Scientists and science are on the ballot

doi:10.1126/science.370.6514.283

GSTDTAP > 气候变化

DOI	10.1126/science.370.6514.283
	Scientists and science are on the ballot
	Jeffrey Mervis
	2020-10-16
发表期刊	Science
出版年	2020
英文摘要	Chemistry professor hopes to become first female Ph.D. scientist in Congress. Nancy Goroff says she doesn't mind that her opponent calls her a “radical professor.” In fact, Goroff, a New York Democrat running for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, says her scientific expertise is exactly what Congress needs to deal effectively with climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a host of other issues. A physical organic chemist and longtime faculty member at Stony Brook University, Goroff is one of several congressional candidates with scientific backgrounds on the ballot next month. (Voters in four states will also weigh in on science-related ballot items.) Nonpartisan polls give her a chance of defeating the Republican incumbent, lawyer Lee Zeldin, and becoming the first female Ph.D. scientist to serve in Congress. Scientists running for Congress are no longer a novelty. But winning still is. A small army of people with scientific training—almost all Democrats—ran in 2018, vowing to counter what they viewed as the anti-science message coming from President Donald Trump and his administration. But only a handful were successful. This year, all those rookie legislators are running for reelection to the House, and most are favored to win. The list includes two Illinois Democrats, Sean Casten and Lauren Underwood. Casten, an engineer, has been a vocal advocate for clean energy, while Underwood, a nurse and public health analyst, has been sharply critical of the administration's response to the pandemic. The cohort also features Representative Jim Baird (R–IN), who holds a Ph.D. in animal nutrition. Goroff hopes her centrist positions will appeal to voters in a Long Island district that Trump carried easily in 2016. In contrast, Zeldin, who is one of Trump's most loyal supporters, is following the president's playbook of painting Democrats as “radicals” whose policies pose a threat to the country. Goroff waves off the criticism. “They say that any Democrat is a communist or a socialist,” she says. “And if they think that using facts and scientific evidence as the basis for making policy is radical, then that says more about them than about us.” Goroff earned her Ph.D. in organic chemistry from the University of California, Los Angeles, and came to Stony Brook in 1997. She studies the structure of semiconducting polymers with the goal of improving solar cells and other devices. “Nancy isn't someone who publishes a lot of papers. But her work is always very solid,” says Luis Echegoyen, a chemist at the University of Texas, El Paso, and current president of the American Chemical Society. Goroff, who stepped down as department chair and went on leave when she launched her campaign in the spring of 2019, declines to place herself on the political spectrum. But her positions on most issues align with those of the Democratic presidential nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden. “She's no Bernie Sanders,” says one longtime Stony Brook colleague, Stephen Koch, referring to the Vermont senator and democratic socialist who lost to Biden in the primaries. That's true even on climate change, which Goroff has made a pillar of her campaign. Global warming is “the biggest threat to our way of life,” she says. But she has not endorsed the Green New Deal, an ambitious plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions and create jobs being advocated by the party's progressive wing. “I have strong objections to some provisions, while others are appropriate,” she explains. In Montana, Democrat Kathleen Williams, a water resources scientist running for the state's only House seat, is also using climate change to differentiate herself from her opponent, Republican Matt Rosendale. Climate change “is real,” she said in a recent debate in which she accused Rosendale of “hiding his head in the sand” after he ducked a question on the impact of human activity on the planet's climate. Unlike Goroff, Williams is playing down any ties to the Democratic establishment. Instead, she vows to break with her party when necessary to broker a deal with Republicans. “Congress is broken” because of “hyperpartisanship,” she asserted during the debate. Williams, a former state legislator, lost her 2018 bid to win the seat, but prodigious fundraising has put her in a stronger position this year. In Wyoming, wildlife ecologist Merav Ben-David of the University of Wyoming is the Democratic candidate for a seat in the U.S. Senate. But she's a decided underdog against Republican Cynthia Lummis, a lawyer who has previously served four terms in the House. In four states, residents will be voting on ballot initiatives with implications for U.S. researchers. California voters are being asked to approve an additional $5.5 billion in bonds to fund the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state's stem cell research programs, which voters created in 2004. Nevada could soon require the state's electric utility companies to double their use of renewable energy, to 50%. Voters approved the mandate in 2018, but the state constitution requires a second affirmative vote. Colorado voters are being asked to support the reintroduction of gray wolves in portions of the state. The restoration effort would begin by the end of 2023. And Oregon could become the first state to allow the use of so-called magic mushrooms in clinical research settings. The active ingredient, psilocybin, has been shown to help those with depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
领域	气候变化 ; 资源环境
URL	查看原文
引用统计
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/299317
专题	气候变化资源环境科学
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Jeffrey Mervis. Scientists and science are on the ballot[J]. Science,2020.
APA	Jeffrey Mervis.(2020).Scientists and science are on the ballot.Science.
MLA	Jeffrey Mervis."Scientists and science are on the ballot".Science (2020).