This is from the Obama campaign website. It's a short YouTube video discussing the need for action on (especially) climate change and energy issues:
http://enviros.barackobama.com/page/content/enviroshome ALSO, Obama provides answers to 14 science-related questions that were posed to (formerly) both presidential candidates here: http://www.sciencedebate2008.com/www/index.php?id=42 HERE's the Q & A regarding his priorities for research: 13. RESEARCH. For many years, Congress has recognized the importance of science and engineering research to realizing our national goals. Given that the next Congress will likely face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in basic research in upcoming budgets? "Federally supported basic research, aimed at understanding many features of nature from the size of the universe to subatomic particles, from the chemical reactions that support a living cell to interactions that sustain ecosystemshas been an essential feature of American life for over fifty years. While the outcomes of specific projects are never predictable, basic research has been a reliable source of new knowledge that has fueled important developments in fields ranging from telecommunications to medicine, yielding remarkable rates of economic return and ensuring American leadership in industry, military power, and higher education. I believe that continued investment in fundamental research is essential for ensuring healthier lives, better sources of energy, superior military capacity, and high-wage jobs for our nations future. "Yet, today, we are clearly under-investing in research across the spectrum of scientific and engineering disciplines. Federal support for the physical sciences and engineering has been declining as a fraction of GDP for decades, and, after a period of growth of the life sciences, the NIH budget has been steadily losing buying power for the past six years. As a result, our science agencies are often able to support no more than one in ten proposals that they receive, arresting the careers of our young scientists and blocking our ability to pursue many remarkable recent advances. Furthermore, in this environment, scientists are less likely to pursue the risky research that may lead to the most important breakthroughs. Finally, we are reducing support for science at a time when many other nations are increasing it, a situation that already threatens our leadership in many critical areas of science. "This situation is unacceptable. As president, I will increase funding for basic research in physical and life sciences, mathematics, and engineering at a rate that would double basic research budgets over the next decade. "Sustained and predictable increases in research funding will allow the United States to accomplish a great deal. First, we can expand the frontiers of human knowledge. Second, we can provide greater support for high-risk, high-return research and for young scientists at the beginning of their careers. Third, we can harness science and technology to address the grand challenges of the 21st century: energy, health, food and water, national security, information technology, and manufacturing capacity." Obama clearly has good intentions for science and research, though as others have said, he has a few competing priorities. It will no doubt be incumbent upon the community of scientists to keep research and/or ecology on the front (or any) burner. Michael Kirkpatrick Botanist Fort Collins, CO
