LAST month, just before the back-to-back spectaculars of the Democratic and Republican national conventions, the American public was treated to a during which the two principal presidential candidates answered questions about their religious convictions and how these guided their approach to issues like abortion, social justice and the economy. The forum took place in a 22,000-seat California mega-church and was televised across the nation.
Two days later, a group of government officials, business leaders and academics gathered at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee for a . The summit had been mandated by Congress as part of the 2007 , intended to stimulate discussion about the state of research in the US and the education system that keeps it supplied with talent. Unlike the faith forum, this was not a venue for presidential politics, nor did it draw thousands of spectators or hordes of camera crews.
The disparity between these two events in terms of the publicity and political attention they were afforded could not be more stark. Science has a low profile in the US political arena, and that鈥檚 worrying because science and technology are crucial to the well-being of the country, and to that of people around the world who benefit from US investment in R&D (see 鈥淢cCain vs Obama: who will end the war on science?鈥�). Innovation is as emblematic of American culture as Hollywood movies. The current administration has given this legacy short shrift, choosing instead to politicise science at the expense of the public good. The next president will have his work cut out to repair the damage.
Advertisement
Why are these issues so little discussed publicly? One possibility is that, unlike personal faith, science is a subject that many Americans do not feel informed enough to weigh in on. Another is that the little public debate there is about science doesn鈥檛 pull the right emotional strings 鈥� in which case the candidates should find ways to present the issues so that they do.
National elections tend to be mercurial affairs in which heart reigns over head, and this one looks set to be no exception. Both candidates have compelling personal stories to tell, and both are promising change, but that is not enough. In its conversation with the candidates, the American electorate deserves to hear more about science and technology, especially in areas such as climate, energy, health and the environment. The consequences of this election are too far-reaching to be settled by faith alone.
US Election 2008 鈥� Science and technology are at the heart of many of the issues facing the candidates. Find out more in our special report.