Many organizations issue voter’s guides, from political orgs to even churches, skirting the rim of the Johnson Amendment. But in 2018 we may see a new variety of candidate in some of those guides – working scientists. BuzzFeed has the word:
On Tuesday, [volcanologist Jess Phoenix] will announce her latest extreme endeavor, running for a spot in Congress. Her campaign joins the efforts of the science advocacy group 314 Action to inject better scientific thinking into government, by pushing actual scientists to ditch their field jackets and lab coats and run for office. Along with one other candidate, Phoenix will run to unseat a member of the group of politicians most notorious among scientists: the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, also known by some as the House “anti-science” committee. Her official paperwork will be filed in early April.
The Representatives they are trying to replace — Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who chairs the committee, and Rep. Steve Knight of California — will both be up for re-election in 2018, and 314 Action wants to make sure they don’t come back. (The group also wants to unseat another committee incumbent, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, but hasn’t yet confirmed a candidate.)
The races are just another symptom of bubbling scientific discontent with US politics, best seen with the hundreds of thousands of supporters for a March for Science in Washington, DC, in April, as well as “rogue” Twitter accounts for national parks and federal science agencies gaining large followings. Trump’s introduction of vaccine opponents and climate deniers onto the political stage has spurred scientists, usually insistent on staying out of political disputes, to speak out.
An interesting activity. Certainly, the mindset of a scientist is not guaranteed to resonate with the mindset of politicians, as one looks for answers, while the other – until the advent of Gingrich – looks for compromise. Since Gingrich, it’s more a search for power and the implementation of ideology, no matter what the consequences (see Kansas for an example of such a disastrous approach). But scientists can certainly learn – they spend tremendous amounts of time doing exactly that – and so the question is whether they have the cast-iron stomach to do that.
314 Action is located here. One of their declarations:
Our mission is to put members of Congress who are anti-science under the scope. By scrutinizing their actions and voting record that go against the facts and data, we will bring attention to practices and policies that are decidedly anti-science. It is no longer the time to sit idly by as partisan motives are promoted in direct opposition to leading scientific consensus on topics such as climate change, clean energy and evolution. 314 Action is committed to holding these members accountable for their actions and their votes.
The BuzzFeed article claims 314 Action will only support Democratic candidates, which may be a theoretical mistake. BuzzFeed did find at least one opposition voice:
But others are skeptical about whether getting scientists to run for office in this way will ultimately be good for politics — or for science.
“There’s no shortage of scientific information in Congress. They’re not using it, and it’s not because they don’t have access to it, it’s because the politics of the situation is not incentivizing them to use it,” said science and society professor Daniel Sarewitz of Arizona State University, who previously served on the staff of the House science committee.
“The calls for more scientific thinking are naive. They misunderstand how politics works, and I also think they misunderstand what it takes to be effective on behalf of science in Congress.”
By only running Democrats for office, he added, a group like 314 Action also runs the risk of further stoking mistrust of science among Republicans.
“The danger is you have a self-fulfilling prophecy where Republicans start to look at science as nothing more than Democratic politics by another name,” Sarewitz told BuzzFeed News.
I’m a little puzzled by the objection raised by Dr. Sarewitz. After all, politicians are elected to Congress in order to shape policy based on the knowledge of experts on national issues – not necessarily their own knowledge base. The fact that the GOP politicians scream Conspiracy! when their delivered wisdom is denied by a scientific conclusion is the basis of the objection to having them in Congress at all.
Having scientists occupying elected office is important in that they understand the methods of science, when a hypothesis is trustable and when it’s still debatable – on its own merits. Indeed, in an idle moment I might suggest that scientists, by studying reality, which is the fundamental basis of all science, they become grounded in science.
On his other objection, it’s a good theoretical objection, but I think in reality the GOP has mostly gone anti-science anyways.
Keep an eye open. Maybe your district will have the pleasure of evaluating a scientist for office. We certainly don’t have good representation at the present time – perhaps you can help with that.
