I received the following email this last Friday, Feb 6th:
****************************************
Dear Sheryl,
I am writing to alert you to efforts underway this morning to zero out a large portion of the science funding from the Senate American Reinvestment and Recovery Act as a part of a $77.9B reduction effort led by Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Susan Collins (R-ME).
As you know better than most, science and technology are responsible for half of the economic development of the United States since WWII and yet, if current trends hold, some, such as the Business Roundtable, have predicted that 90% of all scientists and engineers will live in Asia within 5 years.
The United States simply MUST renew our investment in the single greatest economic engine this country has ever known. Small federal investments in scientific research have helped produce things like the internet and the transistor that have consistently delivered multi-trillion dollar economies.
The United States is at a critical juncture, and if this concerns you we suggest now would be a time to contact your Senators and urge them to support science funding. Here is what is being proposed to be cut from the bill, according to TPM:
NASA exploration $750,000,000 = 50%
NSF $1,402,000,000 = 100%
NOAA $427,000,000 = 34.94%
NIST $218,000,000 = 37.91%
DOE energy efficiency & renewable energy $1,000,000,000 = 38%
DOE office of science $100,000,000 = 100%
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/Collins-Nelson-Cuts/?resultpage=1&
*************************************************
Yesterday, I was talking with my cousin's husband who has been a scientist in the area of chemical research for his entire career, mostly in the area of protecting crops from diseases and increasing food production. He has weathered a number of company mergers over the past 10 years and is now working for Dow Chemical. He told me that almost the entire research operation has moved to India and China over the past decade, with only a small staff of senior management to oversee the departments here in the United States. The reasons for this shifting of these science jobs outside the US? One, we don't have enough scientists coming up into the industries here to replace those retiring; and two, the companies are looking for cheaper and cheaper work forces in order to increase their profits.
Why would we not want to tackle both areas in the stimulus? Provide more money to research organizations, cut out rewards for shipping science jobs oversees, and start to rebuild our education system to support science jobs here in the future with an educated US workforce of scientists.
This IS stimulus, people, not pork as the Republicans would have you believe. I hope you will take the time to contact your representatives in Washington and tell them that we absolutely need to retain these items in the stimulus bill.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 139
We really are one of the most backwards industrialized nations. I read a statistic that says of all the industrialized nations the US is second to last in believing the Theory of Evolution (paramount in understanding and progressing in biological sciences). The only country less informed than ours. Turkey. We beat Turkey. Go us!
I agree with your premise Sheryl...wholeheartedly....but for the sake of accuracy...the proposed cuts in this bill were not cuts in the operating budgets of the mentioned areas of science...the cuts were proposed for the amount of increases in those budgets....(as I understand it).
Hello.
In order to compete in the world today we need to FOCUS and these 2 aspects.
We elect ninkinpoops.
I dont think I spelled that right but you get the picture.
all agencies are in this spreadsheet:
http://bennelson.senate.gov/documents/Nelson-Collins%20Stimulus%20Final.xls
Talk about stimulus. Aside from the benefits pointed out in this letter, we are talking about the education of young bright minds who might never fulfill their potential because they are not going to grad schools as professors will see their funding cuts during these tough times.
These are bad cuts. Really bad. NSF, DOE, and NIST have been very successful under Clinton. Was hoping for a rebirth of these agencies.
Now, we're trying to regain those losses and then some for stimulus purposes and to rebuild our science and technology edge we USED to have in this country and all the GOP can do is scream pork.
Great point. And the cuts they are going to see as the result of a recession. That's one the goals of the stimulus: to stop the bleeding.
*rolls eyes*
That's crazy. Here we have Ben Nelson, a democrat leading the chorus. That's crazy. The first things they thought to cut was the schools construction and science funding.
Who says science funding does not create jobs? It does not for their constituencies. That's what this is about. If you say construction jobs, everyone will agree. Research jobs? Who needs that? It's a waste of money.
To answer the question in your title - Republicans want to destroy anything that doesn't bring immediate gratification ($), and anything they don't understand. Apparently, their investments and understanding are in killing things, not learning or growing things. Since they decided one week was enough time for them to judge President Obama, I think we should say that one week was all the time he needed to waste on trying to work with them. It's time to work around them because they have nothing to offer and are totally insignificant.
Excellent point, Jared. Their 'base' are anti-science, and anti-education, so I guess these guys are looking forward to the next election. Screw the economy, screw our standing in the world, screw technology.
The thing that really gets me is that these people want to benefit from the developments in medicine, science, etc. but refuse to support it on idealogical terms. I doubt they would refuse to take a cancer-curing drug if they had cancer, but heaven forbid we support the research to get us there. Stupid, stupid, stupid people.
Hallelujia, Sandy! Exactly. Why should be bother to 'work with' a bunch of ignorant, immature children who only want things 100% their way or no go. It's like toddlers, for crying out loud. They will keep hammering and whining until they get their way entirely. We need to stop this nonsense and just move ahead without them. I'm sick of the stupidity. They not only want instant gratification, they want it at the expense of this country's future.
I think Sandy's assessment of your question is pretty much spot on.
In addition, I would mention that they are mostly only interested in helping themselves rather than the majority. If they do not benefit directly from these programs and spending (i.e. making them and their friends richer) then they do not see the benefit for the majority or the country.
Like stated earlier... the measures in the stimulus bill do not affect current funding for the science programs.
These should be removed from the current bill and developed on their own merit.
That's the amazing thing, Lainie - they DO benefit directly from this type of investment, just as the economy benefitted from the technological advancements that the space race and its residual effects on science education in this country benefitted us all. There would be no Bill Gates if there had not been a focus on science and technology in the schools. These are the things that are going to put us back as leaders in the world - not oil drilling, or more faith-based initiatives, or more tax cuts for the rich. They are simply going to put the money in their off-shore accounts.
I'm surprised you had to ask the question that titled this post.
Why are we so friggin' stupid when it comes to building our future? Have we become that much of a drive-thru, fast food nation? Can't we see that we need both short- and long-term stimulus? Only short-term will do absolutely nothing for us in a year or two.
Well, it was rhetorical, Stephanie. I know you understand the issue well.
No science majors? Some scholarships, full ride, would help in that area a lot.
How about a bill that stands on its own that is not in a Stimulus Bill?
As to the remark about immigration, what we get is not the scientists it is the dregs of the foreign country.
Make the rich richer and screw everyone who isn't rich already.
It wouldn't hurt to let them know that this is extremely important to their constituents and you support them fighting any cuts in this area.
But I disagree that this is NOT stimulus - it should be in the bill and it should not be cut. This does create jobs, and also helps to create and retain an educated workforce in this country. What do you tell companies when they say they have to ship out science jobs because they cannot find qualified American workers? We have to cut that excuse out of the argument in the future. If our scientists are superior, these companies are going to want to use them in order to progress and make more money.
Sheryl O., Feb 9, 2009, 10:07am EST
consider it done. And i will bug the crap out of everyone I know to do the same.
This is true, Lainie, but incredibly short-sighted. Just like the bank criminals who worked their magical greed to get us in this economic situation right now - it's the short-term gains, not the long-term growth. They should all be tried for treason and hung - but that's another article.
"The reasons for this shifting of these science jobs outside the US?...we don't have enough scientists coming up into the industries here to replace those retiring;..."
There has been a decrease in students studying science, math and engineering (moreso for basic science than for applied engineering). In part this is due to the lack of emphasis on these fields in elementary and high schools, as well as the "graduate and get rich quick" mentality of so many youth raised in the dot.com era. Some of it is simply the dumbing down of America, as noted by some commenters above. But much of it has to do with the amount of funding available.
As has been noted, the science funding "cuts" are not cuts to budgets but cuts to the increased stimulus funds for these areas. Everyone will have their opinion on whether any particular line item deserves to be in the stimulus. But as also mentioned above, funding for science has been pretty consistently taking hits for some years, and certainly during the economic crisis we are now in we can expect science not to get first priority.
