There are some anecdotes from the Washington trip that bear repeating. I found them personally quite enlightening, so here I pass them along to you.
Access to Government
I know that a lot of television personalities, authors, and song writers like to gush about why this is the greatest country in the world. Most of them seem to think it’s because you can get paid to be a celebrity publicist, or because of baseball or pie or certain kinds of beer. Many seem to think it’s because we take down other countries, or because of our food. The secret to the greatness of a nation such as this is in none of those things. Rather, it’s in the access of the people to the halls of power, because it is the people that have made them and the people that can take them away.
The ability to make a few phone calls and setup an appointment with a Member of Congress or their staff seems a small thing, so small that it’s not worth the time of many Americans who are otherwise busy or engaged in their own lives. However, to know that you can set aside the trivial things of the day and walk into a Congressional office, state your case and have a discussion, and ask them to do something for you, is a powerful and life-changing thing. There is no greater power than that derived from the consent of the governed, and while it may seem inefficient compared to a dictatorship and maddeningly frustrating compared to a monarchy, the slow crawl of the republic is the only protection against the whims of the few and the desires of the corrupt.
One of my non-U.S. colleagues remarked, at the end of the trip, that with great enthusiasm he had never witnessed such access to government. The ease with which they welcome you into their office, the eagerness with which they choose to serve your cause, can be overwhelming. Indeed, he remarked, he now understood what a great thing we had made here in America. Is not all the toil of the Republic worth the revelation that a government for the people, by the people, serves as a beacon even in the hearts and minds of those who have already looked toward the United States as a friend and ally?
The Fear of Exodus
I was a second on a visit to a NY congresswoman. By “second”, I mean that I was not the one who made the appointment but I went as a support person to the one who did. In our training, we emphasize that we should go in pairs and use each other to avoid “pregnant pauses” or to steer the discussion back to the core message. In this meeting, we met with a new staffer that was eager to learn a lot about particle physics and the nature of our work. Overall it was a good meeting, and the Congresswoman was clearly supportive of these efforts.
The lesson from this meeting was an unexpected one. The staffer grew concerned when we discussed the international aspects of the field. “Don’t people just come from other countries, learn how we do our work, and then take it back to their own countries?” It’s a tough question. In many cases, the answer is yes. However, in my own personal experience I have known several outstanding non-U.S. physicists – students, post-docs, and faculty – who have stayed here a long time and cannot imagine going home. I told the staffer as much, that my own personal experience was not like this.
As a product of a graduate program in which I was the first student of a non-U.S. faculty member at Madison, as a person whose first post-doc was under the guidance of a non-U.S. born faculty member, and as a mentor and colleague to several students who have made the choice to stick with the U.S. for the long haul, I find the practices described by the staffer alien. However, I know that they happen.
The lesson here? Approach internationalism with caution. Clearly, a native talent pool drawn from all the diverse corners of the U.S. is critical to the sustainment and development of a 21st century economy. No nation can long rely on the good graces of other nations to send talent, and no nation can rely on the gamble that enough of those will stay to make a difference. The education and training of the domestic 21st century workforce is paramount to the continued success of this nation. However, no nation can long survive in a vacuum and the import of and exposure to the best and brightest the world has to offer is needed to facilitate good foreign relations and develop new ideas that perhaps might never have taken root even with a talented home-grown talent pool. However, be prepared to react to the reality that countries do “loan” out their most gifted students and young geniuses with the intent of reeling them back in for use at home. It’s a distasteful practice, one our nation should work to discourage at the highest levels.
Be Open to the Universe, for It Delights in Surprise
The most startling revelation of this trip had nothing to do with FY09, or the omnibus, or international relations. It had to do with a single paragraph in a single speech, and the actions of a single man. That man is President Bush, that speech is the State of the Union, and that paragraph was about science.
