Rivals’ visions differ on unleashing innovation
Slide shows |
World reacts to Obama’s victory From the U.S. president-elect’s ancestral homes in Kenya and Ireland to his namesake town in Japan, election fever grips the globe. |
Special coverage |
Discuss on Newsvine |
More from NYTimes.com |
External links |
By contrast, even before the current economic crisis, Mr. McCain proposed freezing, at least initially, almost all discretionary federal spending — a budget category that includes federal research efforts.
And he makes hay on the stump by citing, as an example of wasted money, a study of the DNA of grizzly bears in Montana, wondering aloud why anyone would think bears were involved in paternity suits or criminal activity. (In fact, the project, undertaken by the United States Geological Survey, intended to find ways of estimating the region’s population of grizzlies, endangered in the lower 48 states.)
The McCain campaign has said he will encourage corporate research by reducing the capital gains and corporate taxes and promoting “conditions favorable to investment.” In response to a survey by Science Debate 2008, a private group that tried to arrange a debate on science issues, he cited “burdensome regulations” as inhibiting innovation in the United States and said he would work to remove them.
“I am uniquely qualified to lead our nation during this technological revolution,” he said in the survey response, pointing to his Navy experience with advanced technologies as well as his leadership on the Senate commerce committee. “Under my guiding hand,” he added, Congress developed a wireless spectrum policy that prompted the rapid rise of mobile phones and Wi-Fi technology.
Seeking to reduce the government’s role in choosing technologies and to increase that of entrepreneurs, Mr. McCain has now proposed federal sponsorship of a $300 million prize to encourage the development of a revolutionary new battery for electric cars.
Mr. Obama supports expanding research on human embryonic stem cells. The research is regarded as a promising avenue toward novel treatments for serious diseases. But because such research involves destruction of early stage human embryos, opponents of abortion rights oppose it. Mr. Bush severely restricted the work in 2001.
Mr. McCain has voiced support for this research, but he now adds that he hopes it will soon be unnecessary to use these cells. In his response to the Science Debate 2008 questionnaire, at sciencedebate2008.com, Mr. McCain said the nation should refuse “to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for scientific progress.”
Mr. McCain’s campaign did not respond to repeated requests for information. According to the journal Science, he has “no formal structure” for seeking science advice. It reports that Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic adviser and head of the Congressional Budget Office under Mr. Bush, serves as Mr. McCain’s “point man” on science, having been in touch with experts on climate, space and “science in general.”
On the other hand, Mr. Obama established a science advisory committee led by Dr. Harold Varmus, a Nobel laureate who is president of the Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Dr. Varmus said the group’s leaders communicated almost daily with the campaign’s policy leaders. And this month, the campaign announced that 61 American Nobel laureates in science had endorsed Mr. Obama. (When Martin Chalfie, a Columbia biologist, learned last week that he had won the Nobel Prize in chemistry, he said one of the first things he did was to call one of the 61 to ask how to add his name to the list.)
Dr. Varmus acknowledged that finding the money to pay for the Obama innovation agenda “is not an easy question.” But he said Mr. Obama would focus on federal spending on high priority areas “and among the things he mentioned as being central to economic recovery are science and technology.”
Experts agree that the immediacy of the financial crisis is overshadowing the innovation debate and predict little headway until a new president has settled into office and confronts budgetary realities.
“The problem,” said Mr. Boehlert, the former chairman of the House science committee, who left Congress last year, “is that it takes an immediate investment that won’t pay immediate dividends, and people are looking for an instant fix.”
Kenneth Chang contributed reporting.
This report, "Rivals’ Visions Differ on Unleashing Innovation", originally appeared in the New York Times.
|
|
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
-
Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES |
Sponsored links
Resource guide



