Rep. Ehlers on National Science Policy Report
Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) gave a briefing on Tuesday about the recently completed study, “Toward a New National Science Policy.” He opened his discussion at the American Association for the Advancement of Science by saying that he does “not consider myself an expert on science policy,” adding that the study was not intended to be the “greatest science policy report you have ever seen.” Rather, it is a report to Congress to guide it in developing a new national science policy.
Ehlers worries about the federal budget, and the amount given to science. He predicted that future overall budgets will not grow beyond inflation, and ruled out significant increases in federal revenue because of the public’s opposition to higher taxes. A “major concern” was the continuing squeeze on discretionary spending by entitlement programs.
The congressman briefly outlined several theses used in writing the report. The first was that “our science policy is outdated,” with Ehlers describing current science policy as more of a budget policy (a point made frequently by Rep. George Brown (D-CA).) Another thesis was that “the American public doesn’t understand science and its practice.” The public’s knowledge of science, he said, is limited to more of a collection of facts than an understanding of the scientific process. Ehlers’ third thesis was that “scientists are politically clueless.” He stressed the need for scientists to become aware and involved in the political process. Finally, Ehlers called for a new science/mathematics education strategy.
Ehlers also repeated the “vision” guiding the report: “The United States of American must maintain and improve its pre-eminent position in science and technology in order to advance human understanding of the universe and all it contains, and the improve the lives, health, and freedom of all peoples.”
He then discussed some highlights of the report, including the importance of basic research, the roles of government and private industry, how science can support decision making, and kindergarten through graduate school education reform. Regarding decision making, Ehlers said there were a “huge number” of science and technology issues in Congress and state government deliberations. He stressed the need for scientists to become involved early in the decision making process.
Limiting the report’s reach was the committee’s jurisdiction. As an example, Ehlers cited the difficulty of including defense R&D issues in the study. Time was also a limiting factor, as Ehlers had less than a year to complete the report before Congress adjourns. He later added that there was “not as much detail as I would like...the concepts are there.”
His colleagues on the committee support the report, although to obtain their approval he had to reduce some of the report’s discussion of international cooperation, which some members viewed as foreign aid. Regarding this he concluded, “We are a little light -- I hope you understand the reasons for that.” It is of note that all but one Republican on the House Science Committee support the report, as do a majority of the committee’s Democrats.
