Science Debate 2008

[minsx]

Science Debate 2008 is basically a group of citizens who want to push politicos to emphasize, support, and use science and technology and innovation. They came up with 14 questions they wanted answered by both Obama and McCain, as a 'debate' between the two on what their stances are. The results, side by side, are here. It is far too extensive for me to go into great detail here in my opening post, and I admit I don't have the time to make a detailed megapost like some I've seen, but I did want to put it here and open up this forum for discussion on the topic.

What I like about the 'Science Debate 2008' is that many of the responses of Obama and McCain are very detailed - both name specific steps they claim they will take as president in many areas. Unfortunately it seems there are also areas where they are not specific in their claims, and more often than that, areas where they make grand claims with no realistic eye towards costs and funding. Also, I'm concerned about how much power either of them really have to support their claims. Would either of them really have the power to do these kinds of things, or are they promising things outside of their jurisdiction? Finally, how much of it is political pandering and posturing - would they really do what they say? Or are their 'responses' like their speeches: written by others and signed off on without attention to the substance.

What do you guys think?

[adciv]

Oh, this is going to be fun.

On the funding for all this: It must all at some point be approved by congress the President can propose and push for it. However, the House and Senate appropriations commitees must approve and appropriate the money. The President can not simply say X gets money and the money is given.

On 2: I was going to skip it, but then there was so much BS on both I couldn't resist.

I'll work on 5+ later.

1. Innovation: Obama

For example, the U.S. annually imports $53 billion more in advanced technology products than we export. China is now the world’s number one high technology exporter. This competitive situation may only worsen over time because the number of U.S. students pursuing technical careers is declining. The U.S. ranks 17th among developed nations in the proportion of college students receiving degrees in science or engineering; we were in third place thirty years ago.

Bad numbers. China exports it because it is manufactured there. See Intel and AMD for examples. The chips are still largely designed in the US, manufacturing is what is coming out of china. The number of students in technical careers is dropping because there is better pay elsewhere, such as in business. Also not that he says 'techincal careers' and not techincal degrees. A number of engineering graduates are going into other areas. Eliminate the much abused H1-B visa program to increase techincal salaries and the people and students will follow. The number of studentes receiving degrees is similar. Also, just because a country is putting out more degrees does not mean an engineer is an engineer. As Feynman reported, a number of those countries basically teach rote memmorization, not problem solving. Which do you think would make the better engineer?

My administration will work to guarantee to students access to strong science curriculum at all grade levels so they graduate knowing how science works – using hands-on, IT-enhanced education.

Great, more Federal interference in what is a State matter. More so, the use of computers instead of hands on actual experiments instead of simulations. A computer is no substitute for disecting a real dead frog.

As president, I will launch a Service Scholarship program that pays undergraduate or graduate teaching education costs for those who commit to teaching in a high-need school, and I will prioritize math and science teachers.

Neat. How will you pay for this? How will you garuntee that they actuall teach? How do you define 'high-need'? How can you make sure they are actually receive teaching licenses, are employed and are good teachers?

Additionally, my proposal to create Teacher Residency Academies will also add 30,000 new teachers to high-need schools – training thousands of science and math teachers.

No, you'll try to encourage it, but the Fed is not hiring the teachers, the localities are. They are the ones who will actually be paying the salaries. If the localities can't afford them or don't have the room they won't hire them.

I will also expand access to higher education, work to draw more of these students into science and engineering, and increase National Science Foundation (NSF) graduate fellowships.

Government funding of Higher Education. I'd prefer loans instead of Fellowships as it reduces funding requirements. However, this is graduate degrees, not undergrads. Most businesses are paying for their engineers to get masters degrees now and as such there is really no need for this unless the students plan to become PHDs and stay in Academia instead. Further, most students have Research Assistantships so I'm not sure what the point is of targeting graduate education.

My proposals for providing broadband Internet connections for all Americans across the country will help ensure that more students are able to bolster their STEM achievement.

How is having access to broadband (note, broadband, not just the internet) going to help? One does not logically follow the other.

Progress in science and technology must be backed with programs ensuring that U.S. businesses have strong incentives to convert advances quickly into new business opportunities and jobs. To do this, my administration will make the R&D tax credit permanent.

On the first part. Yes, it's called making a profit. That is all the incentive they need. One the second part. The R&D tax cut will encourage R&D. The seeking of profits will mean they want products to go with that. If you really want to encourage it even more, lower their tax rate, don't increase it.
1. Innovation: McCain

Focus on addressing national needs to make the United States a leader in developing, deploying, and exporting new technologies;

Utilize the nation’s science and technology infrastructure to develop a framework for economic growth both domestically and globally;

Which means what?

Appoint a Science and Technology Advisor within the White House to ensure that the role of science and technology in policies is fully recognized and leveraged, that policies will be based upon sound science, and that the scientific integrity of federal research is restored;

Ok, I you're going to use sound science. What are you going to do?

Eliminate wasteful earmarks in order to allocate funds for science and technology investments;

AH! A FUNDING SOURCE!

Fund basic and applied research in new and emerging fields such as nanotechnology and biotechnology, and in greater breakthroughs in information technology;

Basic research generally pays off in 20 years, if ever. Applied research is being done by the truckload by companies to get products.

Promote greater fiscal responsibility by improving the scientific and engineering management within the federal government;

How does one equate to the other?

Encourage and facilitate commercialization of new innovations, especially those created from federally funded research;

How? Cutting taxes? Reducing royalties? What?

Ensure U.S. leadership in space by promoting an exploration agenda that will combine the discoveries of our unmanned probes with new technologies to take Americans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond

NASA! How much funding? What gets funded? Extension to the Shuttle? Increased for Orion? Where is the money coming from? NASA's budget could stand to be doubled.

Grow public understanding and popularity of mathematics and science by reforming mathematics and science education in schools;

Aside from the pay differences between Science and Business (among others/see above), How in God's name would you do this? As much as some may think or want it to be, the Fed does not control K-12.

Leverage technologies to create employment in rural areas and deploy the displaced workforce;

What does this mean? Telecommuting? What?

Create greater transparency in government and encourage more citizens-government dialogs using current technology; and

Ok, How? What current technology? How would you use it? How would you improve transparency? How would IT improve transparency?

Develop and implement a global competitive agenda through a series of business roundtables with industry and academia leaders.

Ok, you're going to talk to business and academia. I can sum it up for you right now. Cut their taxes, figure out a way to relatively increase the cost of imports to local manufacturing.
2. Climate Change: Obama

With the right incentives, I'm convinced that American ingenuity can do this, and in the process make American businesses more productive, create jobs, and make America’s buildings and vehicles safer and more attractive.

And you're going to do this how?

Specifically, I will implement a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately by establishing strong annual reduction targets with an intermediate goal of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. A cap- and-trade program draws on the power of the marketplace to reduce emissions in a cost- effective and flexible way. I will require all pollution credits to be auctioned.

So, you're going to help American businesses by raising the cost of Energy. Didn't Europe try this and it only wound up exporting all their production and such to China? How will that reduce emissi[/size]ons when their power plants and factories are so much more in-effecient and CO2 producing and polluting than anything we have seen in decades? How will that help American businesses? Europe can't even cut it's levels and you expect to be able to do this in the US? Didn't the US Senate REJECT 99-0 the Kyoto Protocol?

We will re-engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, the main international forum dedicated to addressing the climate change problem.

Will China and India actuall receive a binding target this time? Because, you know, they have blank checks under Kyoto.

I will also create a Technology Transfer Program dedicated to exporting climate-friendly technologies, including green buildings, clean coal and advanced automobiles, to developing countries to help them combat climate change.

Will they pay for them? Or are we going to be paying through the nose to reasearch the technologies and they get to charge us for implementing them?
2. Climate Change: McCain
[quote="McCain]To dramatically reduce carbon emissions, I will institute a new cap-and-trade system that over time will change the dynamic of our energy economy.[/quote]
So I don't have to retype it, I'll just say, See the Obama section on this.

The purpose of this approach is to give American businesses new incentives and rewards to seek cheaper emission reductions, instead of just new taxes to pay and new regulations to follow.

Gee, I don't know. A cap and trade seems a lot like knew taxes and regulations.

I have long supported CAFE standards - the mileage requirements that automobile manufacturers' cars must meet. Some carmakers ignore these standards, pay a small financial penalty, and add it to the price of their cars.

In other words, the car buyers decided they wanted that car no matter what taxes the Gov't added on. Then there is the absolute bullshit way CAFE looks at the overall fleet. If I specialize in Trucks, and make really good trucks, I'm going to be penalized under CAFE even if my Trucks are the most efficient on the planet as no truck will ever be as efficient as a sedan. The Japanese specialize in Sedans. They sell a lot of Sedans. The US is doing best in big trucks, they sell a lot of big trucks. CAFE penalizes them because it treats sedans and trucks as the same market.

But I believe that the penalties for not following these standards must be effective enough to compel all carmakers to promote the development of fuel-efficient vehicles. I will strengthen the penalties for violating CAFE standards, and make certain they are effectively enforced.

In other words, the taxes on the citizens will increase for those who need the vehicles that do not and can not meet the CAFE standards.

A McCain administration would establish a permanent research and development tax credit equal to ten percent of wages spent on R&D, to open the door to a new generation of environmental entrepreneurs.

A Tax credit counts towards taxes already paid. Nice. This might actually eliminate most corporate taxes. Although, it would benefit all areas, not just the 'environmental entrepreneurs'.

I am also committed to investing two billion dollars every year for the next 15 years on clean coal technologies, to unlock the potential of America's oldest and most abundant resource.

Clean Coal sucks as a technology. You have to have a permanent place to store CO2. Where would that be? Best you could do would be to take the smokestack of a Coal power plant and put it right into a biofuel plant. Which, by the way, has already been considered. (Unknown on if it is being built yet).
[quote"McCain"]And we will issue a Clean Car Challenge to automakers, in the form of a tax credit to the American people, for every automaker who can sell a zero-emission vehicle. We will commit up to a 5,000 dollar tax credit to each and every customer who buys that car.[/quote]
How do you define zero-emission? Does the Chevy Volt count? Or would it be a Tessla Roadster that gets it right now but costs over $100k?
[quote"McCain"]In the quest for alternatives to oil, our government has thrown around enough money subsidizing special interests and excusing failure. From now on, we will encourage heroic efforts in engineering, and we will reward the greatest success.[/quote]
Which means?
[quote"McCain"]I further propose we inspire the ingenuity and resolve of the American people by offering a $300 million prize for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars. [/quote]
Specs and everything else for the battery package? (And I'm assuming a capacitor would count) Besides, if someone could come up with it, they would already have a market as the Electronics Industry, Auto Industry, Handheld tool industry and a whole lot of others would already be there customers. Rarely does technology leapfrog. It's usually incremental, which is exactly what battery technology has been for the past 30 years or so.
[quote"McCain"]This is one dollar for every man, woman and child in the U.S. -- a small price to pay for helping to break the back of our oil dependency – and curb the dangerous effects of global climate change.[/quote]
It might. Not completely sure it will. In the mean time, what about other technologies such as coal liquification? Cellulistic Ethanol? Biodiesel?
3. Energy Obama

My programs focus both on a greatly expanded program of federally funded energy research and development and on policies designed to speed the adoption of innovative energy technologies and stimulate private innovation.

What programs? How will they speed the adoption or innovation? As has been shown, if it is economically cheaper, businesses and individuals will swich themselves without incentives.

First, I have proposed programs that, taken together, will increase federal investment in the clean energy research, development, and deployment by $150 billion over ten years.

And where will you get this money from?

Basic research to develop alternative fuels and chemicals;

Been there, done that. The problem is the applied research to get it out the door today. And what do alternative chemicals have to do with this?

Equipment and designs that can greatly reduce energy use in residential and commercial buildings – both new and existing;

Such as? And see above on economically cheaper.

New vehicle technologies capable of significantly reducing our oil consumption;

Already being done. See Chevy Volt, Tesla Roadster and others. Also, see econmically cheaper.

Advanced energy storage and transmission that would greatly help the economics of new electric-generating technologies and plug-in hybrids;

Ok, so it does somewhat mean the Volt. But what do you mean by advanced? It's already being worked on by private industry without Federal dollars. How would you have new transmission?

Technologies for capturing and sequestering greenhouse gases produced by coal plants; and

Ah, clean coal again. See 2.McCain for more on this BS.

A new generation of nuclear electric technologies that address cost, safety, waste disposal, and proliferation risks. I will also work closely with utilities to introduce a digital smart grid that can optimize the overall efficiency of the nation's electric utility system, by managing demand and making effective use of renewable energy and energy storage.

So, we'll actually have more nuclear power plants? With re-enrichment? Like the Republicans have been pushing? That keeps getting blocked by red tape and the lawsuits by the Environmentalists?

How do you plan to make energy storage useful beyond what the utilities are already doing? What do you mean by 'managing demand'? Rolling blackout? How would it increase efficiency?

Increasing new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade, and taking other steps that will reduce the energy intensity of our economy 50 percent by 2030

Great, so you're going to eliminate manufacturing, which will ship more jobs overseas, and perform stuff that is uneconimcall (or otherwise the businesses would already be dong it). Great idea! Reduce energy usage by killing the economy and manufacturing base! No more US steel production! No more US Manufacturing! More exporting jobs to China and India!

Increasing fuel economy standards 4 percent per year and providing loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers to build new fuel- efficient cars domestically;

Nice. But they've already asked for the guaruntees. Are you publicly coming forward NOW to push for it? How do you define fuel economy? Gasoline only? Or over jules used?

Extending the Production Tax Credit for five years and creating a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard that will require that 10 percent of American electricity be derived from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025; and

See this thing call being economical. How about including Nuclear in that list as well?

Ensuring that regulations and incentives in all federal agencies support the national energy and environmental goals in ways that encourage innovation and ingenuity.

So, less regulation? Not targeting incentives in a way that encourage a particular thing (see corn->ethanol subsidies)? What would this be?

I will also encourage communities around the nation to design and build sustainable communities that cut energy use with walkable community designs and expanded investment in mass transit.

And how would this help existing areas? Raze them and start from scratch? How would walkable community designs cut energy usage? What is a walkable community design?
3. Energy McCain

As President, I will put the country on track to building 45 new reactors by 2030 so that we can meet our growing energy demand and reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases.

Difficult, given that the only place in the world that makes 400 ton steel ingots that are used the reactor containment units makes exactly 8 a year and is located in Japan. And they are booked for the next ~4 years. And they are only expanding production capabilites to 16. (Or am I off by a factor of 2 for that 8/16?)

Nuclear power is a proven, domestic, zero-emission source of energy and it is time to recommit to advancing our use of nuclear energy. The U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years.

You can thank the Environmentalists and Nuclear=Weapons croud. Will you reduce the redtape in building a plant as well?

In the progress of other alternative energy sources -- such as wind, solar, geothermal, tide, and hydroelectric --government must be an ally but not an arbiter.

A.k.a., let the economics decide?

I've voted against the current patchwork of tax credits for renewable power because they were temporary, and often the result of who had the best lobbyist instead of who had the best ideas. But the objective itself was right and urgent. And when I'm signing laws, instead of casting one of a hundred votes, I intend to see that objective better served. We will reform this effort so that it is fair, rational, and permanent, letting the market decide which ideas can move us toward clean and renewable energy.

Did you ever propose your own laws for this that were 'rational'?

4. Education.A comparison of 15-year-olds in 30 wealthy nations found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 17th, while average U.S. math scores ranked 24th. What role do you think the federal government should play in preparing K-12 students for the science and technology driven 21st Century?

Ok, this time I'm assaulting the question. The other countries have tracks in their education system (see Germany and Japan for an example. The US only has comprehensive colleges now. Other countries only test their higher students. The US does not. Gee, I wonder the scores are lower when the samples are rigged from the start.

4. Education Obama

All American citizens need high quality STEM education that inspires them to know more about the world around them, engages them in exploring challenging questions, and involves them in high quality intellectual work.

In other words, the death of manufacturing and blue collar workers and more importing of manufactured goods from other countries. How about the rest of the jobs out there that do not require a college education? How exactly do you plan on getting this into K-12 when you have no control over it?

STEM education is no longer only for those pursuing STEM careers; it should enable all citizens to solve problems, collaborate, weigh evidence, and communicate ideas. I will work to ensure that all Americans, including those in traditionally underrepresented groups, have the knowledge and skills they need to engage in society, innovate in our world, and compete in the global economy.

And how will STEM education let them compete exactly?

I will support research to understand the strategies and mechanisms that bring lasting improvements to STEM education and ensure that promising practices are widely shared.

In other words, you don't know how it will help and are just saying this unproven undeveloped I have no clue what it is program will work miracles.

****Yadda yadda yadda, more BS and some stuff covered above****

My proposals for a comprehensive “zero to five” program will ensure that children enter school ready to learn.

Why does this remind me of Fahrenheit 451 where children are in school from the day they are born? What ever happened to having a childhood?

And when they finish school, I will make sure that through the new $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit, they will have access to affordable higher education that will provide them with the science fluency they need to be leaders in STEM fields and across broad sectors of our society.

Uh huh. How?

4. Education McCain

Less than 20 percent of our undergraduate students obtaining degrees in math or science, and the number of computer science majors have fallen by half over the last eight years.

A) So what? And why is Engineering not included? B) Yeah, comparing the height of the dotcom boom to eight years later is a good assessment.

Thus our nation’s education system should not only focus on graduating new students; we must also help re-train displaced workers as they prepare for the rapidly evolving economy. Invigorating our community college system is a good place to start.

What happened to giving them practical skills?

For example, recognizing this, I have long supported grants for educational instruction in digital and wireless technologies, targeted to minorities and low-income students who may not otherwise be exposed to these fields.

And this teaches them how? Telecourses suck compared to having a professor in from of you. Why is it discriminatory in who it targets?

The diminishing number of science, technology, engineering and math graduates at the college level poses a fundamental and immediate threat to American competitiveness.

Yeah, because the pay is shit compared to others. See above for more and kill the H1-B visa program.

We must fill the pipeline to our colleges and universities with students prepared for the rigors of advanced engineering, math, science and technology degrees.

And how do you plan to do that?

We must move aggressively to provide opportunities from elementary school on, for students to explore the sciences through laboratory experimentation, science fairs and competitions.

How do you plan on interfering in the K-12 school with no authority to do so?

We must bring private corporations more directly into the process, leveraging their creativity, and experience to identify and maximize the potential of students who are interested and have the unique potential to excel in math and science.

I got to visit Honeywell 20 years ago. You going to bring back something that has been going on for decades? Or do you mean something else?

We must strengthen skills of existing science and math teachers through training and education, through professional development programs and community colleges.

And this will work how? And how will you get the schools to go along with it?

I believe we must provide funding for needed professional teacher development. Where federal funds are involved, teacher development money should be used to enhance the ability of teachers to perform in today’s technology driven environment.

And how do you enhance their ability to perform?

We need to provide teachers with high quality professional development opportunities with a primary focus on instructional strategies that address the academic needs of their students.

I thought they were already suposed to do that.

The first 35 percent of Title II funding would be directed to the school level so principals and teachers could focus these resources on the specific needs of their schools.

What 'specific needs'? Why is the Fed funding State programs?

I will devote 60 percent of Title II funding for incentive bonuses for high performing teachers to locate in the most challenging educational settings, for teachers to teach subjects like math and science, and for teachers who demonstrate student improvement. Payments will be made directly to teachers. Funds should also be devoted to provide performance bonuses to teachers who raise student achievement and enhance the school-wide learning environment. Principals may also consider other issues in addition to test scores such as peer evaluations, student subgroup improvements, or being removed from the state’s “in need of improvement” list.

Ok, you just used up 95% of the funding. At least it's incentive instead of forced placement. How do you define improvement? Sounds like the principals control the purse strings here.

I will allocate $250 million through a competitive grant program to support states that commit to expanding online education opportunities. States can use these funds to build virtual math and science academies to help expand the availability of AP Math, Science, and Computer Sciences courses, online tutoring support for students in traditional schools, and foreign language courses.

Great, so the AP classes that got dumbed down for the stupid students who sued their way in are getting some money to waste on technology to try to teach teleclasses that are not as good as real classes.

I will also continue to support STEM education programs at NSF, DOE, NASA, and NOAA. These scientific agencies can and should play a key role in the education of its future engineers and scientists. These agencies have the opportunity to add a practical component to the theoretical aspects of the students' educational process.

I'd say INS could help out as well.

[ampersand]

1. I don't know from the commentary if I would vote for either Obama or McCain at this point, but I would certainly vote for Adciv if he ever ran for governor of West Virgina.

2. Why do I get the feeling I went into the wrong STEM field?