|
Developed by
Are we losing what made America great?
|
The Top American Science Questions: 2012
|
[1].jpg){kind=logo}
|
|||
|
Innovation |
Climate Change | Research and the Future |
Education |
|||
| 1. Innovation and the Economy. Science and technology have been responsible for over half of the growth of the U.S. economy since WWII, when the federal government first prioritized peacetime science mobilization. But several recent reports question America’s continued leadership in these vital areas. What policies will best ensure that America remains a world leader in innovation? |
|||
|
Technological innovation is key for America to compete and win in an increasingly global economy. The federal government has played a critical role in fostering science and technological innovation, particularly in the latter half of the twentieth century, and the American people and our economy have benefited tremendously from those public investments.
|
|||
| |
|||
| 2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on cap-and-trade, carbon taxes, and other policies proposed to address global climate change—and what steps can we take to improve our ability to tackle challenges like climate change that cross national boundaries? |
|||
| Climate change is one of the most serious dangers facing the world today. Over the past twelve months, U.S. temperature records have repeatedly been shattered and we have experienced the droughts, floods, wildfires, and extreme weather events that scientists have long predicted would intensify and become more frequent as the planet warms. It is imperative that the United States act to sharply reduce U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases and that we engage with other nations to achieve world-wide emissions reductions.
I strongly support policies to address global climate change and believe that a comprehensive solution requires congressional action. Market-based policies such as cap-and-trade programs and carbon taxes offer the most cost-effective approach, and I strongly support such policies. In the 111th Congress, Rep. Markey and I joined together to introduce the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, known also as the Waxman-Markey bill. This bill offered a comprehensive and cost-effective approach to reducing greenhouse gases through a cap-and-trade system to reduce emissions by 28% to 33% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050. The bill passed the House, but did not gain Senate approval. This Congress, the House Republican leadership has attempted to reverse any progress on addressing climate change. Republicans have voted 47 times on the House floor to oppose action on climate change. These included votes to overrule the Supreme Court and repeal existing EPA authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases, to cut funding for clean energy, and to cut funding for climate change research. The House Republicans even voted to deny the fundamental scientific reality of climate change. In light of the Republican denial of the science and opposition to action on climate change, I have called on the chairmen of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the relevant subcommittee to hold hearings on the science and impacts of climate change, so that the Committee could better understand the issues. I have written to the chairmen fifteen times requesting hearings on different topics related to climate change. Among others, I have requested hearings on new findings on the impacts of climate change on agriculture, new findings regarding the probability that extreme weather events are influenced by climate change, and new analysis of earth surface temperatures. I have never received a response to any of these requests. |
|||
| |
|||
| 3. Research and the Future. Federally funded research has helped to produce America’s major postwar economies and to ensure our national security, but today the UK, Singapore, China, and Korea are making competitive investments in research. Given that the next Congress will face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in research in your upcoming budgets? |
|||
| It is critically important that we prioritize funding for clean energy initiatives. We need to end our dependence on oil, which hurts consumers at the pump and threatens our climate and national security. Congress should support this Administration’s clean energy initiatives because our economic future depends on building the clean energy industries of tomorrow.
Unfortunately, the Republicans seek to dismantle many of our government’s clean energy initiatives. During this Congress, the Republican House voted 52 times to defund or repeal clean energy initiatives. The Republican budget, introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan, would slash discretionary spending for energy programs by over 50% next year, derailing efforts to increase energy efficiency and develop wind, solar, geothermal, and other clean energy sources. The Ryan budget would also repeal funding for the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Program and the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program. At the same time, the Republican budget continues to provide $40 billion in tax breaks for oil companies. The priorities reflected in the Republican budget are backwards: we should be cutting subsidies to established profitable industries like the oil companies and investing in new technologies. |
|||
| |
|||
| 4. Education. Increasingly, the global economy is driven by science, technology, engineering and math, but a recent comparison of 15-year-olds in 65 countries found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 23rd, while average U.S. math scores ranked 31st. In your view, why have American students fallen behind over the last three decades, and what role should the federal government play to better prepare students of all ages for the science and technology-driven global economy? |
|||
| Although our colleges and universities are home to world-class science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs that attract the best and brightest domestic and international students, I am very concerned that the math and science test scores of American school children are lagging behind their counterparts in other countries. I believe we must create more opportunities for students to gain hands-on experiences that inspire them to pursue STEM learning. The Obama Administration has put forth several strategies to address the shortcomings in our education system and improve student achievement in these vital areas, including the President’s goal of training an additional 100,000 effective STEM teachers over the next ten years. I also support the Administration’s efforts to engage private sector employers in STEM education programs that connect students to career opportunities in STEM fields.
