Morning Reflection: More Political Science

My ramblings yesterday on the Bush Administration's mixed signals on climate change begs a larger question: Just how important a role will science policy play in this election? Not too important, I suspect, in light of the general public's rather questionable understanding of science. Of course, if scientists as a group were as important a voting bloc as, say, the storied state of Ohio, Bush would probably have a lot more spare brush-clearing time in Crawford beginning next January. (Of course, if scientists were an important voting bloc, Bush's science policy probably wouldn't be the disaster it is, so maybe it wouldn't work out that way after all.)

The one scientific issue that seems to have legs in this election is, of course, the policy flap regarding embryonic stem cells -- but here again, the public seems to have only the vaguest notion of what's at stake here. A nice posting yesterday on the Technology Review site put this into some perspective: Although a staggering 83%% of respondents to a recent poll claimed to have heard or read about stem cell issues, and 73% of respondents approved of ESC research (versus 11% who disapproved), some scientists who support the research are nonetheless concerned about whether the public has too overblown a view of what work with ESCs can accomplish at present. The TR post quoted one stem cell worker about this problem:

"How much is going to happen therapeutically, and how quickly, is not being discussed in realistic terms," says Neil Theise, a physician and stem cell researcher at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City who says he has been invited to speak to fifth-grade classes on the subject. "In all likelihood, stem cell technology will lead to improvement, if not a cure, for the diseases talked about," Theise says. "But how quickly it will happen is being exaggerated."

Uninformed as the public may be, the kinds of numbers cited above explain why the Bushites have been spinning their policy so furiously to make it look like the restrictive Bush policy, which limits federally funded ESC research to a handful of existing cell lines, is actually promoting stem cell research -- rather than the real chilling effect that has overtaken this branch of U.S. science. (It is no accident that one of the year's most stunning advances in ESC science came out of South Korea, not the U.S.) The First Lady seems to have been drafted as the key point person on justifying her husband's approach, and that has resulted in some breathtaking examples of doublethink (even for a Republican). Another example of Bushite political tightrope-walking between its radical-right constituency and the general public -- and of consummate doublethink by political whores like Giuliani, Schwartznegger, and McCain, who can somehow support this president and claim to be "moderates" in favor of stem cell research, tolerance toward gays, and a more enlightened climate change policy.