 Science and Technology in the Realm of Politics
Every modern President has paid tribute to science as critical to America’s prosperity. During the dark days of World War Two, the value of new technologies became bleakly obvious. Nowadays, Presidential candidates still talk about science in terms of competition with other nations. What’s next for America’s role as a world-leader in science is our topic this week in KPLU’s special election series, Looking Back to Look Forward. KPLU’s Keith Seinfeld has our story:
Reporter: Here’s a trivia question that’ll stump even most political junkies: What does Barack Obama have in common with President Richard Nixon? It has to do with how they talk about the power of science. When Obama talks like this on the campaign trail:
Obama: “… if we create a Manhattan project, an Apollo project, for clean energy … “
Reporter: His historical references are the same as as Nixon’s talking about cancer in his 1971 State of the Union speech:
Nixon: “… the same kind of concentrated effort that split the atom and took man to the moon should be turned toward conquering this dread disease.”
Reporter: If you want Americans to support a scientific goal, and to dream big, then you compare it to the Atom Bomb and the Apollo space missions. And its not hard to find people today hungry for that kind of goal and leadership.
Heyamoto: “You have to find something nowadays in order to defeat, or be superior against, and set that as your goal.”
Drumheller: “We just need one guy who can get in there and pull it all together, I think.”
Reporter: That’s Aaron Heyamoto, a Junior student at the University of Washington, and Kirk Drumheller, a retired engineer. They participated in a roundtable discussion of the candidates, at KPLU’s Seattle studios. We’ll hear more from them in a moment. First, let’s put the Manhattan and Apollo projects in context. Those were pivotal moments.
Imagine a nation just emerging as a world leader, catching up with the great powers of the day. You might think of China today. But this is America back in the 1920’s and 30’s. Our universities were second-class. Our innovations came from lone geniuses like Thomas Edison and Henry Ford. Then World War Two forced political leaders to ramp up scientific research. Before long, a top-secret weapon was unleashed, to end the War.
Truman: “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base … “ :06
Reporter: That’s U.S. President Harry Truman in August, 1945, after the first atomic bomb dropped on Japan.
Truman: “We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan’s power to make war.” :06
Reporter: The atomic bomb came out of the Manhattan Project, which brought together previously isolated laboratories from across the country, and thousands of scientists from around the world. The war also produced a medical revolution – bringing us into the age of antibiotics. To build on these successes, Congress and the President created many new science institutions, which we still have today.
But in the 1950’s, a new international challenge emerged. It was an age of giant missiles, and the Soviet Union showed it could do better than the U.S., by being first to launch an earth-satellite.
Universal Newsreel, narrated by Ed Heruhy: “Today a new moon is in the sky, a 23 inch metal sphere placed in orbit by a Russian rocket …”
Reporter: It was a science experiment, named Sputnik. This newsreel from 1957, gives a sense of Sputnik’s drama, circling overhead,
Newsreel: “…500 miles up …”
Reporter: … able to watch Americans below:
Newsreel: “You are hearing the actual signals transmitted by the earth-circling satellite, one of the great scientific feats of the age.”
Reporter: And a great way to puncture America’s pride. The space race was on. President Dwight Eisenhower felt compelled to address the nation.
Eisenhower: “MY subject tonight is Science in National Security. …”
Eisenhower tied the fate of the country to science:
Eisenhower: “According to my scientific friends, one of our greatest, and most glaring, deficiencies is the failure of us in this country to give high enough priority to scientific education and to the place of science in our national life.”
Reporter: And so he gave scientists a higher profile:
Eisenhower: “I have created a new office, called the office of Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology.”
Reporter: This special advisor position still exists, although not as prominent as it once was. Before long, America’s investment in science and research more than tripled.
A few years later, President John Kennedy faced Cold War challenges with the Soviet Union and Cuba. He called on the nation in 1961 to prove our superiority, by being first to the moon:
Kennedy: “No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space.”
Reporter: The Apollo project served no practical use, and it was massively expensive. It was all about symbolism – a show of strength – as Kennedy reveals in this private White House tape. He’s tells the head of NASA, James Webb, Apollo is not about science:
Kennedy: “I’m not that interested in space. I think it’s good. I think we ought to know about it. We’re ready to spend reasonable amounts of money. But, we’re talking about fantastic expenditures, which wreck our budget, and all the other domestic programs, and the only justification for it in my opinion, and do it in this pell-mell fashion, is because we hope to beat them.”
Reporter: And we did. By the time Neil Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969, the Apollo project had become an enduring symbol. After nearly 40 years, it’s still invoked to show what our scientists and engineers can do, if we commit to a goal.
The voters in our studio discussion wondered about setting such a goal … starting with Aaron Heyamoto and Diana Davis:
Heyamoto: “With the atomic bomb, the idea was, ‘atomic bomb equals victory,’ and with the Apollo program, kind of the same concept, where we get a man on the moon, we win -- we beat the Russians.”
Davis: “You had that threat of, look what the Russians did, we have to show we are better … and right now you don’t really have that big dog nipping at your heels.”
Reporter: “We need a competitor, maybe if china comes up with a ….”
[Group all talks at once – voice says: “Yeah, there you go ...”]
Drumheller: “We do have a problem that is far greater than any of the problems we’ve had before, and that’s global warming. The space thing wasn’t essential to continuation of life as we know it. The energy thing is, in my view, it’s essential.”
Reporter: Can global warming and fossil fuels be the new crisis, the enemy, to focus the nation on a scientific goal? Our citizen panel seems to like the idea – even though they don’t agree on the details. Democratic candidate Barack Obama has seized on that exact message, calling for a new Apollo-style project:
Obama: “Not only can we put a stop to global warming, not only can we make sure the polluters are paying for the research and development in clean energy, but also we can stop sending a billion dollars a day to foreign nations.”
Reporter: Obama would spend 150 billion dollars developing clean energy sources. Republican John McCain on the other hand, looks to what he calls the genius of private industry:
McCain: “The federal government can't just summon those talents by command. Only the free market, only the free market can draw them out.”
Reporter: McCain says – in a later town hall visit in Ohio -- government’s role includes some basic research, and offering tax incentives for specific technologies:
McCain: “When we look at the climate effects of conventional fuels and automobiles, when we look at our dependency on foreign oil, and we look at all the other aspects of it, the federal government has to be active, an active participant.”
Reporter: Investing in a problem like energy is typical in the post-Apollo and post-Cold War reality. From Richard Nixon through Bill Clinton -- our leaders have been insisting our research be more practical. Medical research has taken center stage. It gets the bulk of our research funding.
Obama told this college crowd in Michigan he’d like to spend more on all forms of research:
Obama: “I will double federal funding for basic research, and make the R and D credit permanent. We can ensure that the discoveries of the 21st century happen in America, in our labs and universities.”
Reporter: Of course, the federal budget’s now in crisis, and any boost in science spending may have to wait – at least until Americans again fear some great threat, or great competitor. Keith Seinfeld, KPLU news.
|
|