The innovation and technological breakthroughs that emerge from STEM fields are vital to our economic growth and prosperity, and we must raise our commitment to STEM teaching and learning across all levels of our education system to maintain our edge in the global economy. We cannot maintain the promise of American ingenuity without investing in the next generation of leaders in these critical fields. |
|||
| |
|||
| 5. Energy. Many policymakers and scientists say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet the demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future? |
|||
| I strongly support a market-based policy to promote clean energy, reduce carbon pollution, and address climate change. A rising price on carbon will create incentives for investments and innovation that will reduce emissions, improve energy security, provide certainty to industry, and strengthen our economy. A carbon policy could also raise significant revenue that could be used to reduce our debt.
A carbon policy would help protect Americans from the worst effects of climate change, such as extreme heat waves and droughts. It would level the playing field for clean energy sources like wind and solar. It would spur research into and development of important new technologies, like electric vehicles and carbon capture and storage technologies. And it lessens our dependence on foreign oil. |
|||
| |
|||
| 6. Fresh Water. Less than one percent of the world’s water is liquid fresh water, and scientific studies suggest that a majority of U.S. and global fresh water is now at risk because of increasing consumption, evaporation and pollution. What steps, if any, should the federal government take to secure clean, abundant fresh water for all Americans? | |||
| Sources of drinking water are a valuable resource that should be protected through full funding and strong enforcement of environmental law. The Safe Drinking Water Act, which ensures that the nation has a safe drinking water supply, should be fully enforced. The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, which can be an important funding mechanism for state source water protection efforts, as well as water treatment, should be reauthorized and fully funded.
We must also ensure that oil and natural gas drilling, including hydraulic fracturing, meet the highest safety standards to protect underground sources of drinking water from potential contamination. Regulations for waste disposal, including the disposal of coal ash, should be strengthened and fully enforced to prevent the creation of new contaminated sites and new threats to drinking water. |
|||
| |
|||
| 7. The Internet. The Internet plays a central role in both our economy and our society. What role, if any, should the federal government play in managing the Internet to ensure its robust social, scientific, and economic role? |
|||
| The federal government played an important role in the development of the Internet through funding by the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency and the National Science Foundation. To the extent possible, the federal government should continue to foster innovation by investing in research and development for the broadband ecosystem, including networks, equipment, and applications, so the United States can continue to be a leader in the global broadband economy.
In 2010, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a set of sensible rules to preserve the open Internet by limiting the ability of broadband providers to act as Internet gatekeepers and decide what content their subscribers can access. By ensuring an open and transparent Internet, the federal government can provide the regulatory certainty necessary for investments in Internet infrastructure and the proliferation of e-commerce. The U.S. government is now engaged in preliminary negotiations on a treaty known as the International Telecommunication Regulations, which will be taken up by the World Conference on International Telecommunications in December. The federal government has a crucial role to play in resisting efforts by some countries to encourage centralized control of the Internet. We need to ensure that the Internet remains a tool for the global dissemination of ideas, information, and commerce, without interference from any government. |
|||
| |
|||
| 8. Science in Public Policy. We live in an era when science and technology affect every aspect of life and society, and so must be included in well-informed public policy decisions. How will you ensure that policy and regulatory decisions are fully informed by the best available scientific and technical information, and that the public is able to evaluate the basis of these policy decisions? |
|||
| |
|||
| Effective policies must be informed by the best scientific and technical information available. When policymakers reject the science, the result is bad policy. Unfortunately, science-denial seems to be the norm on Capitol Hill these days.
The Republican denial of climate change science is a prime example of this irresponsible approach. According to the eminent scientific journal Nature, members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have taken positions on climate change that are “fundamentally anti-science” and the result of “willful ignorance,” making it “hard to escape the conclusion that the U.S. Congress has entered the intellectual wilderness.” Notwithstanding the scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and is a serious threat, House Republicans unanimously supported a bill, H.R. 910, to overturn EPA’s scientific finding that climate change endangers public health and welfare. During the floor debate on H.R. 910, I offered an amendment that stated, “Congress accepts the scientific findings of the Environmental Protection Agency that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for public health and welfare.” All but one House Republican voted to reject these scientific findings. Many House Republicans explained their rejection of EPA’s scientific findings by stating their view that the science is “not settled.” At the same time, House Republicans have voted to cut funding for climate research that could provide more insight into the pace and likely impacts of climate change. They have also refused to hold hearings to better understand the overwhelming body of existing scientific evidence showing that climate change is occurring. Policymakers cannot address serious problems such as climate change by denying their existence. Congress should be holding hearings with the nation’s top scientists to understand the problems we face so that we can design sensible policies to tackle those problems. I have repeatedly requested these hearings. So far, the Republican leaders I have written have not even bothered to respond. It is a deplorable record. |
