ScienceDebate2008 – not in Philadelphia
So it doesn't appear that there will be a science debate in Philadelphia next week. But that doesn't mean that organizers of the debate effort have given up. It simply means they've shifted their focus. Here's what Shawn Otto has to say in an e-mail that I received this morning (see the related report on MSNBC):
Our opening gambit, an April 18 debate in Philadelphia, is looking less and less likely. Obama has declined, Clinton has been non-committal, and McCain has been non-responsive. We want to acknowledge a national debt of gratitude to the Franklin Institute for their outstanding and visionary leadership on this issue, and we will undoubtedly work together with them in the future.But if not April 18 in Philly, then what? Is it over?
Not by a long shot.
Rather, the candidates' reluctance demonstrates the very reason why our initiative is so important and must continue. These issues will not go away by sticking our heads in the sand, and neither will the candidates' responsibility to tackle them, or the voters' right to assess the candidates on their plans. So like the candidates, we are beginning to focus on the next major primary venue, which is Oregon in May.
Not only that, but the ScienceDebate2008 leaders have teamed up with NOVA (the PBS television on science) and NOW (a weekly news program on PBS) to cosponsor a nationally broadcast debate. Not only that, they've proposed three dates, May 2, May 9, and May 16.
As I've written before,
How candidates deal with issues where science is deeply involved tells us a lot about how they use evidence, how they evaluate expertise, and how they reach decisions, all critical features for a leader who cannot possibly know all of the technical details about any policy (s)he adopts. As Roger Pielke points out, the problems posed by the use of science in formulating policy are very similar to those posed by using intelligence.
A president who misuses or misunderstands science can't be trusted to make any decisions.
Click on the ScienceDebate2008 link in the tag cloud to see more entries about the debate. Better yet, visit the ScienceDebate2008 website and sign up as a supporter.
Categories
Politics0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: ScienceDebate2008 – not in Philadelphia.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/983
Kent, did you read the email we got right after the above email? I think its sad that presidential candidates think its more relevant to debate issue of faith then issues of science. I've never understood politics, so maybe they think that's the ticket to wining over voters. I guess despite the huge increase of "green" product advertising I've seen lately that politicians still don't think Americans care about science issues. Maybe they're right, I guess that's what ultimately makes me sad.
It's actually a little broader than that. If it were to happen ScienceDebate2008 would do more than see how Clinton, McCain, and Obama differ in their approach to global climate change or stem cell research. It would provide insight into how they use evidence to reach conclusions on matters of public policy. Facts don't determine policy, but they are certainly relevant to policy, and one of the most important qualities in a president is how (s)he assesses the facts and translates them into policy.