Bush Kerry Nature 091404

8/2/2019 Bush Kerry Nature 091404

1/6238 NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature2004 NaturePublishingGroup


2/6

In their frantic search for votes, George W. Bush andJohn Kerry are leaving no stone unturned. Theyveeven been sparring over science, with Kerry raisingthe issue of embryonic stem-cell research at the

Democrats convention in July, and Bush accusing Kerryof flip-flopping on the site of a nuclear waste dump inNevada soon after.

Sections of the scientific community have pitched in,with Kerrys campaign attracting vigorous support froma group backed by 48 Nobel laureates. The fact that mostof this activity is on the Kerry side says a lot about recentpolitical trends in the United States. This is a deeplydivided country, and scientists and the universitycampuses that many of them inhabit have becomedistinctly unfriendly territory for the Republicans.

But scientists pride themselves on objectively assessing

evidence. So, for the first time in Natures history, we havegiven the candidates the chance to address researchersdirectly. From about 50 questions posed by our editorialstaff, we selected 15 and asked the campaigns to respondin 1,500 words, distributed as they saw fit. Bushs answerswere some 30% over length, and have been edited; Kerrykept to the limit and his responses are presented in full.

We hope that the result will give an inkling of what thecandidates stand for. In some areas, such as the broadbalance of science funding, there is not much to choosebetween them; in others, such as global warming, their

respective stances could hardly be further apart.These stances reach beyond domestic US issues. As theHungarian-born financier George Soros observed twoyears ago: In modern global capitalism, only Americansvote, Brazilians do not. What he meant was that when itcomes to economic, military and other decisions, the USadministrations actions are likely to have as much impacton your country as those of your own government.

Thats why, this November, from the remotestprovince of China to the bustling capitals of Europe,so many eyes will be on Americas votes. Lets hope theycount them up right. Colin Macilwain, news editorSee [email protected] for more election coverage www.nature.com/news

Head to headThe party conventions are over, and the

candidates have been anointed. Now

its a straight race to the tape betweenPresident George W. Bush and his

challenger John Kerry. Natureasked

them where they stand on science.

NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature 239

news feature US election special

SMARCUS/LASVEGASSUN/CORBIS;ROYALTYFREE/CORBIS;M

WILSON/GETTY

2004 NaturePublishingGroup


3/6

ensure that your administration receivesgenuinely impartial scientific advice?

BUSH: My administration has a strongcommitment to the highest scientificstandards in decision-making. Onissues ranging from climate change tonanotechnology, I have sought out thebest scientific minds inside and outsidethe government for policy input andadvice, especially the independentNational Academies. My commitment

to sound, independent scientific advice isunwavering.And my senior science adviserin the White House, John Marburger,happens to be a Democrat.

KERRY: My administration would neverutilize biased advice as a foundation forpublic policy. As president, I will serve onbehalf of the public interest. In order tobest serve the public, effective decisionsmust be made with the input of genuineimpartial expert counsel.

3What is the long-term solution to the

gradual dissemination of knowledgeabout weapons of mass destruction especially bioweapons?

BUSH: Stopping the gradual disseminationof knowledge is impractical if notimpossible. The key to stopping theproliferation of weapons of massdestruction is preventing those seekingthese weapons from gaining access totheir most significant and technicallychallenging components. The redirectionof former weapons scientists to productivecivilian employment is a key priority.

My administration has launched theG8 Global Partnership a $20-billion

1Is there a danger that increasedcontrols on travel by scientists into theUnited States, introduced in response tohomeland security concerns, will isolateUS science and endanger US scientificleadership? If so, what can be done tokeep US science open to the world?

BUSH: My administration values thecontributions that foreign scientistsand students make to our nationsscientific enterprise, while recognizing

the importance of safeguarding oursecurity. We will continue to welcomeinternational students and scientists whileimplementing balanced measures to endabuses of the student visa system.

We have already achieved severalnotable successes in reducing delays nowbeing experienced by some visa seekers.We have increased security while speedingup the clearance process about 1,000backlogged applications have alreadybeen cleared out.

