Last week I attended a panel discussion for scientists who are interested in science policy. AAAS and NAS applicant reviewers comprised the panel and provided us with their backgrounds and some useful tips on applying to fellowships. Mostly, it was a droll list of do’s and don’t’s when filling out an application, and what to expect from a fellowship. For example, don’t think you can come to Capital Hill wanting to make a difference. If you desire a long successful career as a policy-maker, you’d better play the game–their game. Do understand that politicians have short attention spans, so don’t use any big words, such as fruit fly, lest you mire them in jargon. Don’t harbor any illusions that facts matter in politics. Policy is all about the manipulation of perception. Do fashion yourself a science svengali. In short, I found the attitude and views of the speakers just short of appalling.
Also, I have serious reservations over a few points made about “spinning” and “framing” science. The way it was described, dumbing-down and giving equal weight to every other guy with a stake in the issue, is wrong. Our politicians need to be slapped out of their ignorant stupor with some urgent facts on Global Warming, Stem Cell research, medical woo, and the dismal state of science education in America. Then, hopefully, they’ll go back to their constituents armed with a clear picture of reality and of what will happen if you continue to ignore it. The problem the entire panel failed to recognize-as they appear to be perfectly adapted to life on the Hill-is a Washington culture that politicizes science for its own ends, often screwing around with the data for reasons of greed and ignorance. Every wannabe policy wonk should have a copy of The Republican War on Science, so at least they can recognize what it looks like when a politician ignores or misrepresents science.
Right now, science is not sitting at the grown-ups table. And for this, it is forced to fight for small scraps of legislation with which it must use to continually justify its own relevancy amid the noise and chatter of every other special interest group crowding Congress. Here’s a crazy idea, why aren’t AAAS fellowships also playing a role as watchdogs on the Hill, educated people providing sound science judgment, then holding politicians to the fire when they ignore it. The fourth estate can facilitate this last bit.
Money walks in Washington, just as it does everywhere else. As a community of scientists we cannot win the spin game, simply because our adversaries are far better funded. Honestly, besides the burden of truth, what chance does a former bench scientist, turned policy-maker, have against a glad-handing tobacco and coal lobbyist armed with deep pockets and great hair? If it’s nothing more than framing and spinning your issues, science will lose. And this is exactly what we stood by and let happen over the past eight years in Washington.
The sticker for me during the discussion was when the speakers smirked at us and one another as they mocked past applicants who were naive enough to think one could march upon Capitol Hill, facts and figures in hand, and demand politicians start doing things differently.
What gall, what cynicism.
I still remember the discussants eyes a-twinkle in delight as they spoke of their proximity to the levers of control and power this job of theirs provides. If their line of work is to act in the interest of science in Washington, then they fail…and have failed for an approximate decade. Why anyone would still listen to them is what I want to know.