USA POTUS Candidates' stances on science & tech

[rhoenix]

(note by rhoenix: Though I was unsure if this should go in SLAM or here, I settled upon here due to the other effects of the USA's presidential candidates' political stances on science and technology. This thread was not intended as a "huh huh McCain is dum," but rather what sort of impact would be likely upon America and consequently the world, were one candidate elected over the other. I've edited the original text formatting for presentation on a forum - the original site has a better visual side-by-side comparison.)

Topic: Climate Change
Candidate: McCain

McCain has named climate change one of the top three issues of his presidency. He proposes a cap-and-trade system with specific emissions reduction targets.In the Senate, he co-introduced the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (S. 280) with Senator Lieberman, which seeks to lower greenhouse gas levels to 60% of 1990 levels by 2050 through an annually ratcheted emissions cap and a system that will allow companies to trade emissions credits. The bill would also create a Climate Change Credit Corporation that would use the proceeds from the sale of emission allowances to reduce energy costs of consumers and develop technological innovation, including carbon sequestrating coal plants, nuclear energy, biomass, and solar energy.

Quotation: “There is now a broad consensus in this country, and indeed in the world, that global warming is happening, that it is a serious problem, and that humans are causing it. . . . The debate has ended over whether global warming is a problem caused by human activity. Consequently, we can and must act now to solve the problem, or else we will bequeath a dangerous and diminished world to our children and grandchildren.”

Op-ed piece for The Boston Globe, Feb. 13, 2007


Topic: Climate Change
Candidate: Obama

On April 20, 2007, Obama’s campaign announced a plan to combat global warming by setting a National Standard for Low Carbon Fuels (NSLCF) to reduce gasoline consumption and the emission of greenhouse gases. Senator Obama also supports a 100% auction cap-and-trade program to provide incentives for corporations to develop clean energy. Obama would use some of the revenue from the cap-and-trade system to “invest in climate-friendly energy development.” Obama would also reengage with the U.N. climate process and create a new international forum.In the Senate, he co-sponsored the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act of 2007 (S. 309), which calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80% of 1990 levels by 2050.

Quotation: “Global warming is real, is happening now and is the result of human activities . . . Obama believes we have a moral, environemntal, economic, and security imperative to address our dependence on foreign oil and tackle climate change in a serious, sustainable manner.”

Barack Obama’s Plan to Make America A Global Energy Leader, barackobama.com


Topic: Alternative Fuels
Candidate: McCain

According to a July 2, 2008 article from the Los Angeles Times, Senator McCain does not support subsidies for alternate forms of energy such as wind and solar power, but does support subsidies for nuclear energy.On July 7th, 2008, McCain announced a new economic plan under which he would repeal the 54 cent tax on imported sugar-based ethanol. He would also repeal corn-based ethanol mandates that add to the rising price of food.

Quotation: Reporter: You used to be an outspoken critic of ethanol. Do you believe now that it should be part of America’s energy future?”

I do, because, one, of its role in reducing dependence on foreign oil. And also when oil is $10 a barrel, it doesn’t make a lot of sense; when oil is $70 a barrel, it makes a lot more sense. I’m for all kinds of ethanol. I mean, corn-based is obviously the flavor of the month — and I’m all for it — but we also need sugarcane-based ethanol, such as what’s coming out of Brazil, and we need switchgrass biofuels. There should be a broad variety of sources of ethanol besides just corn. And by the way, I still do not support subsidies for ethanol; it’s doing just fine without them.”

Interview, Grist, Oct. 1, 2007


Topic: Alternative Fuels
Candidate: Obama

Senator Obama’s energy proposal includes doubling federal research funding for clean energy projects, investing in clean-coal technologies, and developing “safe and secure” nuclear energy. The plan sets a goal of having 25% of electricity come from renewable sources by 2025. It also calls on the federal government to be more energy efficient and to increase fuel standards, build a biofuel distribution infrastructure, and annually increase Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) targets.

Quotation: “[Obama] will . . . double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources. . . . He will work to ensure that advanced biofuels, including cellulosic ethanol, are developed and incorporated into our national supply as soon as possible.”

Barack Obama’s Plan to Make America A Global Energy Leader, barackobama.com


Topic: Nuclear Energy
Candidate: McCain

According to an article in The New York Times, Senator McCain set a goal of establishing 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030. He mentioned that China, Russia, and India will be developing new reactors, and several countries in Europe derive a larger percentage of their electricity from nuclear power than the United States. While his ultimate goal is 100 power plants, his chief domestic policy advisor said that 45 is consistent with McCain’s desire to expand nuclear power, and with restraining factors such as permits and construction times.

Quotation: “We have in use today a zero emission energy that could provide electricity for millions more homes and businesses than it currently does. Yet it has been over twenty-five years since a nuclear power plant has been constructed. The barriers to nuclear energy are political not technological. We’ve let the fears of thirty years ago, and an endless political squabble over the storage of nuclear spent fuel make it virtually impossible to build a single new plant that produces a form of energy that is safe and non-polluting. If France can produce 80% of its electricity with nuclear power, why can’t we? Is France a more secure, advanced and innovative country than we are? Are France’s scientists and entrepreneurs more capable than we are? I need no answer to that rhetorical question. I know my country well enough to know otherwise.”

John McCain’s speech on Energy Policy, johnmccain.com, April 23, 2007


Topic: Nuclear Energy
Candidate: Obama

According to Obama’s energy policy, he believes nuclear energy is likely necessary to meet climate change goals, but that key issues of public awareness and security must be resolved before expanding nuclear energy.While in the Senate, Obama, along with Senator Richard Lugar, introduced the Cooperative Proliferation Detection, Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006 (S. 2566), which called for tracking and accounting for spent fuel from nuclear power plants.

Quotation: “It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table. However, there is no future for expanded nuclear without first addressing four key issues: public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation. Barack Obama introduced legislation in the U.S. Senate to establish guidelines for tracking, controlling and accounting for spent fuel at nuclear power plants.”

Barack Obama’s Plan to Make America A Global Energy Leader, barackobama.com


Topic: Off-shore Drilling
Candidate: McCain

The Washington Post has reported that facing concerns about the rising cost of gasoline and its effects, Senator McCain wants to lift the off-shore drilling ban to provide an increased supply of oil.

Quotation: “We must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.”"We have untapped oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. . . . It is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions.”

McCain Seeks to End Offshore Drilling Ban, The Washington Post, June 17, 2008


Topic: Off-shore Drilling
Candidate: Obama

An article from CBS News states that Obama has said that opening up the coastline to drilling would not actually give Americans any savings on gas until 2030 and that it “makes absolutely no sense at all.” Obama has said that he would consider drilling off the coast of Florida as part of a plan to promote fuel efficiency and alternative energy sources.

Quotation: “If offshore drilling would provide short-term relief at the pump or a long-term strategy for energy independence, it would be worthy of our consideration, regardless of the risks. But most experts, even within the Bush Administration, concede it would do neither.”

Obama spokesman, Bill Burton, in a press release on July 14th


Topic: Healthcare
Candidate: McCain

Senator McCain unveiled his healthcare plan during a speech at a campaign stop in Iowa on October 11, 2007. Focused on insurance reforms and decreasing costs, the plan would eliminate tax codes favoring employee-based plans and allot tax credits of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to assist with insurance costs. McCain’s plan also calls for insurance to be portable instead of tied to employment. His plan also proposes creating high-risk pools for people with chronic diseases in order to ensure that they too can have health insurance.In a speech on his new economic plan given on April 15, 2008, McCain proposed increasing Medicare prescription drug prices for more affluent seniors, saying “Those who can afford to buy their own prescription drugs should be expected to do so.”Senator McCain voted against expanding SCHIP in August of 2007.

Quotation: “As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow - a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP - that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these [traditionally uninsurable] patients have access to health coverage. One approach would establish a nonprofit corporation that would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.”

McCain’s Straight Talk on Health System Reform, johnmccain.com


Topic: Healthcare
Candidate: Obama

Obama’s Plan for a Healthy America, introduced on May 29, 2007, seeks to create a new national health plan that would allow individuals to buy coverage similar to that offered to members of Congress. It would also create a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals purchase private insurance and serve as a watch dog to promote fairness and affordability among insurance providers. The plan would also require all employers to contribute towards health coverage, allow flexibility for state health reform plans, expand Medicaid and SCHIP and require children to have health insurance. Adults would not be required to have health insurance.Senator Obama voted for expanding SCHIP in August of 2007.

Quotation: “Through the Exchange, any American will have the opportunity to enroll in the new public plan or purchase an approved private plan, and income-based sliding scale subsidies will be provided for people and families who need it. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend upon health status. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and meet the same standards for quality and efficiency. Insurers would be required to justify an above-average premium increase to the Exchange. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, transparent.”

Barack Obama’s Plan for A Healthy America, barackobama.com


Topic: Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Candidate: McCain

McCain supports expanded federal funding for research on embryonic stem cells and voted in favor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (S. 5), which was later vetoed by President Bush. He voted for similar legislation in 2006.

Quotation: Quotation:“I will vote in support of all three bills under consideration today, which together provide a framework for addressing the issue of stem cell research. This research holds the potential to unlock cures that could defeat deadly diseases and relieve tremendous human suffering. At the same time, one type of stem cell research, involving embryonic stem cells, has also raised serious ethical and moral concerns, both inside and outside the medical community. . . . It should be clearly noted that this type of research will proceed with or without federal approval, so I believe that it is best carried out under strict federal guidelines and oversight.”

Press release, July 18, 2006


Topic: Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Candidate: Obama

“The study of stem cells holds enormous promise for the treatment of debilitating and life-threatening diseases. However, in order to reach this level of medical achievement, much more research is necessary to understand, and eventually harness, the amazing potential of stem cells. Instead of creating roadblocks, we must all work together to expand federal funding of stem cell research and continue moving forward in our fight against disease by advancing our knowledge through science and medicine. . . . Of course any work in this area must have appropriate oversight. Embryonic stem cell research demands comprehensive, thoughtful and carefully crafted ethical and scientific guidelines.”

Press release, April 11, 2007


Topic: Sex Education
Candidate: McCain

In a 2007 interview reported by a New York Times blog, Senator McCain said that sex education in the United States should follow President Bush’s policy of abstinence-only education. McCain has supported Bush’s abstinence-only policy.

Quotation:

Reporter: "Should U.S. taxpayer money go to places like Africa to fund contraception to prevent AIDS?”

McCain: "Well I think it’s a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn. He believes – and I was just reading the thing he wrote– that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn’t succeed, than he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I’m not very wise on it.”

Interview, New York Times, March 16, 2007


Topic: Sex Education
Candidate: Obama

Obama supports comprehensive sex education. In a December 2007 questionnaire, Obama’s aides said that Obama “believes that we should not continue to fund abstinence-only programs. . . While abstinence is one approach to reducing unintended pregnancies and STDs, Obama believes we should also support comprehensive and age-appropriate sex education.” He is also an original cosponsor of the Prevention First Act, which would ensure that all taxpayer-funded federal programs are medically accurate and include information about contraception.

Quotation: “Barack Obama is an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.”

Women for Obama, barackobama.com


Topic: Evolution and Intelligent Design
Candidate: McCain

During a New York campaign stop, Senator McCain stated that he believes in evolution, stating: “From a personal standpoint, I believe in evolution . . . When I stand on the rim of the Grand Canyon and I see the sun going down, I believe the hand of God was there.”

Quotation: Question: Should [intelligent design] be taught in schools?

“I think that there has to be all points of view presented, but they’d got to be fairly presented. To say that we can only choose one line of thinking . . . or one belief on how people and the world was created . . . there is nothing wrong with teaching different schools of thought.”

Question: Does it belong in science class?

“There is enough scientists that belief that it does. This is something that I think all points of view should be presented.”

National Journal quoting an interview with the Arizona Star editorial board, August 26, 2005.


Topic: Evolution and Intelligent Design
Candidate: Obama

In an interview with the York Daily Record in March 2008, Obama addressed the topic of science and religion, saying:”I’m a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide children with religious instruction without interference from the state. But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there’s a difference between science and faith. That doesn’t make faith any less important than science. It just means they’re two different things. And I think it’s a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don’t hold up to scientific inquiry.”

Quotation: “I’m a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide children with religious instruction without interference from the state. But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there’s a difference between science and faith. That doesn’t make faith any less important than science. It just means they’re two different things. And I think it’s a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don’t hold up to scientific inquiry.”

Interview, York Daily Record, March 30, 2008


Topic: Research & Development Funding
Candidate: McCain

According to a July 8th, 2008 CQ Politics news article, Sen. McCain is soon to release a market-oriented technology policy with help from Michael Powell, former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. McCain’s proposals will include:

* lower capital gains taxes to encourage domestic investment from large companies
* create a permanent research and development (R&D) tax credit.

Quotation: “John McCain will establish a permanent tax credit equal to 10 percent of wages spent on R&D. This reform will simplify the tax code, reward activity in the U.S., and make us more competitive with other countries. A permanent credit will provide an incentive to innovate and remove uncertainty.”

McCain’s stance on R&D


Topic: Research & Development Funding
Candidate: McCain

Obama has called for making the R&D tax credit permanent. He believes this would help create a skilled workforce and technology infrastructure. Obama wants to make the tax credit permanent so that companies can rely on the credit when making decisions about investing in domestic R&D through a multi-year time frame.He supports creating a Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund, which would be appropriated $10 billion annually for 5 years, to expedite the commercialization of promising technologies.Obama’s Technology Policy, barackobama.com

Quotation: “Obama supports doubling federal funding for basic research . . . Obama wants investments in a skilled research and development workforce and technology infrastructure to be supported here in America so that American workers and communities will benefit. Obama wants to make the Research and Development tax credit permanent so that firms can rely on it when making decisions to invest in domestic R&D over multi-year timeframes.”

Obama’s Technology Policy, barackobama.com


Topic: Broadband Access
Candidate: McCain

Quotation: “I believe that we must promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher-quality services for consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new technologies.“I have been a leading advocate in the Senate for seeking market-based solutions to increasing broadband penetration. We should place the federal government in the role of stimulator, rather than regulator, of broadband services, remove state and local barriers to broadband deployment, and facilitate deployment of broadband services to rural and underserved communities.”

Interview, Tech Crunch, November 12, 2007


Topic: Broadband Access
Candidate: Obama

Quotation: Obama believes we can get true broadband to every community in America through a combination of reform of the Universal Service Fund, better use of the nation’s wireless spectrum, promotion of next-generation facilities, technologies and applications, and new tax and loan incentives.”

Technology and Innovation for a New Generation, barackobama.com


Topic: Net Neutrality
Candidate: McCain

Quotation: Reporter: Let’s talk about net neutrality. It’s probably the most important issue in Silicon Valley, and yet it rarely makes its way to Washington-level consciousness. Barack Obama recently came out saying that he would promise to make it a priority if he became president. What is your position on the net neutrality issue?

“In general, I think we need to move to a different model for thinking about the FCC. I think it should focus on policing clearly anti-competitive behavior and consumer predators. But, frankly, until some foul has been committed, I don’t think it should be interfering in the market, and probably shouldn’t be trying to micromanage American business and innovation.”

Interview, Tech Crunch, November 12, 2007


Topic: Net Neutrality
Candidate: Obama

Quotation: “Barack Obama strongly supports the principle of network neutrality to preserve the benefits of open competition on the Internet. . . Barack Obama supports the basic principle that network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others.”

Technology and Innovation for a New Generation, barackobama.com


Topic: Space
Candidate: McCain

In late summer 2008, the McCain campaign released its plan for space exploration and NASA. The plan includes:

* Committing funding to NASA’s Constellation program including resources for human space exploration.
* Completing construction on the ISS National Laboratory.
* Making an effort to ensure that the U.S. has access to space during the time between the retirement of the shuttle and the replacement vehicle and reducing the time of the gap.
* Maintaining the United States‘ space and satellite infrastructure and support system.
* Investing in aeronautics research.

Quotation: “Senator McCain understands the importance of investments in key industries such as space to the future of our national security, environmental sustainability, economic competitiveness, and national pride as a technological leader. Although the general view in the research community is that human exploration is not an efficient way to increase scientific discoveries given the expense and logistical limitations, the role of manned space flight goes well beyond the issue of scientific discovery and is reflection of national power and pride.”

America’s Space Program, www.johnmccain.com



Topic: Space
Candidate: Obama

In mid-August 2008, the Obama campaign released its space policy proposal. Details of the plan include:

* Re-establishing the National Aeronautics and Space Council.
* Minimizing the gap between the retirement of the current shuttle and the Constellation program.
* Supporting Congressional efforts to add an additional shuttle mission before retirement.
* Completing the International Space Station and using it for scientific and technological research.
* Supporting human space flight, including a mission to the Moon by 2020 and missions to further destinations such as Mars.
* Exploring the role of the private sector in fulfilling some of NASA’s lower orbit cargo transportation needs and encouraging commercial access to space.

Contrastingly, the last sentence of Obama’s education plan states that his education plan will be paid for in part by a five year delay in the implementation of NASA’s Constellation program. However, an August 13, 2008 article in The Orlando Sentinel notes that at an appearance in Florida he promised he would not cut NASA’s budget to fund school programs. He said he was committed to an additional shuttle mission, closing the gap between the end of the space shuttle and the next human space launch, and sustaining America’s leadership in space.

Quotation: “When I was growing up, NASA united Americans to a common purpose and inspired the world with accomplishments we are still proud of. Today, NASA is an organization that impacts many facets of American life. I believe NASA needs an inspirational vision for the 21st Century. My vision will build on the great goals set forth in recent years, to maintain a robust program of human space exploration and ensure the fulfillment of NASA’s mission. Together, we can ensure that NASA again reflects all that is best about our country and continue our nation’s preeminence in space.”

Advancing the Frontiers of Space Exploration, www.barackobama.com

[dragon]

Hum they both look like they have decent views on many of the topics presented. Granted just because they said it now doesn't mean they will hold to their spoken words after the election is over. And I am definitely happy about how they both support stem cell research and space exploration.

[Justforfun000]

Jesus...I find reading some of McCain's answers punishing.

McCain: "Well I think it’s a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn. He believes – and I was just reading the thing he wrote– that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn’t succeed, than he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I’m not very wise on it.”

Exactly WHY should we encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity? He deosn't actually give any good bloody REASONS for this basic inherent policy tenet. What's wrong with contraception? Disease reduction? No, it has to be the most unrealistic and pointless suggestion. Denial. It's like dealing with a mass obesity crisis by saying "just don't eat". Wow. That's so easy. No propblem. Right?

Quotation: Question: Should [intelligent design] be taught in schools?

“I think that there has to be all points of view presented, but they’d got to be fairly presented. To say that we can only choose one line of thinking . . . or one belief on how people and the world was created . . . there is nothing wrong with teaching different schools of thought.”

Question: Does it belong in science class?

“There is enough scientists that belief that it does. This is something that I think all points of view should be presented.”

"one belief" on how people and the world was created....so automatically suggesting that a science viewpoint has the same degree of credibility as a personal tribal myth. lovely.

"There is enough scientists that belief that it does".

First of all, love the the English John. Good to know you're a real scholar. And is he actually aware how many true "scientists" publically espouse a belief in intelligent design? He says there's 'enough'. Is it likely 50%? 20%? er......10%?

I doubt it's even ONE percent.

God. How can you possibly qualify to run the entire country of the largest superpower in the world with the military capability of a global genocide wanker's dream with no necessary requirement there to demonstrate critical thinking or rational thought? You need to go to university for thousands of other positions and professions that have a miniscule amount of overal harm potential compared to a POTUS. Yet this can be achieved by any Tom, Dick and Mary who gets lected by popular vote. It really stuns me.

[CmdrWilkens]

The counterpoint to McCain on the astinence only/ abstinence first sex education was Obama's legislation. I actually was unaware that he had been a co-sponsor on that and its pretty damn worthwhile standup against Bush.

[Guardsman Bass]

According to a July 2, 2008 article from the Los Angeles Times, Senator McCain does not support subsidies for alternate forms of energy such as wind and solar power, but does support subsidies for nuclear energy.On July 7th, 2008, McCain announced a new economic plan under which he would repeal the 54 cent tax on imported sugar-based ethanol. He would also repeal corn-based ethanol mandates that add to the rising price of food.

The bolded strikes me as strange. Wouldn't his state (Arizona) be on the frontline for these types of subsidies in the area of solar power?

It's stupid as well. I like nuclear power, and I think it should be the backbone of American energy supplies - but you ought to take advantage of regional varieties of alternative energy wherever they can be used to generate cheap energy, like hydroelectric dams, solar panels, wind, and so forth. Plus, IIRC, nuclear power tends to be more of a "steady state" source of energy; you can't rapidly turn it on or off to meet sudden changes in demand like you can with natural gas or coal plants.

[Guardsman Bass]

Sorry, I submitted accidently before finishing my post.

McCain’s plan also calls for insurance to be portable instead of tied to employment.

This seems redundant. If you are killing off employer-based coverage by changing its tax credits in order to create a system where people buy their own coverage, wouldn't that by definition by portable?

[Master of Ossus]

The bolded strikes me as strange. Wouldn't his state (Arizona) be on the frontline for these types of subsidies in the area of solar power?

It's stupid as well. I like nuclear power, and I think it should be the backbone of American energy supplies - but you ought to take advantage of regional varieties of alternative energy wherever they can be used to generate cheap energy, like hydroelectric dams, solar panels, wind, and so forth. Plus, IIRC, nuclear power tends to be more of a "steady state" source of energy; you can't rapidly turn it on or off to meet sudden changes in demand like you can with natural gas or coal plants.

I have never heard of a place where wind or solar power is as cost-effective as nuclear, coal, or NG. I'm sure there are some places, but why haven't those already been tapped out if the conditions there are so favorable to it? Solar energy, in particular, is a joke in terms of cost-effectiveness.

[General Zod]

Sorry, I submitted accidently before finishing my post.

McCain’s plan also calls for insurance to be portable instead of tied to employment.

This seems redundant. If you are killing off employer-based coverage by changing its tax credits in order to create a system where people buy their own coverage, wouldn't that by definition by portable?

Not only redundant, but grossly negligent. By eliminating incentive for employers to help cover their employees deductible premiums, you shunt that cost onto the employee. If I'm not mistaken the deductible is absurdly higher than you'd pay without your employer covering it, and I don't honestly think his stupid tax break would put any significant dent into that. So by doing this McCain would effectively completely fuck over everybody's health plans.

[Guardsman Bass]

Sorry, I submitted accidently before finishing my post.

McCain’s plan also calls for insurance to be portable instead of tied to employment.

This seems redundant. If you are killing off employer-based coverage by changing its tax credits in order to create a system where people buy their own coverage, wouldn't that by definition by portable?

Not only redundant, but grossly negligent. By eliminating incentive for employers to help cover their employees deductible premiums, you shunt that cost onto the employee. If I'm not mistaken the deductible is absurdly higher than you'd pay without your employer covering it, and I don't honestly think his stupid tax break would put any significant dent into that. So by doing this McCain would effectively completely fuck over everybody's health plans.

On the "bright" side, for a single-payer advocate like me, this would probably be a good thing in the long term. McCain's plan, if enacted, would probably cripple much of the employer-based health plans, clearing the way for a more single-payer-ish plan.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The bolded strikes me as strange. Wouldn't his state (Arizona) be on the frontline for these types of subsidies in the area of solar power?

It's stupid as well. I like nuclear power, and I think it should be the backbone of American energy supplies - but you ought to take advantage of regional varieties of alternative energy wherever they can be used to generate cheap energy, like hydroelectric dams, solar panels, wind, and so forth. Plus, IIRC, nuclear power tends to be more of a "steady state" source of energy; you can't rapidly turn it on or off to meet sudden changes in demand like you can with natural gas or coal plants.

I have never heard of a place where wind or solar power is as cost-effective as nuclear, coal, or NG. I'm sure there are some places, but why haven't those already been tapped out if the conditions there are so favorable to it? Solar energy, in particular, is a joke in terms of cost-effectiveness.

If you were to figure the actual cost to society of using coal, oil, and NG as a result of GW and other concerns into the cost of using them, then they would not be so competitive. Nuclear in particular suffers from a completely unfair burden of red tape and added cost of dealing with its consequences whereas we allow CO2 to be just belched into the air, knowing it is causing global and significant and potentially devastating consequences.

[Guardsman Bass]

I don't suppose anyone has any links to papers showing how much something like a hypothetical carbon tax would change the price of coal- or natural gas- created electricity? That might be useful.

[Superboy]

Maybe I'm just jaded by 8 years of Bush, but despite some of McCain's more idiotic answers, he actually struck me as not-too-bad in that article. It might just be because some of his answers (stem cells in particular) are vast improvements over other republicans.

[rhoenix]

Maybe I'm just jaded by 8 years of Bush, but despite some of McCain's more idiotic answers, he actually struck me as not-too-bad in that article. It might just be because some of his answers (stem cells in particular) are vast improvements over other republicans.

They are - I certainly must give him credit for that. His answers are far more progressive than I expected to see from the Republican camp (e.g. his position on stem-cell research, and even evolution), and that actually gives me hope for that party in the future.

His answers weren't as well thought out as Obama's answers by far and large were, and he still clings to some Republican-esque ideology (e.g. McCain taking the position of "abstainance" as his sex education policy, or the position on off-shore oil drilling), but I admit, I was impressed by his answers compared to others in his party.

Even with that said, some of McCain's answers have this "this sounds good at the time" feel to them, especially his answers on R&D. In my subjective opinion, I consider Obama's answers as more comprehensive and thoughtful for the most part than McCain's.

[rhoenix]

Duct-tape edit: In the above, I mentioned that McCain's position on R&D had a "sounds good at the time" feel to it. I mentioned R&D in error - I meant Alternative Fuels instead.

[Alyrium Denryle]

i will be blunt. Market-Based research and Development as well as Federal Research Funding is a bad bad bad idea. Here is why.... (I will crosspost from my blog for easy use... no point reinventing the wheel... which is part of the problem of privatized science)

Science functions because of the free exchange of ideas. Every scientist builds their research on the backs of previous or co-existing scientists. In other words, we stand on the shoulders of geniuses. Science is, by its very nature, a cooperative enterprise. This is why even now, when scientists are doing classified work for the military, they STILL publish their basic findings (just not the applications) so that other scientists can use their information to solve other problems. A corporation doing research is motivated by profit, and they can most easily secure their profits by keeping procedures proprietary and the knowledge all to themselves in order to guarantee a certain line of advancement and application is exclusively their own. If this were made common practice, science could not function. It is one thing to keep exact applications proprietary, like microprocessor architecture, or operating system code. But to keep the basic formation a secret would deprive the world of information, foster inefficiency (because the resources would have to be spent on overlapping projects by scientists working for different companies) and any and all applications of science would become more expensive as a result, because each company would have to do all the leg-work from the ground up. In addition, only that research with direct applications would be done, thus preventing us from answering valuable questions about the nature and structure of the universe, and life. Questions that scientists the world over want to answer and which will benefit all of humanity when answered. Business like competition has no place in science for this reason. The place for competition in science should be restricted to the friendly competitions between rival scientists in making discoveries or about being right in experimental predictions.

Some corporations, to be sure, publish their data and allow their scientists the right to do so without editing. In medicine at least this is not the case. Often results are only published in in-house journals with laughable peer review, and only after... editing... Due to highly competitive funding, we are already facing an epidemic of academic dishonesty in the sciences. We dont need to bump the stakes up higher, or add corporate profits to the mix. Doing that would be like...A ferengi running a research lab. None of us want that.

As a result, Obama's stance on doubling federal research funds alone is enough to get me to vote for him. If I had no position on any other issue, that would be enough to get me to the polls.

[rhoenix]

A corporation doing research is motivated by profit, and they can most easily secure their profits by keeping procedures proprietary and the knowledge all to themselves in order to guarantee a certain line of advancement and application is exclusively their own.

This is what patents are for: give the company a monetary incentive (profits from a monopoly on use) in exchange for them revealing how their new method is done to the world.

If the patent system worked properly, then I'd agree with you.

[Alyrium Denryle]

A corporation doing research is motivated by profit, and they can most easily secure their profits by keeping procedures proprietary and the knowledge all to themselves in order to guarantee a certain line of advancement and application is exclusively their own.

This is what patents are for: give the company a monetary incentive (profits from a monopoly on use) in exchange for them revealing how their new method is done to the world.

You misunderstand me. I am not talking about new inventions, but things like a statistical technique that allows you to answer certain questions, or a novel use for PCR, or even *shock* a physical law. Those should not be subject to patenting, or any intellectual property law other than structures to fight plagiarism. Can you imagine how many times we would have to reinvent the wheel if companies were allowed to keep that secret, or how abusive the system would become if you could not apply certain principles of chemistry in your research because either the technique used to apply them, or the principle itself was patented?

Science would grind to a cyberpunk-like halt

[pieman3141]

Both seem fairly decent on most of the issues. Obama takes the lead, though, on sex ed. With regards to health care, I see McCain's plan as an SSDD thing. Obama's is more of a compromise: It doesn't go too far into UHC zone (I'm fairly sure a lot of Americans don't support this), but it changes things around. Personally, I support UHC, but when it comes to shoving an idea down people's throats, best make it as easy as possible.