KERRY: We can balance science and

security. In the wake of 9/11,Americatook important steps to improve securityfor visa applicants to the United States.However, we can improve our visa systemto process visa applications for legitimatescientists and students more quickly whilestill screening individuals who pose agenuine security risk. With more resourcesand better procedures, we do not need toface a trade-off between scientific exchangeand national security.

2Recent months have seen variouscharges of political bias against scientificpanels that advise the US government atdifferent levels. What would you do to

Bushvs Kerry

240 NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature

initiative to support nonproliferation,disarmament, counterterrorism andnuclear safety projects in the former SovietUnion. For nuclear weapons, the first stepis to prevent access to fissile materials.We are making good progress in this area

through efforts such as the Global ThreatReduction Initiative and our materialsecurity efforts in Russia.

KERRY: It is not a problem we will beable to solve alone. It is going to requireAmerican leadership that forges aninternational consensus on how to dealwith these weapons and the often dual-usetechnology that underpins them. I willwork closely with the scientific communityto develop responsible oversight forbiomedical research to make sure thatdeadly pathogens are only in the hands

of those with legitimate research needs.Together we will find ways to reduce thepossibility that scientific knowledge andcapabilities will be misapplied to do harm.

4Do you support research into newnuclear-weapon designs in the UnitedStates? If not, how do you see the futurerole of the three nuclear-weapons labs?

BUSH: Our national laboratories are doinggreat work to deal with the threats of thetwenty-first century. These laboratories arealso a tremendous asset in our efforts to

improve homeland security, are the sourceof unparalleled technological progress, andare helping America win the War on Terror.

The Nuclear Posture Review released bymy administration in January 2002 notedthat the nations nuclear infrastructure hadatrophied since the end of the cold war andthat the evolving security environmentrequires a flexible and responsive weapons-complex infrastructure. To that end, myfiscal-year 2005 budget reflects an increaseover 2004 in weapons activities.

M.J.SANCHEZ/AP

J.RAEDLE/GETTYIMAGES



4/6NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature 241

KERRY: I would end the pursuit of anew generation of nuclear weapons. Ournational laboratories play a critical rolein maintaining our existing stockpilesand assuring that our existing nuclearweapons are safe, secure and reliable.

They also play and should continue tohave an important role in preventing thespread of weapons of mass destructionand in advancing science for ournations security.

5 Some physicists have questioned thecapability of missile defence systems beingdeployed in the United States. Would youincrease or decrease spending on missiledefence, and would you subject claimsmade on its behalf to independentscientific review?

BUSH: Early in my administration, I calledfor the examination of the full range ofavailable technologies and basing modesfor missile defences that could protectthe United States, our deployed forces,and our friends and allies. Our policy is todevelop and deploy, at the earliestpossible date, ballistic missiledefences drawing on the besttechnologies available.

Later this year, the firstcomponents of Americasmissile defence system willbecome operational. This

will fulfil a pledge I made tothe American people morethan four years ago. We willdevelop and deploy thetechnologies necessaryto protect our people.

KERRY: I am not for rapiddeployment of missile defence.We should not waste money ondeployment at this point. I favouradditional research, development andtesting. As to the issue of independentscientific review, we have to be careful

because of the classified nature of muchof the work in question.At the veryminimum, we must work hard torestore the credibility of the internalreview process. The truth is the Bushadministration has shredded its owncredibility on this, particularly in its rushto deploy missile defence.We need torestore the credibility of our own reviewprocess and we need to subject systemsto realistic, operational testing to makesure that they really work.

6 Should the United States participatefully in the construction of ITER, theproposed fusion research facility, and

what steps would you take to helpsuch international scientific projectsto succeed?

BUSH: I committed the United States tojoin ITER early in 2003. ITER is a critically

important experiment to test the feasibilityof nuclear fusion as a source of electricityand hydrogen. Along with several othernations, the United States is playing acritical role in launching ITER. In fact,ITER is the Department of Energys topfacilities priority.

KERRY: My energy plan will tapAmericas initiative and ingenuityto strengthen our national security,grow our economy and protect ourenvironment.With regard toITER, John Edwards and I support

a strategically balanced United Statesfusion programme that includesparticipation in ITER to supplement

a strong domestic fusion science andtechnology portfolio. As president,my first priority internationally on

this and other energy issues will be toengage other nations to find areas of

cooperation and common ground.

7Do you think the UnitedStates should send astronauts

to the Moon or Mars in thenext 10 to 15 years? If so,why

send humans instead of robots?If not,what is the purpose of the

space shuttle and space station?

BUSH: In January, I announced myvision for the future of Americasspace exploration programme. As wecomplete our work on the International

Space Station, we are developing a newmanned exploration vehicle to explorebeyond our orbit. This vehicle will be

tested by 2008 and will conduct its firstmanned mission no later than 2014.America will return to the Moon as

early as 2015 and no later than 2020, anduse it as a foundation for human missionsbeyond the Moon. We will begin withrobotic missions, and manned missionswill follow.An extended human presenceon the Moon could reduce the costs offurther exploration.

KERRY: Today, thanks to decades of publicinvestment in space exploration activities,a rotating international team of astronautsis living and working in space on theInternational Space Station, a dozenAmericans have walked on the Moon, wehave rovers exploring the surface of Marsand an armada of spacecraft continues to

explore our Solar System. NASA is an

invaluable asset to the American people andmust receive adequate resources to continueits important mission of exploration.

However, there is little to be gainedfrom a space initiative that throws out loftygoals, but fails to support those goals withrealistic funding. John Edwards and I arecommitted to increasing funding forNASA and space exploration becauseit not only makes critical contributionsto our economy, it also expands ourunderstanding of the world we live in.

8 Some researchers have expressed

concern over what they see as a growingdisparity between funding for biomedicalresearch and other fields, including thephysical and environmental sciences.Do you agree that this a problem and, ifso, what would you do about it?

BUSH: My administration is committed tofunding basic research and has listened toconcerns from the scientific communityand lawmakers to ensure that there is afederal priority on funding for physicalsciences as well as life sciences. My budgetshave sent a strong signal that we are

addressing the concerns.

KERRY: John Edwards and I would increasefederal funding at both the NationalInstitutes of Health and the NationalScience Foundation (NSF). To ensurewe remain strong in the sciences andengineering, I would specifically increaseNSF funding for the physical andenvironmental sciences, and doublethe NSF graduate scholarships formathematics and science.

We must not short-change our nationalinvestment in future medical andtechnological breakthroughs. It will bescientific discoveries that will drive our


NAS

A/AP

EPA/PA



5/6

Bushvs Kerryfuture economy just as the discoveries ofelectricity, the combustion engine and theInternet drove our economy in the past.

9Many environmental problems can beattributed to high levels of consumption

in developed nations such as the UnitedStates. Can science and technology alloweveryone on the planet to reach theselevels of consumption? Or do Americansneed to change their lifestyles andconsume less?

BUSH: America in a very real sense haschanged, not by consuming less, but byconsuming and producing smarter. Wehave proven that economic growth makespossible the environmental progressour country has achieved andwill continue to achieve in

the future.Under my leadership,

America has enteredproductive internationalpartnerships to assistdeveloping countries inbuilding more modernenergy systems. Given theenormous gains of the pastcentury, I do not and would notunderestimate the enormous potentialof science and technology to continue tomake possible improved living standardsfor people all over the world.

KERRY: John Edwards and I believe thatwe can protect our environment whilestrengthening our economy. Time andtime again,America has metenvironmental challenges throughingenuity and technological innovation.But it takes strong leadership to put theinterests of protecting public health andthe environment ahead of the interestsof polluters, and as president I will reversethe four years of environmental neglectby the Bush administration. I have beena leader in the fight to strengthen our

economy and protect our environment,fighting to clean up toxic waste sites andto keep our air and water clean.

