Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The President Elect's Science Program

  1. Nov 10, 2008 #1

    Mentz114

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is available from various sources, but I've attached a copy.

    Makes pleasant reading for any scientist or scientifically minded person.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 10, 2008 #2
  4. Nov 10, 2008 #3

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It looks like a repeat of Clinton's policy, especially that doubling plan. That seemed good on the front end, but when it's a 10-year plan, as was Clinton's, and the term of any single president doesn't last 10 years, nor does the term of Congress passing that plan, what it resulted in was a lot of increases in salaries and numbers of grants being submitted that the Federal budget now can't cover the costs of, so hardly anyone is able to get funding, and at the same time, universities pushed through policies requiring faculty to get more funding based on promises there would be more to get.

    I'd rather see a promise of something that could be accomplished in 4 years, so we don't have to rely on his successors following through to complete what he started. Heck, I'd just be happy if they reduced the paperwork burdens. :rolleyes: For that matter, we don't need a doubling from the current budget, I'd be happy to see Clinton's promises fulfilled from where they were left off.
     
  5. Nov 10, 2008 #4
    Take that and shove it creationists.
     
  6. Nov 10, 2008 #5
    But how has Bush affected funding of grants? You made a jump from clinton to the situation of today, but neglected Bush. He had 8 years of policy too. It would be interesting to see how grant money changed from pre clinton all the way up to post bush.
     
  7. Nov 10, 2008 #6
    i didn't read that pdf but i assume that all this stem cell research is gonna be allowed from now on ?

    marlon
     
  8. Nov 10, 2008 #7
    LOL @ Cyrus...
     
  9. Nov 10, 2008 #8

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    He stagnated the budget before it reached the doubling that Clinton promised, but the stipend and salary increases mandated by the funding agencies had already taken effect, which basically cut the amount of the budget remaining for actually doing the research, rather than paying the salaries of those doing it. But that's why I don't want to see another 10 year plan. I'd rather see smaller increments where budget and salary increases all go hand-in-hand within a 4 year period of time than promises for a 10-year plan. There is no guarantee of who might be elected in 4 or 8 years from now to carry on that plan. Like I said, I'd be happy just to see Clinton's plan picked up and completed, since much of the problems we're facing are from that being dropped mid-way through.
     
  10. Nov 10, 2008 #9

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This is really a critical point - the brevity of an administration - at most 8 years. If one president lasts 8 years and is succeeded by one who shares much the same goals, then a 10 or 10+ year program might have a chance.

    But as we've seen Bush-Clinton-Bush, directions can reverse on a number of programs, and that generally makes progress difficult if not impossible.

    On top of policy changes, the US economic crisis doesn't bode well for much in the way of support for a diverse scientific R&D portfolio. I think the priorities will be energy and medical sciences.
     
  11. Nov 10, 2008 #10

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Precisely. And no new president runs on a platform of maintaining status quo, so you never know which budget is going to get cut to fund their newest pet project.

    That, or at least make it so that increases in things like salaries or maximum award amounts are tied to increases in the budget in a step-wise manner, so that one doesn't get ahead of the other if the program does get cut short.

    Yes, that's what I gathered from that document as well, that those are the priorities. Of course I'd like to selfishly keep medical sciences funded, but I think the top priority needs to be energy research right now. I'm not sure when that plan was written and if it takes into account the current economic situation, or was written earlier in the campaign when the economy wasn't so dire.
     
  12. Nov 11, 2008 #11

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2015 Award

    It's worth pointing out that Congress already passed the doubling, but it was not acted upon because of Harry Reid's office's opposition.
     
  13. Nov 11, 2008 #12
    Whoo hoo! I want my Jetsons car, on the double.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?