{"id":271,"date":"2017-08-28T17:33:54","date_gmt":"2017-08-28T21:33:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/?p=271"},"modified":"2017-08-28T19:10:49","modified_gmt":"2017-08-28T23:10:49","slug":"more-bad-news-for-science-in-the-u-s","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/2017\/08\/28\/more-bad-news-for-science-in-the-u-s\/","title":{"rendered":"More bad news for science in the U.S."},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

If you think my July 24 post about the outlook for science in the U.S. brought bad news, just wait, it gets worse.<\/p>\n

NEWS FLASH
\nWe really need to worry about the marginalization of science
\nin the present Administration<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Probably not a surprising piece of news. Here are more reasons why we should be concerned, just in case you need convincing:<\/p>\n

It can be \u2013 and is \u2013 argued that scientists have not been successful enough in telling Congressional offices powerful stories of how our federal investment in basic research pays off for American taxpayers. Senator Chris Coons<\/a> (DE) recently wrote some advice<\/a> for our community on this score. Part of my job, as Director of the AMS\u2019s Washington Office, is to collect our stories and tell them. I can assure you that there are many great people, including from our sister disciplinary societies, in D.C. telling these stories with me, on behalf of all scientific areas. We work hard, but we can always do more, and do better. One area in which I feel we have not been very good is in helping legislators understand what \u201cindirect<\/a>\u201d or \u201coverhead\u201d costs go to and why they are critical to supporting research. Because these critical funds are not well-understood and are perhaps under the radar (and perhaps because discussing them does not a sexy conversation make), they are under threat<\/a>.<\/p>\n

There are other alarming signals coming from the government, appearing as serious threats to science. One such signal is in the lack of science appointments made thus far. The White House has recently allowed the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s (OSTP) science division to empty completely<\/a> of all staff, and the science adviser at the State Department recently resigned<\/a>. President Trump has not filled the position of OSTP Director<\/a>, or official science advisor, positions often held by one person (John Holdren<\/a> held both under President Obama). President Obama\u2019s OSTP had over 130 employees (to be fair, this was a large OSTP, compared with previous administrations), with nine in the science division who led on issues such as STEM education. Every post-World-War-II president except President Nixon has had scientists in the White House. According to a recent Nature<\/em> article<\/a>, only 12 people are working on science in the White House, and the Administration is being represented at senior staff meetings by Michael Kratsios who is Deputy Assistant to the President (OSTP), and a former chief of staff to venture capitalist Peter Thiel. Without a stronger working group, OSTP and science are being marginalized in the current Administration. Incidentally, Kratsios is also serving at least in some way as the public face for science in the White House; we were very pleased that he attended the United States of America Mathematical Olympiad (USAMO) awards ceremony held at the State Department in June. The AMS supports the USAMO and Executive Director Catherine Roberts, Committee on Science Policy Chair Scott Wolpert, AMS Congressional Fellow Catherine Paolucci, and I represented the AMS at the event. The chart below gives an overview of key science positions filled<\/a> by recent administrations. The chart does not show retentions and \u2013 important to the math community \u2013 President Trump has retained President Obama\u2019s NSF Director France C\u00f3rdova.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Finally, don\u2019t even get me started on threats to international cooperation in science (e.g., introduced legislation<\/a> that would dramatically alter universities\u2019 ability to hire who they want to hire), and support for STEM education. I plan to soon write about these topics.<\/p>\n

In addition to this blog, I post regular items on the AMS Washington Office Government News<\/a> page (and recently wrote there a little bit about the legislation mentioned in the preceding paragraph).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you think my July 24 post about the outlook for science in the U.S. brought bad news, just wait, it gets worse. NEWS FLASH We really need to worry about the marginalization of science in the present Administration Probably … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":123,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,34,17],"tags":[13,35],"class_list":["post-271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-congress","category-federal-support-for-science","category-science-policy","tag-congress","tag-ostp"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8sfLS-4n","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/123"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":285,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271\/revisions\/285"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}