Why are scientists concerned?

The President’s budget proposes draconian funding cuts for science research, e.g.:

  • 31% for Environmental Protection Agency – eliminates climate change research
  • 18% for National Institutes of Health – cuts deeply into biomedical research
  • 17% for Department of Energy Office of Science – cuts deeply into R&D on renewable energy sources

The President, some of his Cabinet members and many Congressional allies call climate change a “hoax” despite overwhelming scientific evidence that it is real and primarily induced by human activities.

The federal Office of Science & Technology Policy remains essentially unstaffed in the present administration.

Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, Chair of the House Science Committee, says citizens can only get the “unvarnished truth” from the President, and proposes legislation that will let the government decide appropriate criteria for reviewing scientific research.

why should you be concerned?

  • The scientific method provides a proven, self-correcting approach for establishing real, as opposed to “alternative,” facts.
  • Scientific research provides a robust foundation for identifying real problems, evaluating potential solutions, and underpinning evidence-based decision making.
  • Scientific research has long been, and continues to be, a major driver in improving health, technology, national security and the economy.  It leads to lots of jobs in old and new sectors of the economy.
  • The present political climate threatens what used to be strong bipartisan support for federal investment in scientific research.  This investment has often been deemed as the most effective non-defense spending the federal government undertakes.

communicate your support for science to your friends, family, and legislators!

  • Tell your legislators that you support robust federal funding for science research, at existing levels, and oppose the President’s proposed draconian cuts.  Tell them that scientific peer review works well and should be left to scientists, not to legislators lacking scientific background.
  • Tell them that you consider American jobs to rely on a robust and well thought through federal policy in support of science and technology.