NEWS FOCUS
Presidential Candidates Give Views On Science and Technology Where do the Presidential candidates stand on the vital issues affecting science and technology? What is their science policy based on? What do they believe is an adequate R&D funding level? What importance do they attach to research activities? What role do they see science and technology playing in solving national problems? These are issues not normally addressed in the heat of a campaign. Believing that C&EN's readers might wish to be better informed of the candidates' views on these and related issues, C&EN has culled examples of the candidates' positions on various science issues from speeches and statements made by President Ronald Reagan and various members of his Administration and material supplied by Walter Mondale's campaign committee.
Science policy g^*lg Both candidates agree on the importance of science and technology and the need for a strong basic research effort. President Reagan has stated, "Today the U.S. faces major challenges to both our economic wellbeing and our national security. We turn increasingly to science and technology to help us maintain the competitiveness of our industries in the international marketplace and the continued technological superiority of our defense capabilities. . . . My Administration recognizes the federal responsibility to maintain U.S. leadership in scientific research." The current Administration's science policy has three broad goals, according to Presidential Science Adviser George A. Keyworth III. One is to assure the quality and supply of tomorrow's technical talent. A second is to "develop new knowledge, the precious raw material that drives economic growth, underlies national defense, and improves our quality of life." And the third goal is to stimulate new partnerships between scientists and engineers in all sectors of society, partnerships to improve the application of knowledge to industrial and defense needs. Mondale believes that "our future depends on excellence in science, research, and technology. In national 6
October 15, 1984 C&EN
defense, our security rests in large measure on our technological edge over the Soviets. In international trade, our ability to compete rests increasingly on the development of high technology—computer systems, telecommunications, and the rest. In our economy and society, high-quality jobs and rising opportunity for our children can only flow from constant innovation. For every important national goal, we must have basic scientific research that leads the world, and the results of that research must be transformed into new processes and products built by American workers and American businesses." Mondale's science policy would be focused on "three key tasks." First would be to improve access to instruction in science, mathematics, and technology at every level, and enhance the quality of that instruction. The second task would be to renew the U.S. world leadership in every sector of basic research. And third would be to accelerate the translation of basic scientific discoveries into new processes and products. Given that the candidates' goals are very similar, the question arises of what actions the Administration has taken to implement its goals and what strategy Mondale would pursue, if elected, to achieve his.
Science education As to precollege education, the Administration's comm i t m e n t to assuring the quality and supply of tomorrow's technical talent wasn't obvious at the beginning. In 1981 it proposed cutting off funding for all of the National Science Foundation's education programs, except graduate fellowships. But then in his 1983 State of the Union message, Reagan said, "We Americans are still the technological leaders in most fields. We must keep that edge, and to do so we need to begin renewing the basics—starting with our educational system." The Administration then sent legislation to Congress, designed, as Reagan put it, "to stimulate the training of more math and science teachers [and] encourage existing math and science teachers to go back to school themselves to update their own knowledge." Con-
gress responded this summer with more than Reagan wanted in a bill providing $800 million for the Department of Education to be used to improve math and science education at the elementary and secondary level. The bulk of the funding, 70%, is to be passed on to local education agencies to be used for updating teachers' skills, retraining teachers of other subjects as math and science teachers, and establishing traineeships for undergraduate students who intend to teach those subjects at the secondary level. NSF gets $125 million to be used for teacher institutes, materials and curriculum development, Congressional merit scholarships, and graduate fellowships for math and science teachers. Reagan signed the bill on Aug. 11, saying that it responded to a "deeply felt concern" of his Administration. He noted that "science, mathematics, and technology have special importance in this country. Our economic and military strength, as well as our health
and well-being, depend to a great extent on continuing development in these areas. If we are to maintain our strength and independence, we cannot allow our skills in these fields to diminish." He further stated he was "very pleased to see that this bill emphasizes the critical importance of teacher training in improving the quality of science and mathematics education in activities authorized for the Department of Education and in endorsing the excellent ongoing science, mathematics, and engineering programs of the National Science Foundation." However, Reagan also noted that the bill had a "number of serious weaknesses: It is too expensive; it authorizes too many complex and administratively burdensome programs; [and] it denies state and local governments the broad flexibility and decision-making authority they need to address local educational needs in the most effective manner." Mondale believes that "excellence in education beOctober15, 1984 C&EN
7
News Focus gins with the trained mind. To be effective, that training must begin in the early years of education, and it must continue to the most advanced level/' To make sure that such training is available, he proposes a new national Fund for Excellence, which would make $4.5 billion of added resources available each year to local school districts to use as they see fit. The fund could be used, for example, to refurbish laboratories and upgrade instructional material; raise teacher salaries to attract first-rate new personnel; and establish new programs for motivated, committed, and talented students, including school-business ties and exchanges between schools and universities. Investing an additional $1 billion each year in such things as a new "Education Corps" to attract new people into teaching in critical areas, especially mathematics and science, is another Mondale idea. The money also would be used for continuing education for teachers, research and development work on improved curricula, and competitive grants to colleges and universities to improve teacher training. For college-level education, undergraduate and graduate, the Reagan Administration believes, according to Keyworth, that "government has a responsibility for helping our colleges and universities create an environment for attracting and retaining faculty of the highest quality," who can, in turn, help train the kinds of scientists and engineers that industry must have in increasing numbers. The Administration education initiative—the Presidential Young Investigators awards program—is designed, Keyworth explains, to "attract and retain desperately needed new university faculty" in the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering. Each recipient is eligible for five years of support up to $100,000 per year in a combination of federal and matching industrial funds. It is expected that 200 new investigators will be named each year, resulting after five years in a continuing total of 1000 active awards. Besides "beefing up support" for basic research and for training the kinds of scientists and engineers that are needed, Keyworth notes that the Administration has established a number of new programs to stimulate interactions between industrial, academic, and government scientists and engineers. Among these new initiatives is NSF's program to create university centers for cross-disciplinary research and education in engineering. "This program is ambitious," Keyworth says, and "by providing both resources and a focus on larger-scale projects than most university faculty are able to conduct on their own, it hopes to get at a number of weaknesses. Moreover, it envisions what will probably be a more prominent role for industry in these centers than has been customary for university programs before. Working within the framework of particular industrial fields—manufacturing processes or biotechnology processes or materials processing or any appropriate area— the centers would develop new and useful bodies of knowledge, and, not incidentally, train engineering students to solve problems." Mondale says that at the college level special oppor8
October 15, 1984 C&EN
tunities must be provided for talented students in science and mathematics. He says, "We should enlarge summer research possibilities, including internships at recognized centers of excellence and funding for summer research projects." "In the past decade," Mondale charges, "graduate education in science and technology has stagnated. Support for graduate education has declined, as has the number of Ph.D.s in these fields. We cannot allow this key link in the chain of training to be broken." To remedy this situation, Mondale proposes creating a new national advanced study awards program for outstanding students in mathematics, science, and other areas. Funds to support each awardee's research would be provided to the host institution. In addition, Mondale says he would institute competitively awarded block institutional training grants, modeled after the current U.S. Public Health Service grants, to pay for student stipends and the cost of equipment, laboratory materials, seminars, and travel to scientific meetiitgs. In addition, Mondale says, "We should increase opportunities for new Ph.D.s to broaden their training, perform research, and qualify for university teaching positions. At this postdoctoral level, we should create new competitive national science and technology research fellowships for top students, tenable for up to two years." No matter what the educational level, he warns, "science and technology must not become the preserve of a narrow e l i t e . . . . These occupations must be open to all."
Research
_ _ _ _ ^ _ _ ^ _ — ^ ^ —
Basic research "is a vital investment in the nation's future," according to Reagan. "Such research lays the foundation for a strong defense in years to come, and for new technologies and industries that will help maintain our industrial competitiveness, create new jobs, and improve our quality of life. By carefully establishing budget priorities, my Administration has been able to reinvigorate support for basic scientific research." This Administration has overseen what Keyworth
calls a "startling shift" in research priorities relative to those of previous Administrations. That funding for civilian R&D has remained essentially flat while defense R&D funding has soared, he says, is the result of countervailing trends—a steady rise in basic research and a steady drop in development. Basic research has grown from the smallest fraction of nondefense R&D to the largest. The overall, four-year 55% increase in basic research funding shows that it is, Keyworth says, after national security, the second highest priority item of the federal budget. "It's evident that we're seeing very real increases in the resources being devoted to producing new knowledge." An even more pronounced result of this policy, Keyworth says, is the growth in basic research funds that have gone to universities. There was a consistent decline in such funds from 1968 to 1979, and essentially no growth from 1979 to 1981, he says. However, from 1981 to the level being proposed by the Administration for 1985, support for universities has grown 26% in real terms. Noting the well-known instrumentation problem that underlies virtually all of university research, Keyworth explains that the Administration has adopted a policy of building support for new instrumentation and equipment, in large part, directly into project grants. Across all R&D agencies, the federal government expects to provide more than $400 million in 1985 for research instrumentation. He admits that "this amount, while substantial, falls far short of the estimated needs." But he adds, "Even if it were possible, it would be foolish to think this is a problem that could, or even should, be solved all at once or over a short period of time. Keeping up with new technology has to be a continuous process, so we intend to request these substantial sums of money on an ongoing basis to address this problem." Overall, Keyworth says, "Government should continue to place high priority on the generation of knowlege by supporting basic research across the spectrum of scientific frontiers. . . . Our actions over the past three years have made a clear statement that we are committed to excellence. The threat to the greatness of American science in recent years has not been that we've been too selective, but just the opposite. We've been too tolerant. Although good scientists can distinguish excellence from mediocrity, for a long time they were getting messages that said excellence was only one of many factors to be considered in establishing priorities." Speaking on basic research, Mondale says: "The key to our long-term competitiveness and national strength is the basic research performed by highly trained minds. And central to this research is the excellence of our universities. . . . To be effective, our university personnel need up-to-date equipment, rapid access to information, and adequate time for research. These are the key objectives of my program to upgrade basic research." Mondale proposes increasing the federal investment for civilian basic research in real terms at least 3% each year. He would enlarge competitive grants sys-
tems under NSF, the National Institutes of Health, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics & Space Administration, and the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, and upgrade basic agricultural and engineering research. In addition, Mondale is interested in maximizing basic research supported by the Department of Defense while assuring that restrictions on scientific discussions of that research are reduced to only what is required to safeguard national security. He also would like to modernize advanced university research laboratories and libraries by investing an added $4.5 billion over five years, to be matched, in part by public and private donations. And he is interested in enhancing tax incentives for research contracted out to colleges and universities and for equipment donated to such institutions. At the national level, Mondale believes the government "should consider the creation of new centers of research excellence analogous to NIH. [The national institutes] have become the focal point for U.S. scientific leadership in a wide range of disciplines bearing on the cure and prevention of disease. This model could be replicated in other key areas, including advanced physics and the information sciences." While basic research funding has been rising, the government has been rapidly getting out of what the Reagan Administration sees as its nonproductive role in the development of technologies, a role that it believes industry is far better qualified and motivated to play. Thus, development funding has fallen some 40%, with particularly heavy reductions being made in what Keyworth terms "those well-intentioned but incredibly expensive and misguided energy-related demonstration projects left over from the 1970s. . . . The signal to industry is quite clear: Government will not continue to dabble in technologies, but leave that development to the private sector." The exception to this is when it comes to the development of defense technologies. According to Keyworth, most of the recent large rise in defense R&D comes from development costs associated with the modernization of the nation's strategic forces—an action necessary to restore strength that was eroded during the previous decade. And since in the case of defense development the only customer is the government itself, there can't be much expectation of shifting the investment in defense development to the private sector. However, he notes that "the Administration is also providing incentives and stimulation to help—and prod—the federal laboratories, which spend $18 billion each year on R&D, to work more productively with industry." Right now there is a move afoot to have the national labs and the research arm of the steel industry work together to reduce the complexity of the steelmaking processes by eliminating many of the costly steps the industry now goes through— applied research of a sort. Mondale notes that "in spite of new challenges in the past decade, the U.S. remains the world leader in most areas of basic research," but "all too often, the results of this research are not translated into new October 15, 1984 C&EN
9
News Focus processes and products, and promising new ideas are often sold to foreign firms for commercial exploitation." He points out, "During the past 15 years, U.S. receipts of royalties and fees—one of the best measures of this transfer—have risen from $1.5 billion to more than $7 billion annually. Our intellectual capital is being squandered, and our very future is being exported." Mondale offers several ideas on how to "reverse this trend . . . to ensure that the U.S. regains international leadership in applied research and development. First, to fill faculty vacancies and to ensure an adequate supply of industrial engineers in the coming decade, we need a crash program to enhance the attractiveness of teaching in engineering institutions. Second, we should establish an Economic Competitiveness Council, one of the functions of which would be to engage in ongoing technology assessment. Third, we should establish Technology Extension Centers, to help assure effective use of new technologies. These centers would help channel federally supported R&D to the private sector and provide technical assistance to new and smaller businesses."