This is not only a shame but a major mistake for our future. While manufacturing jobs have been going overseas for decades due to significantly lower labor, health, and environmental costs, the US had always held the niche of "high end" intellectual work. Today, however, the world is getting more technologically savvy and has in many respects passed us by in the very areas we once excelled (and catching up quickly in other areas). With the anti-intelligence, anti-education, pro-ignorance attitude of many Americans and more than a few politicians, we will continue to slide into meaninglessness as the other countries rise above us.
As we face the need to find alternative energy sources and sustainable business practices, wouldn't it be ironic if the free marketers go out of business because we can't adequately compete against the world.
What Obama asked Congress is to pass a bill that stimulate the economy. Investing in science does just that. These agencies even fund SBIR (Small Business Initiative Research). Google SBIR, "SBIR grants" and so forth. Over 100,000 people are employed by companies who count on SBIR funds to run.
Republicans are talking about helping small business. NSF, NIST, ARL, ... all help small business science/engineering companies.
These things are not mutually exclusive. There are thousands of companies fueled by scientific research that receive tax dollars. While the funding is not cut, these companies, just like any other companies are cutting jobs.
So true David. Go to any engineering department at any college. At the graduate level, they are over 50% from other countries. At the top schools, we are talking about 60 to 75% foreign students undertaking grad studies. Somehow it does not alarm anybody.
1) the public schools are focussed on testing - preparing for constant testing on reading, writing and basic math skills devours all the teaching time in the day; science and arts programs suffer;
2) the adults in a child's life have a huge impact on what that child feels is important and of interest - if the adults focus on religion, or do not focus on the importance of studying science, they child will not think it important;
3) we have become a nation of 'easy' and 'quick' - science takes thought, hard work and prolonged determination to achieve results. This has gotten weaned out of our American 'character' to a great extent in the past decades as we increasingly focus on instant gratifications instead of hard work and long-term rewards.
That's what got us in this mess in the first place.
Then the next time that God sends a cat 5 hurricane into Florida or Texas, the lords work will be done when there is not enough notice to evacuate.
Doesn't the bible teach that you reap what you sow? I guess the ideologs would rather sow ignorance and reap death than use our god given intelligence to deal with things.
The President is pushing hard for a bill to be passed NOW so short tern issues can be addressed. Why not break the bill into two objectives, stimulus and recovery? A stimulus package (focused on stimulus!) can be passed and that work can begin. Then we could take a little more time to effectly evaluate recovery and address the long term issuesl
I fear that the big dollar bill isn't effectively addressing the need/value of education, science, health, etc. because each is being used as a pawn against the other.
There is no longer control/effective debate over the programs that deserve attention. Education will be short-changed to provide tax breaks on big movie industry film, ATV trails will get money while funds for developing alternative energy get shortchanged, etc.
That may sound reasonable to you, Tammy, but these things are long-past due. The time to address them is now - and this money may very well go right into creating jobs and income immediately. We have put this off for way too long. If we don't start to build our knowledge base back up immediately, we continue to stall and lose precious, precious time. Again, this is long past due - there is no reason to put it off any longer. I couldn't care less about what you call it - it needs to happen yesterday.
I know, personally, hundreds of immigrants who are the opposite of how George portrays them - most of them scientists and engineers.
One can make an argument for many parts of this bill but if its goal is create jobs (ha) fast (double ha) then spending on government projects of any time seems short term defeatist. I agree with you that science projects need funding but since when politicians are making funding decisions based on partisan ideals, I have to wonder what are the winners/losers under such designs.
Obama and your party can make some good arguments that infrastructure investment makes jobs, that is until Obama said the work should go to union contracts. That is to established companies with workers already well paid and normally unable to compete well in the normal economy. There were things he could have done to that segment alone that would have garnered support (open bidding to all, ignore Davis-Bacon etc).
Far too much of this bill is simply pork and political payback and though you will win this fight to get this bill because of the ease of which people like Specter/Collins are bribed. You know, the same way Bush bribed Dems to support his spending plans (which were labeled horribly overpriced until a new administration took over, now Bush's spending plans pale in comparison). Anyway, you will get your bill and we'll see how little it really does except sink us further into debt.
And yes I screamed as loud for years against Bush spending too, I'm consistent in my fear of the way bi-partisan stupidity is spending us into oblivion.
Charles, can you list what you think is "simply pork," and what is "political payback," and why?
I suppose it depends on your version of 'short-term' - we are way too involved with trying to save money instantly. As my mother used to say, "Penny wise, Pound foolish."
I agree and disagree with most people here. Actually I agree with everything you (Alan, Sheryl, E.M.,.. and co ) say but I think you are missing one key element: what gives you the most return with a dollar as far as stimulus is concerned?
None of you has made the case that science funding does. It is very important, but in the short term, we need to fix the housing mess, unemployment and unemployment benefits, and encourage people to spend. You encourage people to spend by giving them tax cuts, you solve the unemployment short term by starting big projects (roads, bridges schools), and the housing mess can be solved by lending banks money so they can restructure the loans of some who can still be saved and get credit flowing. These are things we have to do in the next 12 months. These are stimulus as far as I am concerned.
Science funding and all that other stuff are desperately needed. They don't belong in this bill. The dems know that once this passes, the republicans will block everything and say we have to pay for the stimulus. That's the issue here. They want to pass everything at once just in case something fails it won't be used to block something else.
I agree with you there, Christos, despite my disagreement with the fact that these science initiatives DO create jobs now and also create jobs in the near future. I am sick and tired of the total long-term dumbing down of our nation. It needs to be turned around as soon as possible - and I support it being in this bill as it is the one that will get the funding out there sooner rather than later.
Yes. Thank you, John McCain, for dumbing down your already mentally challenged base. The pork is in the heads of McCain, Palin, and Joe-the-tax-evading-dishonest-wannabe-plunger.
1). I heard a woman on either NPR or Oprah’s radio station, her voice rising toward hysteria. She believed that America needed to get back our old manufacturing jobs. It’s the only way, she said.
She wasn’t looking to the future. The old-manufacturing-jobs ship has sailed. (Amazingly enough, the only “maverick-y” thing I EVER head McCain say was when he was standing in front of a group of autoworkers, and he told them that the old jobs are not coming back).
2). We could manufacture “Green,” like President Obama said: Solar panels, wind mills, etc. we could be the world’s supplier. However, that kind of thing takes science and math. If we don’t fund the programs at K-12 and Universities, we are screwed.
We can do it later, and maybe never get ahead when we finally wake up, or we can start it now and have a great chance at getting ahead of other countries.
Yes, Michael - that is correct. They are not cuts in the existing budgets, but part of the stimulus that is needed to counter act the cuts these organizations have received over the past few years of the Bush Administration, as well as increase the focus and future these areas provide our economy."
"And that is exactly the point, Michael. These agencies have been under attack by anti-science Republicans for years."
I fully understand this point and I fully agree!!! I simply wanted to make clear a point that would have possibly been misunderstood by some...
The jobs are in creating new technologies and having once again an educated workforce to do those jobs. Many of our talented, most intelligent students have been driven into business and finance because of the financial rewards. We need to get back to a place where people believe that science can create jobs and prosperity much more so than a glutted finanial industry that has succeeded in devasting itself with its greed. We can rebuild our manufacturing base - but, as you point out, in new areas that Chinese peasants can't compete in.
I think the science programs need this funding that some would cut because that is like the seeds for the next crop of high-tech production. We don't want to compete for the cheapest labor but for the most highly skilled.
"I would mention that they are mostly only interested in helping themselves rather than the majority. "
Worse, they really ONLY care to obstruct the will of the majority and to see the Democrats fail. The only difference between them and Limbaugh is he said it.
"Like stated earlier... the measures in the stimulus bill do not affect current funding for the science programs."
