The Honorable John Edward Porter
Thank you, introduction
Honored to included among the distinguished scientists and others who are part of your conference program.
- Ellis & Joanna Rubenstein
- Dinner honoring Elias Zerhouni
- Global Health discussion, I'm interested in & working on
- Shaifali Puri, Scientists Without Borders
Where I'm coming from:
- My father was afflicted with polio, 18 months, 1901
- Brace on his leg, other fathers
- Grandmother, Christian Science, Sunday school
- Salk vaccine
- My father, all those people in iron lungs
Second, not a scientist
MIT, appreciation of science
Congress and elections
Elections, serendipitous
So are committee & subcommittee assignments - Michel
20 years of exposure to NIH
Nobel laureates
1994, Newt Gingrich, chairman of the subcommittee
Moderate Republican. I should be in a museum.
Always worked closely with the Democratic members and continue to do so today
Finally, had only, but all, life science programs, my jurisdiction
If I had the physical sciences, I would have doubled them as well
Rita Colwell and Arden Bement
I bring it up, but someone should deal with the subject of silos, in agencies, in Congress, Bridging the Sciences
President's speech at NAS (4/27)
a- Importance of science, him and the country
b- Undermining of scientific integrity, politization of research
c- 3% of GDP to R & D
d- Science, technology, and innovation is our economic destiny
e- Will double physical science research funding
f- Increase NIH funding on a sustained basis
g- Make the R & D tax credit permanent
h- Respect role, OSTP and PCAST -John Holdren, Eric Lander, and Harold Varmus-and seek their counsel and advice
i- Talked of bridging the sciences, called "convergence"
j- Encourage international scientific cooperation
k- Commit to science and mathematics education
l- Maintain our leads is science
m- Foster innovation
n- Everything you would want to hear him say, he said
Two very significant editorials in Science preceded President's
a- Harold Varmus and Kurt Gottfried (UCS), protecting free and open scientific inquiry
b- Ralph Cicerone (NAS): "scientists must do more to demonstrate the value of investing in science" Ralph tells you what you should do President gives you the messages to use
c- John Holdren: "Everybody in the science and technology community who cares about the future of the world should be tithing 10 percent of his or her time to interacting with the public in the policy process."
d- Nancy Pelosi, in accepting the Research ! America Whitehead Award in March: "There are four words that describe the domestic agenda in this country, and those words are science, science, science and science."
But why do it?
Why not go back to your labs and offices and let them do it
We think the President has his head screwed on right regarding science.
His party has control of both Houses of Congress
With Arlen Specter switch, virtually filibuster-proof in the Senate
So with all this control and all of these good words, why not just go back to sitting on your fingers---from a public and policy maker engagement standpoint--- and let those Washington guys do it?
Now, we have arrived at C.P. Snow's famous lecture and "the gulf of mutual incomprehension"
Politician-Policy makers in America know little about science
Only about 4% of the U.S. House and Senate have any science background
Scientists know little or nothing about politics and government
Why not just leave it that way?
Because:
Because while we like to think only science research funding suffered for six years under our last president
Fact is, everything suffered, everything except defense, homeland security, and veterans
Education, literacy, vocation education, job training;
Mental health, substance abuse, child and foster care;
Transportation, infrastructure, national parks, conservation;
You name it, unless it was for an unnecessary war or security, it all suffered, by being flat funded or decreased
And all of these have their demands on the MCs, just as we do, and are making their voices heard
We can't do nothing, because while we were focused on the President's message on science, the American public generally was not
And because it's the public to whom Congress is accountable and must serve
We can't do nothing because science is increasingly complex and increasing incomprehensible and foreign to our poorly-scientifically educated electorate
Half of them believe Intelligent Design and Evolution should have equal time in our public schools
That alone tells you the job that needs to be done
And it tells you the job the science community has failed to do
We can't sit on the sidelines because China and India and Singapore, and others have made a strong commitment to scientific research
And people from around the world who came to enrich our science and our society, are likely to increasingly stay home
Finally, we can't do nothing to bridge the C.P. Snow gulf because an incredible opportunity exists in America today to reach out and educate the public and policymakers alike of the importance of science to our way of life
We don't know if such a window will open again
Research!America polls year after consistent year tell us that scientists are the most respected people in our country
Use that credibility and walk through the door President Obama has opened!
If we do, science will reclaim its preeminent position of importance and influence in our society
I know, though, that if they engage, many of our bench scientists and even many deans and administrators would be outside their comfort zones
Good, that's how we grow as human beings
Now, what exactly should you do?
Not just pay your professional society dues, vote in the next elections, and rely on your people in Washington
I'm not talking about what should they do in your behalf
Because they can only do so much
Tip O'Neill was right; all politics is local
The folks at home who vote are the ones that really count and can make a difference for the things they believe in
I'm talking about every single stakeholder in America who cares about American leadership and investments in science, technology, innovation, and research
Individually. I'm talking about you.
John Holdren, the science advisrr to the President is in place
Eric Lander and Harold Varmus are in place.
Steven Chu, a magnificent appointment to head our Department of Energy, is in place
But we have no directors of NIH, NCI, CDC, and many of the other physical science agencies
But what about all the other top S&T positions in the new Administration?
I chaired the 2008 NAS committee on Ensuring the Best Science and Technology Appointments in the new Administration
Our committee's report (the rest of the committee were all prominent scientists) identified the 55 or 60 which, in its judgment, are the most important
Check the report, identify your candidates and get their names to the White House through your professional society or organization
It doesn't mean those candidates you propose will be the President's selections
But it will certainly provide the President with choices
Also, please, insist the new Administration work to reduce the financial and personal obstacles to government service
And push them to make the process for nominations and appointments to federal advisory committees more explicit and transparent
Get your university, research institution, or company to join Research!America, an organization devoted exclusively to advocacy for science
Log onto its YourCongressYourHealth.org.
It asks all Members of Congress of both parties to answer questions on their positions on research and funding
Check it and see if your Senators and Congressperson has responded
If they haven't call their local or Washington offices and ask them to do so
You have a right to know where they stand
Have your professional society take steps to make candidates accountable for your specific concerns
Write an op-ed about science issues and funding for your local newspaper
Create a science blog or participate in one
Take your newspaper's science report out to lunch
Make a speech on your work in science to your service, social or other club or organization
Invite your representative and senators (separately) to your research center or campus and show them the research that is being done
Ralph Cicerone says in his Science editorial that I told him that each and every one of my colleagues in Congress who visited a science laboratory in his or her home district emerged as an enthusiast.
I did tell him that, and I guarantee that they will.
Go to your local public or private primary or secondary school.
Tell them you like to talk to a class or two or three about science
They'll welcome you with open arms.
Chances are their teachers have little background in science
Only scientists can inspire kids to careers in science
I can't do it, but you can.
I say often: Maybe the one good thing to come out of this Great Recession is that in the future all our kids won't want to become stockbrokers.
Change the culture of your institution or company
Scientists at universities tell me that rewards and advancements depend on grants, research, teaching, and committees or engagement with the broader scientific community
Fine, but you need to add one more---public engagement
You are by every measure the most respected and credible people in America
But if the public and policymakers never hear your voices, never see scientists, never are exposed to science, never understand its methods: the chances of its being high on the list of national priorities will be very low
Now, looking ahead, to the next election, pick your favorite candidate.
It may be for the Senate or Congress, or governor, state senator or state representative
Call his or her campaign and tell them you'd like to help advise the candidate on science matters and issues
They'll love it
Is there a candidate anywhere that ever refused help?
Tell them you'd like to be the candidate's science adviser or serve on his or her science advisory committee
If they say they don't have one, tell them you'll create one for them.
Chair it yourself and recruit your colleagues
Get inside their campaign, then press to put science into the candidate's message to voters
Once your candidate has won, offer to continue in your role to advise your new officeholder on science policy and funding questions
Ask yourselves: Wouldn't it be wonderful if all candidates in all future elections had science advisors or advisory committees
They will, if individual scientists would step up to the plate
If possible, don't concentrate all your efforts in one political party
You never know how elections will turn out
Besides, you want both parties invested in the importance of science to America's future and committed to support it
In the next election, go to the candidates' debates
Ask a question on their support for science or on a science issue of interest to you
How many of you did this in the last election?
And finally, horrors, run for office yourself!
It is disheartening to see so many public officials with so little knowledge of science
Bill Foster, a physicist, ran for and won the House seat of
Former Speaker, Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican.
Twice.
If he can do it, you can do it
If you can't bring yourself to do that, at least aim at a position of science policy in the new Administration or a position on a federal advisory committee
Use your creative powers to think of other ways to bring the importance of science home to policymakers and the public alike
Now for the easy part: how do you prepare for doing these things?
Go to the Research!America website or call their national office
Or FASEB, or AAAS, ASTRA, or Society for Neuroscience or your own professional society
We are not in competition. All of us share the same goals.
Most of them have good guidance on organizing and preparing to meet with Members of Congress and administration officials
How to do it: it's really not rocket science.
Talk to Shawn Otto who's here and who did so much with ScienceDebate2008 to bring the importance of science to the attention of the presidential candidates
d- Call me, I'd be happy to aim you in the right direction.
But you might have to be subjected to learning Porter's Five Principles
C.P. Snow had it right fifty years ago---there was a gulf of mutual incomprehension between science and the public
We have only regressed since then
The opportunity lies before us
The tools and messages are readily available
But the ascent of science, technology, innovation and research---, so essential to the future of our society---simply won't happen without the engagement of scientists and their institutions or companies with the American public and its elected representatives.
Will you make it happen?
Thanks for listening to me.