as a follow-up to a previous post: It turns out that John McCain has recently submitted his positions to the Science Debate 2008 list of 14 issues. Both candidates’ statements can be found here.
Here’s my take on both candidates’ positions:
1. Innovation
Sen Obama proposes a doubling of government funded basic research expenditures over the next decade. He quotes detailed statistics that frame the issue. He proposes to create Teacher Residency Academies thus adding 30,000 new teacher to high-need schools. He proposes to make the R&D tax rebate permanent.
Sen McCain does not offer any specifics, only phrases such as this one “I am uniquely qualified to lead our nation during this technological revolution. While in the Navy, I depended upon the technologies and information provided by our nation’s scientists and engineers with (sic) during each mission.”
2. Climate Change
Both candidates would implement a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse emissions, with Sen Obama targeting a reduction of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, Sen McCain a reduction of 60% below 1990 levels by 2050. As far as I know, cap-and-trade greenhouse reduction schemes may not be enough to reach these goals. Sen Obama has a clearly internationalist approach, suggesting the creation of a G8+5 Global Energy Forum. Sen McCain would create a 300 million dollar award “for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars.” Sounds nice but is not practical, in my humble opinion.
3. Energy
Sen Obama stresses conservation and increased efficiency. Sen McCain apparently wants his government to build 45 new Nuclear Power plants; a really, really bad idea. Strange, but conservative politician McCain does not mention the words conservation or efficiency increase.
4. Education
Sen Obama states that “All American citizens need high quality STEM education that inspires them to know more about the world around them, engages them in exploring challenging questions, and involves them in high quality intellectual work. STEM education is no longer only for those pursuing STEM careers; it should enable all citizens to solve problems, collaborate, weigh evidence, and communicate ideas”. He proposes specific initiatives such as Teacher Service Scholarships, a Teacher Residency Program, Career Ladders, a $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit to make College more affordable and a comprehensive “zero to five” program for pre-school children.
Sen McCain also mentions specifics such as devoting 60 percent of Title II funding for incentive bonuses for high performing teachers, allocating $250 million through a competitive grant program to support states that commit to expanding online education, but his approach is summarized in this unfortunate phrase: “We must fill the pipeline to our colleges and universities with students prepared for the rigors of advanced engineering, math, science and technology degrees.” Sounds like another oil guy talking about education. Not appealing at all.
5. National Security
Sen McCain is a military man. As the saying goes, “if your only tool is a hammer, everything will look like a nail”. Thus National Security for McCain is solely a military problem. His approach is narrow and shortsighted. Sen Obama defines this issue much broader and his suggestions will be more successful. In my opinion, both candidates neglect the basic fact that moral authority is one of the cornerstones of national security policy. If the United State is just one more bullying superpower we all need to expect more blowback from those that we are bullying.
There are 9 more issues. Biggest difference is in support for Stem Cell research, where McCain takes the expected conservative stance and Obama is more supportive. Sen Obama also explicitly commits to establishing health care for all US citizens, while Sen McCain just wants to make health care “more affordable”.
From a “Science point of view” this election is not a difficult decision. It is unfortunate that we Americans only have a choice between these two somewhat similar views and positions, though Obama’s responses are more rational and generally more detailed.
Whoever our next president happens to be, he’s going to first have to deal with the mess that his predecessor created, thus severely constraining any room for truly new ideas or initiatives. When the projected fiscal deficit for your first year in office is $500 billion and you have two hot wars on your hands with 150,000+ U.S. troops committed overseas, wobbly financial markets, skyrocketing energy costs, a tanking housing market, rising unemployment, rising inflation and a shaky economy, you probably have different priorities than Science policy initiatives. Right?
