Friday, 26 August 1988
1.
STRENGTHENED WHITE HOUSE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ADVICE
is called for in letters to Bush and Dukakis signed by 23 science
and engineering society presidents representing a total of
three-quarters of a million members. The letters urge the
appointment of a distinguished advisor, "...who would enjoy not
only the confidence of the President, but the respect and trust
of the science and technology community. In the absence of that
trust, the science advisor is isolated and ineffective." At a
Thursday press conference, called to make the letters public,
reporters asked if this did not imply a criticism of the present
Administration. A three-member panel responded that science and
technology advice has suffered bipartisan neglect in the past
several administrations. The panel members were the presidents
of three organizations that were instrumental in forming the
coalition of 23 societies: Val Fitch of the APS, Russ Drew of the
IEEE and Howard Schachman of the Federation of Societies of
Experimental Biology. The APS Council adopted a resolution in
January calling for strengthening the office of Science Advisor.
The joint-society letters also urge that the appointment of an
advisor be made early. A prolonged hiatus in the appointment of
a science advisor at the start of both the Carter and Reagan
administrations had serious consequences for the science budget
and for the filling of sub-cabinet level science positions. The
American Chemical Society and the American Association for the
Advancement of Science did not join in signing the letters.
2
. THE COUNCIL ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
has also urged the candidates to make science and technology
policy a top priority in the next Administration. "CORETECH" is
a coalition of private companies, universities, trade and
professional organizations
formed last year to encourage a stronger US commitment to science
and technology. It calls for the appointment of a cabinet-level
Presidential Science and Technology Advisor and the establishment
of a new Science and Technology Advisory Committee.
3. THE IDEA OF A CABINET-LEVEL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ADVISOR
has a lot of support, but few scientists, aside from George
Keyworth, seem to favor a Department of Science and Technology.
One concern is that budget deliberations in Congress would be
concentrated in a single committee, which is risky. In fact, it
is access, not rank, that is needed. Indeed, some cabinet
officers have little contact with the President. Dan Greenberg,
Editor of Science and Government Report and an astute observer of
the politics of science, favors locating the Science Advisor in
OMB, but that only helps on the money problem. It is much more
important that the advisor provide early warning of impending
disasters such as AIDS, acid rain and ozone depletion; deflect
the Administration from preposterous schemes such as SDI; and
have the intellectual courage in congressional testimony to fight
the philistines on issues such as "creationism."
|