10Does the Endangered Species Actneed to be amended in order to operate

more effectively? If so, how would youamend it?

BUSH: We need to modernize the act sothat it provides the greatest benefits tothose species most in need. For example,productive reforms could include habitatconservation plans, conservation banking,voluntary agreements with landowners,and partnerships with states, tribes andnongovernmental organizations. These

programmes couldprovide far greater

conservation

benefits whileavoidingunnecessary

regulatory,economic and

social burdens.

KERRY: John Edwardsand I support protecting

wildlife and the important goals of theEndangered Species Act.We will implementthe act in a cooperative manner that extendsthe benefits of wildlife and habitatprotection to public and private lands.

With adequate funding and a cooperativeapproach that works for both wildlife andproperty owners, we will continue Americasstrong legacy of protecting wildlife.

11Most Americans accept transgeniccrops as safe to eat, transgenic salmonare being developed for sale as food, andgenetically modified fish that glow in thedark are being sold in pet shops.At whatpoint does genetic modification of plantsand animals become problematic to you?

BUSH: Biotechnology plays an extremely

important role in reducing environmentalimpacts of farming and meeting the worldsincreasing demand for food. But I believe itis important that our regulatory frameworkkeeps pace with science. The agriculturedepartments Animal and Plant HealthInspection Service has begun developinga wide-ranging environmental impactstatement to assess the effectiveness ofbiotechnology regulations. This will helpthe federal government better understandrisks and benefits.

KERRY: John Edwards and I will worktowards the goal of reducing the ecologicalfootprint of agriculture and ensuring

adequate and safe foodand sustainability.We will redoublegovernmentefforts tomake sure

biotechnologyis safe forhumanconsumptionand safe for theenvironment. We willgive government agenciesthe power they need to effectively regulategenetically modified food products, bothbefore and after market. And we will workwith the international community toeffectively address its concerns and improvetrade relations.

12 Are greenhouse gases generatedby the burning of fossil fuels the maincause of global climate change? Is this animportant problem for the United Statesand,if so,what would your administrationdo to limit emissions of greenhouse gasesat home and abroad?

BUSH: Global climate change is a seriouslong-term issue. In 2001, I asked theNational Academy of Sciences to providethe most up-to-date information about thescience of climate change. It found thatconsiderable uncertainty remains about

the effect of natural fluctuations on climateand the future impacts climate change willhave on our natural environment.

My administration is now well alongin implementing a comprehensive climate-change strategy to advance the science,expand the use of transformational energyand carbon sequestration technologies,and mitigate the growth of greenhouse-gasemissions in the United States and inpartnership with other nations.

I created the new US Climate ChangeScience Program (CCSP) to refocus thefederal governments climate research

programmes. The National Academyendorsed the CCSP, noting that itarticulates a guiding vision, isappropriately ambitious, and is broad inscope. I also committed the nation to agoal of reducing American greenhouse-gasintensity by 18% over the next ten years.

KERRY: The scientific evidence is clear thatglobal warming is already happening andrising levels of global warming pollutionare making the problem worse. For yearsin the Senate, I have worked with our alliesto fight for a balanced global warmingtreaty. President Bush rejected the KyotoProtocol, stubbornly walking away from

242 NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature

PCL/ALAMY

H.ANGEL/NATUR

ALVISIONS

R.RAHMAN/AFPPHOTO



6/6

the negotiating table altogether. JohnEdwards and I will take the United Statesback to the international negotiating tablewhile working at home to take concretesteps to reduce pollution, setting concretelimits to halt and reverse the growth in

global warming pollution and tapping theingenuity of American industry.

13The Food and Drug Administration(FDA) constantly has to balance the desirefor rapid approval of new drugs againstthe need to ensure their safety. Is thecurrent system getting this balance right?If not, how does it need to change?

