Science goes under the political microscope

Alan Boyle Science editor • Profile • E-mail

This election season, msnbc.com is presenting a weekly series assessing the issues and controversies that the next president will confront once he takes the oath of office.

In this Briefing Book, we look at the candidates' stands on science and technology issues, ranging from embryonic stem cell research and global climate change to space exploration and research priorities.

Is there a problem?
The best case for GOP presidential candidate John McCain's maverick status could be made by pointing to his stands on two traditional hot-button scientific issues: stem cells and global warming.

Like his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, McCain favors expanding federal support for embryonic stem cell research, and for years he's been proposing potentially painful programs to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.

"Their emphases are different, but when you come down to it, their policies are very similar, on paper," said Kei Koizumi, director of the R&D Budget and Policy Program at the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

That's one reason why science-related issues haven't had much visibility during this year's campaign. A bigger reason is that there are more immediate matters to worry about, ranging from the continuing financial crisis to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. When the markets are crashing, does it really matter what the candidates say about research spending or future innovations?

Shawn Otto, chief executive officer for ScienceDebate 2008, argues that it does. He points out that scientific and technological advancements have been the engine for half of the country's economic growth since World War II — and right now, "we're coasting on the fumes of yesterday."

"Americans are starting to get it," he told msnbc.com last week. "We're living in a world where science and technology dominate a big part of our lives."

When you dig down beneath the surface, there are actually "marked differences" in how McCain and Obama approach science and technology issues, Otto said. And as Election Day approaches, some of those differences are becoming more pronounced.

Where the candidates stand
Here's a look at the candidates' views on the two biggest science controversies:

Stem cells: In the Senate, Obama and McCain both supported bills that would have permitted federal funding for research using human embryonic stem cells other than the 21 pre-existing strains approved by President Bush in 2001. Bush vetoed such bills in 2006 and 2007, on the grounds that such research involves the destruction of human embryos.

Obama also has co-sponsored a bill that would ban reproductive cloning aimed at creating a child, but would allow therapeutic cloning for research purposes. In contrast, McCain says he opposes all forms of cloning.

McCain says experimental techniques that appear to give normal skin cells the regenerative properties of stem cells "raise the hope that one day this debate will be rendered academic." Obama, however, sides with most stem cell researchers and says that embryonic research should continue, "ethically and with rigorous oversight."

Some scientists worry that McCain's campaign statements have become progressively less supportive of human embryonic research. The American Medical News quoted James Thomson, a stem cell pioneer at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, as saying he was "concerned about the shift from Sen. McCain."

McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, opposes all embryonic stem cell research, as does the Republican Party platform. But during last week's final presidential debate, McCain insisted that his views haven't changed, and he took Obama to task for airing ads suggesting that they had.

Global climate change: Starting in 2003, McCain has co-sponsored a series of bills with Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., that would set up a cap-and-trade system and take other steps aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Today, McCain supports a target of reducing greenhouse-gas output by 60 percent (based on 1990 levels) by the year 2050. Obama favors an 80 percent reduction in the same time frame.

McCain's view that humans are partly responsible for global warming, and should do something about it, has put him at odds with the Bush White House — although Bush himself has moderated his position over the past couple of years. Palin, too, appears to have softened her stance as a climate skeptic: "I don't want to argue about the causes. ... We've got to reduce emissions," she said   during her debate with Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden.

Most environmentalists appreciate McCain's past efforts but say he may be falling behind the curve. "McCain's take on cap-and-trade legislation is now anachronistic, lagging well behind what's current, what's possible, and what's needed," Grist's David Roberts wrote in February.

Both candidates emphasize a mix of energy sources to take the place of fossil fuels, ranging from clean-coal technology to alternative fuels. Rhetorically, McCain tends to emphasize the expansion of nuclear power, while Obama stresses solar, wind and biofuels such as ethanol. McCain wants to end domestic ethanol subsidies as well as tariffs on ethanol imports.

MORE FROM BRIEFING BOOK: ISSUES '08

Briefing book: Issues '08 Section Front

Candidates debate path to education reform Candidates stances on consumer issues Science goes under political microscope How McCain, Obama will change abortion policy Candidates on gun control: Shooting for the sweet spot Iraq -- waiting to re-ignite? Overhauling health care: Two divergent visions Pakistan relations complicate al-Qaida fight Can Social Security, Medicare promises be paid for? Trade, outsourcing and tariffs top '08 concerns Briefing book: Issues '08 Section Front   Add Briefing book: Issues '08 headlines to your news reader: