Knock Twice

Because I live in Washington, DC, or perhaps because I work on Capitol Hill, my family and friends who live outside the beltway periodically ask me about where I stand considering the current milieu of presidential candidates.

“Is there anyone that you like?” I am asked. Most often, my answer is, “no.”

My main reason for not really liking any of the candidates is that none of them speak well (or at all) on the issues that I care the most about. It is rare that I hear any of the candidates on either side speak satisfactorily on things like: funding for arts and sciences, providing free and widespread access to information, or improving the sorry state of the education system in the U.S. It is even rarer that one of these mopes offers a radically different vision of America’s future; one that isn’t built on on unending economic growth, but instead relies on sustainability as the cornerstone for long term stability and community building both here and abroad.

For a more in depth and articulate break down of why one of these issues (science) is actually really important for the development of this United States, I defer to Chris Mooney, who wrote the article, ‘The Presidential Science Debate’, for the current SEED (Issue 14). The crux of his argument is this, “Getting the US presidential candidates to talk about science isn’t about hearing their campaign promises–it’s about forcing politics to respond to the reality that science underpins America’s future.” The article isn’t online, yet, but as soon as it makes an appearance on the web, I’ll link to it here.