I’ve had the privelege of participating in lobbying Congress about science for almost half a decade, and in that time I have seen scientists take more steps to raise their public profile. We have been graced by a number of opportunities to engage the public, and the government, about our fields. In physics, the world year of physics in 2005, Brian Greene’s very popular string theory books, and astrophysical discoveries have all provided gateways to talking broadly about modern research. Political controversies have also bought science to the forefront: intelligent design (which seems to have died a proper death, at least as science), climate change, and stem cells have all forced an engagement with tge public about the fact and fiction in the discussion of these topics.
Scientists have been taking more public stands than usual, too. Long-standing organizations, such as the AAAS and Union of Concerned Scientists, have all had their say in science policy issues. I’ve tried to push more grass roots efforts, with sites like “scienceaction.org”:http://www.scienceaction.org, which didn’t do so well, probably because I didn’t have time to sell it. Now there is SEA – Scientists and Engineers for America, with their website at “http://www.sefora.org/”:http://www.sefora.org/. This attempts to further connect all sciences to act on policy issues. They’re even running a YouTube-based campaign for advertisements (I’m fond of this one: “http://youtube.com/watch?v=xMSPBn0LL7I”:http://youtube.com/watch?v=xMSPBn0LL7I
One thing that we as scientists have to be careful about is the same thing the general public has to be careful about: there is a danger in condensing complicated realities into a series of brief slogans or talking points. Politicians often attack each other by saying things like, “Senator Fisk voted against our giving our troops meal rations five times” or “Congresswoman Blameworthy says she supports tax relief for the poor, but she actually voted for tax increases 9 times.” In reality, bills are big beasts with tiny little clauses hidden in them. You can be voting on the war budget, and inadvertantly support some other Congressman’s pork barrel project or a law banning perfectly legal behavior. So when organizations like SEA promote advertising that makes statements like “200 Legislators voted against stem cells,” who knows what they were *really* voting against? I have no doubt that most members of Congress are pig ignorant when it comes to the basic science of stem cells, by choice or by accident, and that many probably do vote based on a complete misunderstanding. However, when you throw out a short soundbite like that, it makes you wonder how accurate it really is.
All I am saying is that you should think, speak, and take action. Vote, if that’s the way you want to express your support or opposition to a candidate’s views on science. But learn about the issues relevant for your specific candidates, before you blindly accept a catchy slogan and misuse your political power.
