Comments on: On Being an “Assistant to the President” http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: jdelayknee http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656&cpage=1#comment-11165 jdelayknee Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:59:07 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656#comment-11165 Representing the "Science & Technology " community is not valid. How in the name of anything logical can one do this? You may get a warm fuzzy because you're a scientist or technical person but the bottom line is agencies or offices like this serve as "Convenient idiots" to help advance political agendas. The UN IPCC is a classic example. Who else can say with 90% certainty that Global Warming is due to mankind's influence. Wo, Nellie!! Its gotta be true.. the UN IPCC says so and they speak for ALL scientist. Scientist need to distance themselves from politics, not embrace it and in so doing be corrupted. IMHO Representing the “Science & Technology ” community is not valid. How in the name of anything logical can one do this? You may get a warm fuzzy because you’re a scientist or technical person but the bottom line is agencies or offices like this serve as “Convenient idiots” to help advance political agendas. The UN IPCC is a classic example. Who else can say with 90% certainty that Global Warming is due to mankind’s influence. Wo, Nellie!! Its gotta be true.. the UN IPCC says so and they speak for ALL scientist.
Scientist need to distance themselves from politics, not embrace it and in so doing be corrupted. IMHO

]]> By: David Bruggeman http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656&cpage=1#comment-11154 David Bruggeman Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:01:51 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656#comment-11154 I think the problem with any consideration of OSTP, or the Council on Economic Advisors, or the National Security Council, as the people's voice is that it ignores the critical aspect of much of the Executive Branch, and perhaps all of the Executive Office of the President (wherein all the organizations I mentioned reside) - they serve at the pleasure of the President. They aren't set up to be some kind of conduit for their respective communities or the popular will. Every time a Science Advisor is pilloried for doing something that is somehow contrary to the stand of the scientific community I see an argument based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the office. While the current administration has not been receptive to scientific advice and has not been engaged very much with OSTP, I don't see any administration since the position was formed being that much better. Nixon was worse, but you have a small office in a small corner of this bigger alphabet soup of organizations that gets much, much more of the President's attention. I don't think this would change by some adjustment in a job title, because I don't think those who were Assistants had the kind of pull in an administration that many in the science communities seem to think they should have. The relationships of any presidential advisers are one-sided. Presidents listen, and it is up to them - not their advisors - if the advice has any effect on the policy choices made. I think the problem with any consideration of OSTP, or the Council on Economic Advisors, or the National Security Council, as the people’s voice is that it ignores the critical aspect of much of the Executive Branch, and perhaps all of the Executive Office of the President (wherein all the organizations I mentioned reside) – they serve at the pleasure of the President. They aren’t set up to be some kind of conduit for their respective communities or the popular will. Every time a Science Advisor is pilloried for doing something that is somehow contrary to the stand of the scientific community I see an argument based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the office.

While the current administration has not been receptive to scientific advice and has not been engaged very much with OSTP, I don’t see any administration since the position was formed being that much better. Nixon was worse, but you have a small office in a small corner of this bigger alphabet soup of organizations that gets much, much more of the President’s attention. I don’t think this would change by some adjustment in a job title, because I don’t think those who were Assistants had the kind of pull in an administration that many in the science communities seem to think they should have. The relationships of any presidential advisers are one-sided. Presidents listen, and it is up to them – not their advisors – if the advice has any effect on the policy choices made.

]]> By: mdstepp http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656&cpage=1#comment-11153 mdstepp Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:47:33 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4656#comment-11153 While I agree that OSTP is not explicitly meant to directly serve the scientific disciplines, it does seem to act to provide analysis and direction for the Presidents S+T policies. I think there may be an underestimation of how influential a science adviser and OSTP could be due to the lack of influence seen during the past 8 years (as further shown by downsizing OSTP). There is a place to hope that the science adviser will have more influence - whether that is represented in a title bump to Assistant to the President or not - because it adds another avenue for scientists to make inroads into the decision making process. More so, the office of OSTP was created by Congress (and signed by the President) in an effort to provide insight and oversight into the science policy process of the Executive Branch. Within that context, can it not be assumed that OSTP acts as "the peoples" voice to the President on these issues - or is that a stretch? :) While I agree that OSTP is not explicitly meant to directly serve the scientific disciplines, it does seem to act to provide analysis and direction for the Presidents S+T policies. I think there may be an underestimation of how influential a science adviser and OSTP could be due to the lack of influence seen during the past 8 years (as further shown by downsizing OSTP).

There is a place to hope that the science adviser will have more influence – whether that is represented in a title bump to Assistant to the President or not – because it adds another avenue for scientists to make inroads into the decision making process.

More so, the office of OSTP was created by Congress (and signed by the President) in an effort to provide insight and oversight into the science policy process of the Executive Branch. Within that context, can it not be assumed that OSTP acts as “the peoples” voice to the President on these issues – or is that a stretch? :)

]]>