Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1806

In the Name of Science: Is $32B Worth Reauthorizing the Big America COMPETES Act?

Argument in favor

This bill appropriates funds for anything and everything related to science: STEM education—particularly for underrepresented communities, collaboration with the private sector, investment in alternative energy, cross-agency collaboration. There’s something there for everyone.

···
05/19/2015
Having read through the summarized bulletin points I have to agree yes with this vote. Is it industry and commercial specific? Yes. But the appropriations to solar, to fusion, to the study of space, matter and time, cleaner versions of fossil fuel and the reduction of our dependency for fossil fuel to foreign countries greatly exceeds my caution. The worst that can happen that we all envision: Ossis fuel research finds new oil or new ways of extracting fossil fuel that severely pollute. This makes sense but 600 million is allocated to fossil fuel research whereas 1billion is allocated to solar power research. The best that can happen: solar energy reaches another great step in viability. Fusion becomes within our reach. Space matter and time develop further enough for our culture to understand better means of interstellar travel and communication. Let's authorize this baby.
Like (9)
Follow
Share
NACSP's Opinion
···
03/16/2016
The government should be interested in the promotion of science that benefits the security and well-being of the nation as a whole. Other sciences should remain out of the sphere of government influence, which may be a good thing for them as it removes tedious oversights and regulations.
Like (2)
Follow
Share
···
05/18/2015
This bill will most likely spark serious research into renewable energy through competition, which may streamline the integration process of such technologies so that we may have access to them in the near future. We need such an initiative.
Like (1)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Science education, research, and development are essential — but there’s too much wrong with this bill to pass it. It’s commercially oriented, cuts tons of grant programs, focuses on corporate research interests (like crude oil), and keeps funding decisions out of scientists hands.

andrewbraj's Opinion
···
05/18/2015
This narrowly defines science and allows congress to define it. This bill needs to include social sciences and it also needs to take out the national security and economic prosperity bits -- science should be knowledge based, not a means to an end.
Like (39)
Follow
Share
Jim's Opinion
···
05/19/2015
Loathed as I am to vote against this, the stink of government interference and commercial viability are overpowering. Members of Congress are happy to say "I'm no scientist," yet they want to dictate directions of NSF focus? Programs should benefit industry? That's what corporate R&D budgets are for. Part of that can be mitigated by sharing research with private industry. I better stop here.
Like (26)
Follow
Share
Xn's Opinion
···
05/18/2015
No more money for fossil fuels! Leave it in the ground where it belongs!
Like (17)
Follow
Share
    Having read through the summarized bulletin points I have to agree yes with this vote. Is it industry and commercial specific? Yes. But the appropriations to solar, to fusion, to the study of space, matter and time, cleaner versions of fossil fuel and the reduction of our dependency for fossil fuel to foreign countries greatly exceeds my caution. The worst that can happen that we all envision: Ossis fuel research finds new oil or new ways of extracting fossil fuel that severely pollute. This makes sense but 600 million is allocated to fossil fuel research whereas 1billion is allocated to solar power research. The best that can happen: solar energy reaches another great step in viability. Fusion becomes within our reach. Space matter and time develop further enough for our culture to understand better means of interstellar travel and communication. Let's authorize this baby.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This narrowly defines science and allows congress to define it. This bill needs to include social sciences and it also needs to take out the national security and economic prosperity bits -- science should be knowledge based, not a means to an end.
    Like (39)
    Follow
    Share
    Loathed as I am to vote against this, the stink of government interference and commercial viability are overpowering. Members of Congress are happy to say "I'm no scientist," yet they want to dictate directions of NSF focus? Programs should benefit industry? That's what corporate R&D budgets are for. Part of that can be mitigated by sharing research with private industry. I better stop here.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    No more money for fossil fuels! Leave it in the ground where it belongs!
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Far be it from me to oppose a multi-billion spending bill, but no. Much of science is not results-based, it is research base, to expand our knowledge, which then might be applied down the road. This bill would cut much of that science out, to our own detriment.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Money should be set aside for education. However, STEM leaves out an integral part of American Education...the Arts. This bill would draw funding away from the arts into the sciences, something that we do not need.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    I hate to vote against sciences funding, but congress has reached too far, asserting themselves into issues they genuinely don't understand. Their job is to support our nation's scientific endeavors, not to strangle research that goes against their fundamentalism and force their ideology into scientific circles.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    It is simply not the role of the government to "stimulate" innovation. Since when has the government been a leader in that area, anyway?
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Scientists should be the ones to evaluate science, that's why we have peer review. It is not for politicians to step into specific decisions that they do not understand.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Equal focus on all disciplines is important. We need to see students in the humanities and arts just as much as the sciences.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill takes $$$ and decisions away from scientists & feeds corporate power & greed. If you want to pass a science bill, then propose a science bill. If you want to feed the lobbying folks more $$$, then construct an honest bill. Otherwise, back off!
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This is money the government doesn't have. It is too favorable to the science aspect of education and also a power the federal government does not have!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    If you want America to compete, get rid of the unions who demand ridiculous wages, lower corporate taxes so jobs will come home, and FORGET ABOUT A BIG MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE. Liberals want to pay someone asking "you want fries with that?" more than my son who's a combat medic. THEIR lack of preparation for self support shouldn't mean I should have to cover them. NO ONE will pay $12- for a Big Mac combo. You know what happens then? Major chains, along with the jobs they provide, disappear. Do you really think that makes us more competitive?
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill means well but is actually hiding a bunch of anti-science sentiment. I'd rather have $32 billion given directly to schools/NSF and they can allocate it as they see fit without congress trying to police what is and isn't worthy of 'science'.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    The government should be interested in the promotion of science that benefits the security and well-being of the nation as a whole. Other sciences should remain out of the sphere of government influence, which may be a good thing for them as it removes tedious oversights and regulations.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is "results based" while most of our beneficial research is done to expand knowledge. it leaves out the humanities which are essential for developing our creative skills and it leaves too much control over scientific research in the hands of our elected officials who are mostly nonscientists.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill should have never made it to the floor if our congress actually represented our interests instead of those of big business. My congressman is joke for voting in favor for it, but it doesn't surprise me since he votes for what his party wants and not what the people who elected him want.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    The U.S. needs boosting in math and science. Taxes should not be increased by this bill though.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Big America? Big international (foreign) non-U.S. Tax paying job out sourcing UnAmerican corporations who are trying to cut our benefits and pay us less than minimum wage? Absolutely not another bill for big business interests is the last kind-of-"science" we need. How long did it take for cigarette companies "research labs" to find a link between smoking and cancer.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill will most likely spark serious research into renewable energy through competition, which may streamline the integration process of such technologies so that we may have access to them in the near future. We need such an initiative.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE