IP: Rep. Ehlers on National Science Policy Report This is NOT the same info as a previous post

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

I asked the person who sent this if I could forward with their comment and was told

"Without attribution please. If their sex police can impeach President's 
imagine what their research police will do! "

djf

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:09:03 -0400
To: farber () cis upenn edu
From:  Anonymous (see my comment above)
Subject: Re: Ehelers

See this Dave?
Read carefully, compare with Republican statements about "doubling R&D 
spending  and you can spot the bait and switch in progress.


FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 139: October 8, 1998

Rep. Ehlers on National Science Policy Report

Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) gave a briefing on Tuesday about the
recently completed study, "Toward a New National Science Policy."
He opened his discussion at the American Association for the
Advancement of Science  by saying that he does "not consider
myself an expert on science policy," adding that the study was
not intended to be the "greatest science policy report you have
ever seen."  Rather, it is a report to Congress to guide it in
developing a new national science policy.

Ehlers worries about the federal budget, and the amount given to
science.  He predicted that future overall budgets will not grow
beyond inflation, and ruled out significant increases in federal
revenue because of the public's opposition to higher taxes.  A
"major concern" was the continuing squeeze on discretionary
spending by entitlement programs.

The congressman briefly outlined several theses used in writing
the report.  The first was that "our science policy is outdated,"
with Ehlers describing current science policy as more of a budget
policy  (a point made frequently by Rep. George Brown (D-CA).)
Another thesis was that "the American public doesn't understand
science and its practice."  The public's  knowledge of science,
he  said,  is limited to more of a collection of facts than an
understanding of the scientific process.  Ehlers' third thesis
was that "scientists are politically clueless."  He stressed the
need for scientists to become aware and involved in the political
process.  Finally, Ehlers called for a new science/mathematics
education strategy.

Ehlers also repeated the "vision" guiding the report: "The United
States of American must maintain and improve its pre-eminent
position in science and technology in order to advance human
understanding of the universe and all it contains, and the
improve the lives, health, and freedom of all peoples."

He then discussed some highlights of the report, including the
importance of basic research, the roles of government and private
industry, how science can support decision making, and
kindergarten through graduate school education reform.  Regarding
decision making, Ehlers said there were a "huge number" of
science and technology issues in Congress and state government
deliberations.  He stressed the need for scientists to become
involved early in the decision making process.

Limiting the report's reach was the committee's jurisdiction.  As
an example,  Ehlers cited the difficulty of including defense R&D
issues in the study.  Time was also a limiting factor, as  Ehlers
had less than a year to complete the report before Congress
adjourns.  He later added that there was "not as much detail as I
would like...the concepts are there."

His colleagues on the committee support the report, although to
obtain their approval he had to reduce some of the report's
discussion of international cooperation, which some members
viewed as foreign aid.  Regarding this he concluded, "We are a
little light -- I hope you understand the reasons for that."  It
is of note that all but one Republican on the House Science
Committee support the report, as do a majority of the committee's
Democrats.

###############
Richard M. Jones