Yeah, BUT current funding has been the Booshie idea of what was needed...NOT the pre-George "I don't needs no edu-ma-cation" Bush level of funding. So an increase is even less than it appears anyway!
"Problem is, EM, that much of the science funding is considered 'pork' by the GOP."
Shocker. They consider Social Security and welfare to be "pork".
Sandi...once again I'm proud to call you my friend.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I also believe that what is considered 'short-term' by the GOP is basically just putting extra money into the pockets of the rich. We can all see that that did NOT create new jobs over the Bush administration. Why can't we all just look at reality and see what has worked and what hasn't? Putting small amts of money into people's pockets immediately (like the stimulus checks of last year) did no good at all. Putting large amts of money into rich people's pockets immediately with tax cuts did no good at all.
It's time to take a different approach.
As far as education, I think most of it is pathetic. I wanted to be a history professor and worked as a tutor in a junior college while in college. There I made an arrangement to work with one of the instructors. One thing he had me do is grade papers. He got upset with me because I failed a couple of people, he said they were trying and I would disallusion them. For example Q: Who was the first president of the United States? A: Thomas Jefferson. When I was in public school we were required to take art and music, now find a public school that offers those subjects. Sheryl you are right about teaching to the test. It discourages individualized thought. Also I have actually heard people say why should they have to pay for schools, after all they don't have children in schoo. Hello? The education of Americans (both children and adults) is everyone's responsibility because it effects all of us.
We need to think short term, yes that is important. But I also think it's important to start thinking about where we want to be in five years, ten years or maybe even 100 years. If we don't start thinking about the future when it comes we may find ourselves in a very bad place that we don't want to be in. When that time comes it won't matter what party you belong to. BTW, pork is not kosher.
Good point, Sheryl. Not only do they want to bring back/hang on to the jobs of the past, they want to cut the wages to minimum wage. That doesn't "stimulate" anything but poverty and more need for the social services they hate so much. GE just did that here - sold out, turned the jobs over to a company that offered people a fraction of what they'd been making the twenty years they'd already put in. And some of the people who had the years but not the age to retire were SOL.
My wife worked for many years at a government financed research facility and has many horror stories about the things management did to try to hoodwink congress. The system isn't perfect.
Little bit of irony: The place my wife worked was run by a local university for many years. A couple of years ago after the Los Alamos scandal, or whatever it was, the place where my wife worked was put out to bid and is now a partnership between Bechtel and the university with Bechtel doing all of the administrative stuff. Bechtel came in thinking they could run it like a business with their own rules. Uhh...things haven't quite worked out that way. :)
I do think it is extremely important for governments to fund research, for exactly the purpose you state. I have seen crazy things done in the private sector right before a monthly call with WAll Street, simply to get their share price up a bit.
Only now the speculators have speculated the whole damned world into a depression and even they are losing their asses. I feel so sorry for them... NOT!
Republicans poo poo science because they don't understand it. What I wonder is where in the hell do they think things like their cell phone come from. The sad thing is that Republicans don't ponder such things. And it's no wonder, when your defending a doctrine that is as far from reality as their's, it's important to keep things as simple as possible.
God?
I think if tax forms had a section for people to indicate where they wanted the money spent we may get somewhere.
then " DON'T let the Government get into ANYTHING that might take a lot of money from US Republicans!"
The third part of that DNA was" All things should be done by our Vorkers"(German for 'workers') and we should control them, not the Government."
That DNA moved from Father to Son down all these generations and then, what happened! The BUSH family found that YOU COULD MAKE MORE MONEY IN GOVERNMENT than outside. The conflict in the genes was terrible. It became a fitful scene of a dog running after his own tail.
The Vorkers lost. The Republicans won. The genes were triumphant! Exit the Republicans, nursing their Genes. ENTER the Democrats, no genes of anykind, but great printers of green paper! RESULTS? Not yet in, but sure to run longer than the play GODS LITTLE ACRE!
2) It is not just that companies like Dow can get cheaper labor overseas. It's also that they get treated better by other countries. But the Dems cannot understand that. Big companies will continue to leave the US if they can find more business-friendly countries. It's no surprise. They're in business to make a profit.
Who cares that our children and grandchildren will have to pay it back to the tune of (including the $1 Trillion we've already spent) $30,000 per family. They'll find the money somewhere. Oh, wait, we can't expect the 40 to 50% of families who pay no taxes to help because they would have to pay it back as taxes. So, that will be $60,000 per family (plus interest, of course).
And, today I heard the President says that this is just "leg 1" of a three legged plan to get us out of this mess that the government got us into in the first place. So two more legs at, say, $1 Billion a leg, will bring our kids share to about $100,000 per family (plus interest). But what the heck, they're good for it.
But, wait a minute! If our kids are paying off a $100,000 "note" to the government for the "stimulus & bailouts" who is going to pay for our Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? I think you know the answer.
I hope we all have a good time flipping burgers or saying "do you want fries with that" at McDonald's until we're 90, because we are going to have to cover those looming deficits created by those financial geniuses in Congress who spent the money we put in for our retirement years.
I agree with the sentiment in the post and the majority of the comments.
As stated by a number of people, including Sheryl, science agencies are lagging far behind in funding because of cuts during the Bush era. This has a big effect on local economies and our major technology companies, both of which can be totally or largely dependent on Universities. Now, with States running out of revenue, research and teaching infrastructure is being assaulted from a new direction. The stimulus package would have created construction jobs for needed buildings (either new or renovated) and might have helped states avoid laying off University workers... if the stimulus budget had remained intact.
On top of that, the Bush congress really pushed the earmarking of science funds for specific programs (pet projects), and I'm not talking about "plus-up" pork, but real budget dollars. This means that the administrations put in place to determine national priorities for funding are being trumped by people (senators and representatives) who wouldn't know a molecule if they held one in their hands. It means that hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent on programs that did not get funded by their own merits, but by political mandate. The result has been an even bigger drop in real dollars for scientific research and education than the simple numbers would indicate.
As for "3) When did it become strictly the government's job to finance research?"...
The answer is never. But, what do you think gets cut first b the private sector when financial times are tough? Not sales- research. Plus, these days we live in a world where the largest pharmaceutical company spends more on marketing than on research. The way that pharmaceutical "research" is often outsourced these days, there is no creative or inventive input from the scientists who are carrying out the work (not that foreign scientists can't be creative, it is simply that they are kept in the dark for patent reasons, and one can't think about a problem without hearing what the problem is in the first place).
Another aspect is that we are competing in the global marketplace with countries that have effective, government-sponsored science programs. So, do you want to make our companies fight uphill all the time?
That's one of the main reasons they have accountants. :)
Well, there's taxes and a couple of other things. :)
And if that's not bad enough, the new leader of the Republican Party said the stimulus package won't create jobs, it will just create 'work'.
We are importing our scientists and life goes on while the conversation in the American media is all about religion, abortion, tax-cuts .... mostly just BS.
Why are we not teaching people about economics? Do we need to have people dependent and powerless?
Are we really going to let India become the major Democracy in the world? India's great, but why is this so hard for Americans to understand, we have to move forward. Is school so traumatic for all of us that we reject learning after we walk out of our last class?
elaine d.
There's a position, held by a lot of Republicans these days, according to which government should not fund science--it should be all private companies or individuals. The market will take care of everything.
Except, of course, such policy would mean that the only research to get funding would be whatever is profitable in the short term. Private, profit-oriented entities are not interested in long-term projects or basic research--and without basic research, the profitable projects would dry up sooner or later.
And of course scientists don't wake up in the morning and decide they are going to discover or invent a particular thing today. Instead, they work on what interests them, and follow it wherever it leads. Frequently, what they find is something completely different from what they've been looking for. If things that are not immediately profitable, that look like a waste of time, scientific navel-gazing, or [gasp!] "pork" are neglected, the major advances they would lead to will simply not happen. Or they will--in China, or in Europe. Japan, perhaps.