Science Chair Boehlert-Views on 2001 (fwd)

[Susan Gawarecki <loc@icx.net>]

I thought RadSafers might be interested in the following policy issue.
This is a summary of perspectives from the new Chair of the House 
Science Committee, Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), who is generally regarded
as a friend of science.  Of particular interest is his LACK of mention
of the nuclear energy option as well as his promise to take a hard look
at the DOE.  Nuclear energy proponants have their work cut out for them.

This is unedited, so all misspellings below are someone else's fault.

Regards,
Susan Gawarecki

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:31:24 -0500
From: cssp@acs.org
To: Board <CSSP@acs.org>
Subject: Science Chair Boehlert-Views on 2001

Sherwood Boehlert(R-NY), new Chair of the House Science
Comte had this to say this am at a meeting at the NAS:
1) he joked that he will become popular by providing
 "press coverage for the Members of the Comte, parking 
for the staff, and money for the scientific community" and
said that he wanted to build the Science Comte into a more 
significant force in Congress.
2) He want a healthy, sustainable and productive R&D--
"one that educates students, increases human knowledge,
strengthens US competitiveness and contributes to the
well-being of the world."
3) In this year, 2001, he will concentrate on sci-math
education, energy policy, and the environment and said
he doesn't have any ready made solutions yet.  But
he did ask how we can attract more top students into
sci-math teaching, how can we ensure that technology
actually improves education, and how can we use exams
 to promote critical thinking, retention of knowledge, and
a love of learning. He suggessted that drawing resources 
into research universities may help amswer his questions.
4)   His view of energy policy was focused around alternative
sources--wind, solar, fuel cells, etc and conservation. he
also suggetsed that he'd "give a good, ahrd look " at the
Dept of Energy.
5) He said that we need environmental research that is
adequately funded and conducted by top scientists both
inside and outside govmt. He wants the Science Comte
to keep abreast of brewing controversies in environ policy.
He wants "more reliable results, not more convenient ones".
He wants to review "the risks of biotech on the environment".  
6) He planneed the first full Comte hearings on the above 
agenda to occur in early March.
7) He will explore his concerns about the health of the research
enterprise itself and promised unabiguously to "fight to increase
research funding, especially in the physical sciences,"in the
coming year and support the "vital DoE Labs".
8) He promised that the Science Comte will look at the apparent
imbalance in the federal research portfolio. But he will ask many
"tough questions" about if that is so. He asked, "Given the clear
public concern with health and other areas of biology, why shouldn't 
NIH get the larger share of the pie?" 
     He asked "why double the federal civilian research budget? 
What are we going to get for that money? How will we ever know
 if we are over- or under-spending in any filed or area?"  
     He said he will not any longer accept "randomly generated 
numbers" in place of real data in search of answers to his questions
--so let us round up the needed data. He answered a query on 
the "doubling bill" with a show of skepticism and finally the 
statement that he " would like to find a way to pass it". 
9) He said we need to make a better case to the appropriators, and
noted that Jim Walsh(R-NY) was both a key figure in this process
and a good personal friend of his. But he said Congress will deal
with "doubling agency by agency, and that the DoE Labs do not yet
have a clear role."
10) He worried about the growing university-industry (U-I)partnership 
and the remaining role of government.  He asked how does the U-I
affect education, free flow of ideas and information, the nature of the
University research, intellectual property. "The time has come to
review the U-I relationship", he said.  "How can they be more productive
and less risky to universities?" he asked.
11) He concluded that his new role was to be the science community's
"staunchest ally, and fairest critic". he said he will always ask the
tough
and uncomforatble questions to ensure that the science community
is acting in the nation's long term interest. 
He concluded that he will make Einstein smile--he will ensure that as
long as he is chairman, "no one plays dice with your universe".

------- End of Forwarded Message 
-- 
.....................................................
Susan L. Gawarecki, Ph.D., Executive Director
Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee
                       -----                       
A schedule of meetings on DOE issues is posted on our Web site
http://www.local-oversight.org/meetings.html - E-mail loc@icx.net
.....................................................


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html