(Portions of this entry have been taken from the NYTimes. To see the full article, you can visit http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/us/politics/17innovate.html?pagewanted=1&ref=science.)
There have been questionable messages from both Presidential campaigns in recent weeks designed to instill negativity about one another. This has the harmful effect of taking attention away from what matters: how you feel about the issues. In many cases, this effect is deliberate.
As Election Day fast approaches, I want to ask a favor of you: As you prepare to vote, please decide what matters most to you for our country. Try your hardest to block out the fluff being thrown at you and vote based on what you feel will most impact our nation.
Case in point on the fluff versus the issues: Joe the Plumber (fluff) and American Innovation (issue).
We’ve all heard of Joe the Plumber. He is the icon of Senator McCain’s argument that Senator Obama’s tax policies will harm small businesses and jobs in America. (Obama argues that his tax policy will reduce taxes for 95% of Americans - those who earn less than $250,000 per year). It is now known that Joe is actually Samuel; he is not a licensed plumber; not only does he not make the $250,000 that would see a tax increase under Obama, he actually owes back taxes; and he is a registered Republican. The bottom line is this: this is fluff designed to take your eyes of the ball. This guy isn’t the issue; tax policy is. Vote based on the tax policy you want. This likely means that if you make less than $250,000 Obama’s your guy; and if you make more than $250,000 McCain is your guy.
Now consider America’s eroding position at the leading edge of global innovation. Our nation – once the Tiger Woods of science and invention – will have a high tech trade deficit in the neighborhood of $60 billion this year. Realizing this trend, in 2005 the National Academies released a report called “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” that proposed the government sponsor scholarships for math and science teaching careers and college students studying science, math and engineering; increase the budget for basic research by 10% for seven years; and establish programs that make broadband access available nationwide at low cost. This is an issue I care about, and the candidates have very different approaches to resolving this issue.
McCain proposes deregulation and lower corporate taxes – providing businesses with more resources for research. He also favors limiting exports of certain high tech items to countries like China for security reasons. According the journal Science, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic adviser and head of the Congressional Budget Office under Mr. Bush, serves as McCain’s “point man” on science, having been in touch with experts on climate, space and “science in general.” (He also stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.)
Obama feels cutting costs and shrinking government won’t cut it, and supports increased government funding of basic research and education in math and science. He worked with other Senators (McCain not among them) to introduce a bill built on the recommendations from the National Academies. He has also established a science advisory committee led by Dr. Harold Varmus, a Nobel laureate who is president of the Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and this month has the endorsement of 61 American Nobel laureates in science.
The era of American technological dominance was fueled by government investment in research and education. Would U.S. companies invest resources into R & D or pad employee salaries? These are things you must consider for yourself. And, most importantly, vote based on the approach you support.