Innovation
Reagan contends that "high technology is born from capital, and more capital will require continued incentives for risk taking and investment, not tax increases, which would stifle growth. We support high-tech, not high taxes." He believes that "new technologies are seldom created by luck: They are instead the result of public and private sector investments of time, money, and effort. With this in mind we . . . propose to encourage private-sector R&D by improving the economic and legal climate for such effort. "A number of things already have been done to encourage private-sector efforts," Reagan points out. "The Economic Tax Recovery Act of 1981, for example, provides a 25% tax credit for firms that invest in additional R&D. And by reducing inflation and interest rates, our economic program has lowered substantially the cost of conducting research." In addition, the Administration has backed legislation, recently 10
October 15, 1984 C&EN
passed by Congress, allowing companies, under certain conditions, to conduct joint R&D ventures. It also has pressed for changes, some of which have been implemented, in patent law in an effort to remove what Reagan called "legal impediments that prevent inventors of new technologies from reaping the rewards of their discoveries." Reagan adds that "the federal government must constantly endeavor to strengthen the private economy while supporting research and development, particularly in universities, to train tomorrow's industrial and academic scientists and engineers. . . . We will carry forward that strong commitment into the future. We also will continue our support for tax credits for industrial R&D expenditures." Mondale believes the federal government has a role to play in encouraging innovation, to counter, at least in part, foreign governments that "do not hesitate to take an active role in supporting the industries they see as basic to their future economic growth." He says that by providing incentives to innovation, the U.S. government can help counter such foreign intervention. Many of the incentives he would offer parallel those proposed by Reagan. They include revision of antitrust law to encourage joint ventures for research and development, making government laboratories and scientists available to such joint ventures in which the basic research coincides with government research goals, and making permanent the 25% R&D tax credit. Mondale also advocates stimulating the flow of capital into smaller businesses, which he sees as a prime source of innovation, through elimination of the capital gains tax for long-term new investment in smaller businesses or for gains that are rolled over into such firms. And he advocates adoption of "measures to protect industrial property rights from piracy We should [also] re-examine our patent and copyright laws to ensure that new kinds of 'intellectual property' such as computer software and information systems are appropriately treated." But, he warns, "The federal government cannot solve every problem U.S. science, research, and technology faces, nor should it. In our country, we have always relied on partnerships among federal, state, and local efforts—between the public and private sectors. Government can provide essential support for research, spur needed cooperation, and adopt economic policies that business needs to plan and invest. Schools and universities can insist on excellence in instruction and learning and provide the opportunity for basic research. Businesses can look to the future— not just the next quarter's balance sheet—and invest in the research and development that turns American ideas into American products built by American workers. The progress we need for the future must come from a new partnership among all sectors of our society." Mondale notes that "there is a long haul ahead. There is much for everyone to contribute if we are to safeguard world leadership in science and technology. My program is neither cheap nor easy. But neither is excellence." D
