John McCain has a twitter account. Yes, that’s horrifying enough, but then there’s the actual content of what he writes. At least he is using in creative and productive ways! No, he isn’t. Yesterday he announced:
Tmr I am gonna tweet the TOP TEN PORKIEST PROJECTS in theOmnibus Spending bill the Congress is about to pass
Love it when Senators play cool. Love it. So today is the big list, and guess what comes in at number two?
#2. $2 million “for the promotion of astronomy” in Hawaii – because nothing says new jobs for average Americans like investing in astronomy
Sure, earmarks are dumb, and it would be nice to have a rational way to decide how best to prioritize federal spending. But don’t deny the obvious: when Republicans hear “science,” they think “something to be mocked in the service of burnishing our just-folks credentials.” Ask Bobby Jindal. Or, for that matter, John McCain.
“A great many telescope projects have been successful examples of international scientific and diplomatic cooperation. Astronomers make critical contributions not only to profound questions in physics and astronomy, but are often drivers of technical advances in a wide range of fields, such as computing, optics and cold-matter physics. ”
This is a pretty compelling argument–especially the second part. Does anyone think the average american knows how research by astronomers has eventually contributed to the ccd’s they see in what have now become every day objects? Hell, I doubt Jindal and McCain know. The republican party (or at least a good chunk [I don’t want to generalize too much]) have an understanding of science that seems to be equivalent to that of the average citizen. And as long as they remain a resonant party w/a significant part of the country (even if its barely enough to form a legitimate opposition right now) we have to try to educate them along with the rest of the country. I don’t know how to do that (I can barely stumble through a radiate processes textbook) but I know there are smarter people in the astronomy/physics community that can at least put together some ideas.
“Similar to an education in other sciences, I doubt you could go far wrong in the job world with a masters or PhD in Astronomy: even if you can’t get an astronomy related job, skills in advanced math, physics, computers and critical thinking are much in demand in all kinds of fields. There is every reason to wish that more young people dream of being astronomers!”
I certainly hope the first part is true so that I’ll have something to do when I get my degree! In any event I obviously agree that an advanced degree in a quantitative field is a plus in any job market. The issue however is making people believe that not only is it a plus but that it is preferable to other options that may also seek some of the education/science funding. As a thought exercise let’s replace ‘astronomy’ with ‘microbiology’ or ‘materials engineering’ or something in that bit McCain put out–I can’t imagine that the McCain staffer who put out the quip would be as ready to include it if that was the case. We’re all going to eventually be fighting for a piece of the pie of funding for science—we should be trying to either make the case our piece should be bigger or that our subject is so productive that it merits enlarging the pie.
One also wonders if this is truly an “earmark” (a request by a member of Congress for a project that would not otherwise be funded) or if this passed muster through the review and priority process of whatever agency will be disbursing the money…
In the same argument that people can be patriotic and question the government / war i would argue that somebody can be for science and at the same time question the need for government funding of potentially frivolous research projects
Pingback: why yes, science does equal jobs « weird things
None among us seems to know what, in this instance, “promotion of astronomy” means. My guess is that neither does John McCain or whoever posts on his twitter account. What I find somewhat disturbing is that the writer evidently thought that, in the absence of further clarification, the designation “promotion of astronomy” would sound like probable pork to a lot of readers. A sizeable segment of the American population seems inimical to basic science, probably the same segment averse to any group described as “intellectual elite.”
wow, 10.45 million out of 787 billion? So the top 10 worst things about the bill account for 0.0013% of the bill? I think he might actually be saying this is the most efficient bill to ever come out of congress.
And McCain even takes it to the Senate floor …
See todays “Washington Sketch” by Dana Milbank
“He went after Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the 84-year-old chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. ‘We’re going to spend $2 million for the promotion of astronomy in Hawaii,’ McCain said with disgust, glancing at Inouye. ‘I ask the senator from Hawaii: Why do we need $2 million to promote astronomy in Hawaii when unemployment is going up and the stock market is tanking?’ ”
Well, it’s pretty clear, as a previous poster noted. We should be spending that $2M to promote it in Arizona!
But really, astronomy has become, for John McCain, a convenient example of earmarking run wild. It’s a tiny amount, but it’s like Joe the Plumber for the middle class. It’s a triviality, but hugely memorable.
Pingback: Scientists are not You and Me | Cosmic Variance | Discover Magazine
Anyone interested may view my take on this at:
http://amccright.blogspot.com/2009/03/john-mccain-puts-in-twitter.html
Astronomy and space sciences are important to the economies of both Arizona and Hawaii.
“A great many telescope projects have been successful examples of international scientific and diplomatic cooperation. Astronomers make critical contributions not only to profound questions in physics and astronomy, but are often drivers of technical advances in a wide range of fields, such as computing, optics and cold-matter physics.”
This is not a compelling argument at all. It is the old ‘NASA is worthwhile because of velcro’ argument, and nobody rational still believes it. Yes, there are often unexpected ancillary benefits to wasting money. That doesn’t mean we should waste our money.
It is not clear exactly what is meant by the “promotion of astronomy in Hawaii”. (1) Are we talking about an ad campaign to convince people in Hawaii that astronomy is cool and they should continue to support it with their tax dollars? Or (2) a campaign to convince youngsters that astronomy is cool and they should develop their math/science skills in school so that they can aspire to astro careers? Or (3), does “promotion of astronomy” simply mean more government money for astronomical research?
Without knowing specifically what the money in the bill would be spent on, it seems premature to criticize/ridicule McCain on this. Of course McCain also did a great disservice with his “one liner” that does not explain what the money would be used for or why he finds this objectionable.
I am specifically against (2) because in my own experience astronomy offers such a punishing and insecure career path that I would not want to put anyone else through the career frustration, lost time, and depression that I’ve experienced in graduate school. Yes, astronomy is fascinating, and I believe that our society should continue to support astronomical research at a reasonable level. However, I think we have to be realistic in our expectations; only a very small number of people (few thousand at most) in our country will be able to have long-term full-time jobs in astronomy, and a handful of astronomy/astrophysics graduate programs at the top-tier institutions are fully capable of educating enough astronomers/astrophysicists to fill ALL the jobs available for PhD-level researchers working in this field. The surplus PhDs will be discarded by the research enterprise after a few years and these people will struggle to compete for technical/engineering type jobs that they are overqualified for. Since we are already drowning in engineers (both our own citizens and the foreigners that we bring in to fill the perpetually proclaimed and forever nonexistent science/engineering labor “shortage”), there is no need for engineering firms to look beyond those with engineering degrees when they are searching for employees.
Preparing an excessive number of students for careers in astronomical research is a significant mis-allocation of educational funds and intellectual talent when these bright people could be making valuable contributions in other areas with greater economic benefit to themselves and society.
Pingback: Risk-averse science funding? at Ted Bunn’s Blog