On a trip shortly after the SOTU, President Bush was accompanied by two Senators from the state that was his destination. The Senators took it upon themselves to thank the President for his stern support of the basic research efforts proposed by the Congress in response to his own American Competitiveness Initiative. It was then, apparently, that the President revealed that in the original draft of the speech did not contain this paragraph. He felt so strongly about this issue, specifically about the need for basic scientific research to stimulate the economy, that he inserted the paragraph himself.
Go and get some tea. Take some aspirin. You’ll need it to stop the buzzing in your head.
7 thoughts on “Flashes from Washington”
Um, you missed the part about where you met the totally cool people from Fermilab, by which I mean me. That was by far the best part, I’m sure.
Also, where do I find these links to physicst punk rockers I was promised?
To get started with “Southern Punk Blues” as envisioned by “The Dirty Howlers”, you can go to http://music.cooleysekula.net and look for the appropriate section. For more tunes, I am sure that Mr Danny Howler can hook you up. Mr Howler’s previous life as a leader of the John Ashcroft Fan Club is also represented there. Enjoy!
(Oh, and it was totally a pleasure to meet all the awesome folks from Fermilab, but you know how it is – if I met awesome people from FNAL, then I have to acknowledge that I also met awesome people from LHC, and then I have to dig back and acknowledge past awesomeness from Argonne, and Brookhaven, and – God forbid – SLAC. Eventually they orchestra starts to play you down, and you break down crying . . . it’s just too complicated.)
Last week my colleague James remarked that it seems like the generation before ours had unprecedented access to the halls of power, while we do not. The likes of Rubbia and Oppenheimer and Feynman just picked up the phone, and they influenced the direction of science in major ways.
By contrast, our generation, it seems to me, has become just another political mouth to feed. I don’t honestly think the politicians think of us any differently than any other group which comes into their office. We’re begging for money like all the others, and we’re just another piece of pork. We have to distribute ourselves in every state, so that each senator/congressman has a vested interest in giving us money. No longer are we truly considered essential to national competitiveness or pride.
From your Washington visits, do you agree with my assessment above?
Why was the previous generation so well connected? Do you think any congressperson/senator/president knows any leader of the physics community by name?
Dan Howler = Dan from the trip?
(Personally, I think of him as No Fun Dan, but that’s another story. )
In response to Bob’s comment, one needs to step back for a second and consider historical context. I think that while we all agree that science is important to the nation, and that physics is core to the nation’s scientific effort, there was definitely a time when the relationship between physics and government was a privileged one. The strong regard for the physics community after WWII left us in a very good place, where there was effectively a floor underneath our budget. That is, we could expect at least the same funding next year as last, and we didn’t (it seems) have to justify every penny.
The world is quite different today. Starting with the end of the SSC, it’s clear that particle physics in particular entered a pretty difficult time. We left the era of entitlement and entered an era where physics and other sciences competed for funding with other programs also considered national priorities by either party (or both parties). It’s not that science isn’t important to the nation – it’s that science, like other priorities, has to be competed within the budget. We no longer have a protected floor under our budgets. We are not “entitled”. Combined with the change to a “business-like” federal government, with its prioritization and accountability practices, we’re fighting in a battle we may not be very good at.
Congress regards what we do very highly. One staffer told me that science was “protected” for the first half of the ~$20 billion in cuts needed to make the President’s demands during the FY08 omnibus process? Think about that – we survived until the really, really hard decisions had to be made about which things to kill in the omnibus to appease the President. Still, it’s clear that many in Congress regret hitting physics like they did. It doesn’t change what happens, but it does give us an opportunity to regroup and reconsider how we want to spend the clearly limited money that we have. If we can’t get the ILC, maybe it’s time to invest in that broad portfolio of dark matter, dark energy, neutrinos, and accelerator R&D that we’ve been talking about. Maybe it’s better to do what scientists do best – do many things in the hope that one of them pays off big, rather than spending our money on an ILC before the LHC even gets off the ground.
Regarding Sarah’s question – yes, these Dans are the same. Next time we happen to be in a pub together (which, in this community, may not take too long), I’d like to hear the “No Fun Dan” story.