Online Science Policy Critique Of Kerry And Bush

museumpeace writes "David Appell, one of Techonology Review's bloggers, has posted a quick review of Nature Publishing Group's comparison of candidate positions on Science faulting both for various lame answers. That might save you the trouble of reading all the other coverage at NPG, and the more informative articles published by Science. But if you want a heads-up about which kinds of research will thrive or get the ax in the next four years, you might want to slog through "Kerry and Bush offer their views" . Both publications require registration or payment to access most of their content but the science policy debate is being aired out for free."

Comments

Fisheries Management

[Anonymous Coward]

I heard a story about NPR about fisheries management and how it looks like Bush is making some positive steps there. It sounds like he appointed a bunch of oil people to this committee which worried all the environmentalists, but then the guys he put there ended up agreeing with the scientific findings (to the surprise and delight of the environmental folks). Sounds like they are going to put a bunch of stuff that was under a bunch of different jurisdictions into a fisheries management group, that I assume will be putting some good changes into effect. Interesting.

Re:Fisheries Management

[ImaLamer]

I don't know if that is true, but I know that Nixon devoted 1/3 of his 1971 State of The Union on the environment and started/supported creation of the EPA.

But between Bush and Kerry, Kerry takes the cake for being an "environmentalist".

From Project Vote Smart:

Environmental Issues

2003 On the votes that the League of Conservation Voters considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 53 percent of the time.

2003 On the votes that the Sierra Club considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2001-2002 On the votes that the National Parks Consevation Association considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2001-2002 On the votes that the League of Conservation Voters considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 92 percent of the time.

2001-2002 On the votes that the Comprehensive US Sustainable Population considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 73 percent of the time.

1999-2000 On the votes that the League of Conservation Voters considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 94 percent of the time.

1999-2000 On the votes that the National Parks Conservation Association considered to be the most important in 1999-2000 , Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999-2000 On the votes that the Comprehensive US Sustainable Population considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 84 percent of the time.

Interesting but...

[Malfourmed]

This is interesting but surely the more pertinent question is: how many voters see a candidate's science policy as being important enough to influence how they would vote?