Still working on an Hillary Clinton gave a science policy speech at the Carnegie Institute
Now with new improved policy list...
Text is here
Doesn't say if she took questions.
Predictable kick offs on stem cells and climate change.
Wonkish, very solid.
Restore science advisor, OTA, depoliticize agencies and advisory committees.
Increase funding for NSF, DoE, DoD research.
She likes NASA Earth Science and aeronautics.
She enquired about being an astronaut! Iiiinteresting.
That's a damn good speech, very clintonesque, well researched.
It is also interesting that it is being given at all at this stage of the campaign and that it is not just a shallow staking out position on hot buttons.
Curious to know who her science advisors and staffers are.
Oh, and I infer she is, at heart, an Eisenhower republican.
Hmmmm. Iiiiinteresting
PS: She cites Colbert!
UPDATED: Here is the wishlist
- Rescinding the ban on ethical embryonic stem cell research
- Banning political appointees from unduly interfering with scientific conclusions and publications
- Directing department and agency heads to safeguard against political pressure that threatens scientific integrity and to promote transparency in decision-making
- Appointing an Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Policy and strengthening the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
- Reviving and enhancing the national assessment on climate change
- Enhancing American leadership in space through investments in exploration, earth sciences, and aeronautics research
- Pursuing a comprehensive innovation agenda, including establishing a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund
- ...and increase support for the physical sciences and engineering by the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense
Hmm...
See also at the Intersection and several other sciblog entries that flashed by too fast for me to read
Politics
Comments
Hillary's looking like the best among the current Democratic front-runners. She certainly has the intelligence aspect down.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | October 4, 2007 11:35 PM
It's healthy for the global community if Hillary wins. High hopes for her!
Posted by: Adler Santos | October 4, 2007 11:54 PM
Posted by: Tegumai Bopsulai, FCD | October 5, 2007 10:20 AM
let the flaming commence, but, for everyone who shuddered at a second Bush in office, why do we want to continue the last decade or so of polarization with a second Clinton?
At least let this political dynasty be more competent. I'll forgive a lot for competence at this point.
Posted by: JohnD | October 5, 2007 10:36 AM
Hillary is flawed as a politician, too calculating for my tastes, I think she'd do better if she dumped the consultants and laid it out.
But, the speech is very good, best science speech in a long time, I don't think Al Gore did anything that well researched, he was maybe more passionate but she covers a lot of ground and a lot of it hits serious issues, not just headline material.
Hillary is an interesting politician, she is "left" in US terms on a couple of hot button issues, but her broad politics are strongly old east coast Republican in many ways. This is not a bad thing - an Eisenhowerite who flirted with Goldwater libertarianisms but rejected Nixon?
Be interesting to see what she would do with the expanded Executive powers, eh?
Posted by: Steinn Sigurdsson | October 5, 2007 10:47 AM