BUSH: Today, the FDA sets the worlds goldstandard for speeding new therapies topatients and ensuring the safety of the drugsupply. In 2003, the FDA approved 466 new

and generic drugs and biological products,while decreasing the time it took to reviewand approve most applications. In additionto evaluating new drugs for safety andefficacy, the FDA is now directingmonitoring efforts to the 10,000 drugsthat are already on the market.

KERRY: As president, I will ensure that theFDA has the resources it needs to approvedrugs in a safe and timely manner. In the USSenate, I sponsored and supportedlegislation that requires drug manufacturersto pay fees to the FDA and allows the agency

to hire more reviewers and significantlyaccelerate drug reviews and approvals.Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act,new drugs are being approved rapidly by theFDA and I believe that more should bedone to assure the safety of those drugsonce they are marketed.

The biggest threat to our success inexpanding patient access to medicalbreakthroughs is the Bushadministrations ideological approachto scientific decision-making. Whenit comes to the safety of ourmedicines and food supply, the public

health is taking second place to specialinterests and ideological agendas.John Edwards and I support a

return to sound science at the FDA andthroughout the federal government.

14 Is mad cow disease, and itspossible transmission to people, asignificant potential public healththreat in the United States? If so,what steps would you take toensure its containment?

BUSH: My administration is takingaggressive actions to protectAmerican consumers against

so-called mad cow disease (BSE). LastDecember, after the discovery of BSE inone cow in Washington state, theDepartment of Agriculture (USDA) tooksteps to further assure the safety of ourbeef, including banning from the human

food chain so-called downer cattle andprohibiting specified risk material fromanimals over 30 months in age. I alsocalled on an international review teamto assess the BSE situation and at itsrecommendation USDA launched anexpanded surveillance programme ofhigh-risk cattle populations.

KERRY: Reports of the Bush USDAsmishandling of mad cow disease haveunderscored the need to protect Americanconsumers. John Edwards and I will improveour food safety and inspection process,

including not only the meat-packing side

but also more coverage to ensure that the1997 feed ban on ground bone-meal is notbeing violated. We will increase the testingand inspections overall and enhance theBSE surveillance programme so that allsuspect animals are analysed.And we willimplement an aggressive timeline forestablishing a national tracking system thatwould make diseased livestock and meateasier to track and contain.

15Members of theHouse and the

Senate have each

asked thepresident torevisit the policyon embryonicstem-cell researchthat

was announced on 9 August 2001. Ifelected, would you change this policyand,if so, how?

BUSH: I am committed to pursuingstem-cell research without crossing a

fundamental moral line, and I am the firstpresident to provide federal funding forhuman embryonic stem-cell research.However, stem-cell research is in a very earlystage and while it may hold great promisewe should not overstate the state of thescience, or politicize these issues, because itgives false hope to individuals and familiessuffering through terrible illnesses.

Last year, the federal governmentinvested $25 million in embryonic stem-cell research and nearly $191 millionin adult stem-cell research. And theseeffort are matched with millions more

dollars spent in the private sector. Myadministration is also creating a nationalembryonic stem-cell bank.

These efforts are providing a boost toresearch in a very promising new field, whilenot providing taxpayer funding that wouldsanction or encourage further destructionof human embryos.My policy makes itpossible for federally funded researchersto explore the potential of embryonic stemcells, while respecting the ethical and moralimplications associated with this research.

KERRY: Today, millions of children and

adults suffer from incurable diseases suchas diabetes, Parkinsons,Alzheimers, heartdisease, cancer and spinal-cord injuries.John Edwards and I believe that we mustlift the barriers that stand in the way ofscience and push the boundaries ofmedical exploration so researchers canfind the cures that may exist. I will liftthe ideologically driven restrictions onstem-cell research created by the Bushadministration by overturning the banon federal funding of research

on new stem-celllines, all while

ensuringrigorousethicaloversight.


NATURE | VOL 431 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2004 | www.nature.com/nature 243

GRANTHEILMANPHOTOGRAPHY

S.HON

DA/AFP/GETTYIMAGES

T.SLOAN/AFP/GETTY

IMAGES

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	drpenfield
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

Bush Kerry Nature 091404

Documents