|
While it now appears likely that the candidates will not accept our invitation for a nationally broadcast science forum in May, we have ample evidence to suggest that they should: A new poll shows that 85% of US Adults agree with us.
Poll results are at the bottom.
First, a review of our primary season strategy and what we learned. We made this invitation as attractive as possible.
We recruited every organization that we six core volunteers (2 screenwriters, 2 scientists, a philosopher and a science journalist) have contact with, and we reached out and signed on 37,500 individuals.
We emphasized that it was about policy, not a science quiz.
We took the intimidating word "debate" out of the invitations.
We joined with PBS and targeted an influential, educated demographic, through PBS's 350 member stations, that are well-attuned to science and policy issues and could be very advantageous to court.
We enlisted high-profile supporters to make video appeals.
We recruited America's leading science organizations and universities to sign on.
We proposed not one, but four dates - one in Philadelphia and three in Portland.
We told them the format was entirely flexible; it didn't have to be a debate, it could be a forum similar to the "Compassion Forum" the democratic candidates recently attended in Pennsylvania, discussing matters of faith and values. What matters is that they come.
We even told them we would show them our questions a week in advance, so they could prepare. That's like showing all our cards.
When even that didn't work, several Nobel laureates joined with the Chairman of Intel and the CEO of the World Wildlife Fund in a joint email that emphasized that this could simply be a "conversation," it should not take undue preparation and was important for the country.
Only the McCain campaign gave us the courtesy of a formal response: a polite decline that left the door open for the general election.
How, the science community is wondering, could this be?
Part of the problem, from our perspective, is a perception in the media, particularly the political editors, that this is a niche debate. We have saturated coverage in the science community, but have had a very difficult time getting the mainstream national media to cover this effort at all, despite numerous and frequent attempts; they believe that issues like religion loom far larger in this election and science simply doesn't sell papers. Science has also been somewhat nonvocal and under political attack over the last several years, and this has helped to create the inaccurate perception of an uninfluential minority. The media help to steer the public's attention and the national dialogue, and the candidates respond to this, and it has become an accepted assumption. But is it right? We argue that this assumption is wrong: science is not niche, and it does matter to a majority of Americans - in fact it matters a lot. But policymakers and editors need to know that, and they're not going to poll for it on their own. We argue that this wrong assumption is part of the very problem we are fighting to turn around, and that exposing it is one of the more important goals of this initiative.
So we teamed up with Research!America to do a national poll of public attitudes about science and politics and found that what we've suspected all along is in fact true: there is overwhelming public support for this idea - and the support is equal among both Democrats and Republicans. Indeed, scientific integrity is even more important among Republicans. Today, the following press release went out. You can help this effort by encouraging mainstream media contacts you know to cover this.
In the mean time, we are now making a planned shift to the second phase of our effort, focusing on the general election.
85% of Americans Want a Presidential Debate on Science
Democrats, Republicans agree on need, disagree on issues; health care tops lis
WASHINGTON—May 12, 2008— A new poll shows that 85% of U.S. adults agree that the presidential candidates should participate in a debate on how science can be used to tackle America’s major challenges. The poll found no difference between Democrats and Republicans on this question. A majority (84%) also agree that scientific innovations are improving our standard of living.
The poll, commissioned by Research!America and ScienceDebate2008.com and conducted by Harris Interactive®, shows that 56% strongly agree and 29% somewhat agree that the presidential candidates should participate in a debate to discuss key problems facing the United States, such as health care, climate change and energy, and how science can help tackle them.
“This topic has been virtually ignored by the candidates, but this poll shows that Americans of all walks know how important science and technology are to our health and way of life,” said Shawn Lawrence Otto, CEO of Science Debate 2008. “We’ve heard a lot about lapel pins and preachers. But tackling the big science challenges is critical to our children’s future – to the future of the country and the future of the planet. Americans want to know that candidates take these issues seriously, and the candidates have a responsibility to let voters know what they think.”
A majority of U.S. adults say that past scientific research has contributed “a great deal” or “a lot” to their quality of life today (67%) and that today’s research will continue to do so in the future (72%). When asked in what areas of their life scientific research plays the biggest role, top responses were health care (44%) and communication (20%).
“Americans see the need to invest in science now and want to hear from presidential candidates where science would stand in their administration,” said the Honorable John Edward Porter, former Congressman and chair of Research!America. “Our federal health research and science agencies have had five years of reduced spending power or modest increases. It’s time that candidates for the White House step up to say how they will address this faltering investment in our future.” Research!America and more than 30 partners have created Your Candidates—Your Health, a voter education initiative to present presidential and congressional candidates’ views on health and research at www.yourcandidatesyourhealth.org.
Among the most serious long-term issues facing the country, 76% rate health care the most serious, followed by alternative energy sources (69%), education (67%) and national security (61%). Issues also considered serious by a majority of U.S. adults include global economic competition (55%), poverty (53%) and climate change (53%).
“This is not a niche debate,” said Craig Barrett, Chairman of Intel and one of the supporters of the Science Debate initiative. “Without the best education system and aggressive investments in basic research and development we will become a second rate economic power. We expect the candidates for president to take this very seriously.”
Other findings highlight a desire for public policy to be based on scientific evidence:
• 67% say that public policies should be influenced more by scientific evidence than by elected officials’ personal beliefs.
• 83% of U.S. adults - 88% of Democrats and 80% of Republicans - say it is important that the candidates talk about how science and scientific research will affect their policy-making decisions if they are elected.
• Only 19% say it is acceptable for elected officials to hold back or alter scientific reports if they conflict with their own views – 16% of Republicans and 21% of Democrats.
Climate change had the widest partisan split among questions answered, with 66% of Democrats ranking it among the most serious, while only 33% of Republicans gave it a top ranking. Global poverty was the next widest split, with 63% of Democrats ranking it as a top issue while only 41% of Republicans saw it that way. Third on the list of widest divisions was education, with 59% of Republicans seeing it as a top issue, compared to 72% of Democrats.
This survey was conducted by telephone within the United States by Harris Interactive on behalf of Research!America and ScienceDebate2008.com between May 2 and May 5, 2008, among 1,003 adults ages 18+. This survey has a theoretical sampling error of ±3.1%. For complete methodology and to learn more about the poll, visit www.researchamerica.org or www.sciencedebate2008.com.
-The Team at ScienceDebate2008.com
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
