Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.news From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Science ends are similar Date: Sun, 1 Nov 92 20:06:09 EST Message-ID: \SE A;NATION;CAMPAIGN '92 \HD Science ends are similar \SH But candidates differ on means \BY David Alan Coia \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES President Bush and Bill Clinton disagree on the extent and speed with which government should direct scientific and technological development and on how future U.S. energy needs should be met. The major-party presidential candidates explained their positions in response to questions from Irwin Goodwin, senior associate editor of Physics Today, a publication of the American Institute of Physics. The candidates' comments are published in the current issue. Independent Ross Perot was not a candidate when the questions were posed in late August. "Both propose shifting funds from defense [research and development] into civilian and dual use [research and development], . . . but they differ on how much, how fast and under whose direction the changes should take place," Mr. Irwin said in his preface to the candidates' statements. The creation of a civilian version of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a high-tech research arm of the Pentagon, is central to Mr. Clinton's plans for science and technology. Mr. Clinton proposes the establishment of such a civilian technology agency, "drawing on years of experience with existing successful technology programs," as a way "to help address the problems of declining U.S. technological leadership and economic competitiveness." "The agency we have in mind," Mr. Clinton said, "would work closely with industry to assure that industry is genuinely committed and that the technologies being investigated have commercial potential." Mr. Bush calls such an approach "counterproductive." "DARPA has been such a success in advancing defense technology because it has always had a single customer and project manager - namely the Department of Defense," Mr. Bush said. "In the absence of such a specific customer, the mission of a civilian DARPA would be unfocused and would certainly be subjected to intense political pressures toward technological faddishness with the accompanying inefficiencies that would surely result." Mr. Bush added: "A unique American characteristic of our technology prowess is the participation of small, entrepreneurial firms in the frontiers of technology. Such companies have been responsible for a disproportionate amount of job creation and product innovation." On the issue of energy, Mr. Bush said nuclear power "must play a significantly enhanced role in generating electricity in the future" because of the growing need for power and the necessity of reducing air pollutants and greenhouse gases. "I strongly support the development of the next generation of safer, less costly nuclear power plants," the president said. The Department of Energy "is supporting the development of safer reactor and waste-disposal technologies." Mr. Clinton said he does "not support increased reliance on nuclear power," adding that "there is good reason to believe that we can meet our future energy needs through increased energy efficiency." Both men would redirect some of the resources of nuclear weapons laboratories for civilian and commercial ends. They agree that big-ticket science projects are important as "visible symbols of the nation's commitment to research" but believe the costs should be shared internationally. Mr. Bush pointed to his administration's success in negotiating international agreements for magnetic fusion research and the development of the space station Freedom. Mr. Goodwin in his preface identified Thomas Schneider, a partner in the Washington law firm of O'Connor and Hannan, as a key Clinton adviser on science and technology. While Mr. Schneider's campaign title is science and technology policy coordinator, he is also co-chairman of the Clinton campaign's national finance committee. Mr. Schneider, who has a law degree from Harvard, also has a Ph.D. in organizational sociology from Oxford University. According to Mr. Goodwin, however, Mr. Clinton did not meet Mr. Schneider until 1983. Mr. Bush's principal science adviser, D. Allan Bromley, heads the Presidential Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM