ADVERTISEMENT
2 /3 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Environment

Round 1 Of Presidential Debates

Politics: Obama and Romney lay out positions on energy, education in their first debate

by Jeff Johnson , Susan R. Morrissey
October 4, 2012 | APPEARED IN VOLUME 90, ISSUE 41

[+]Enlarge
Credit: Zhang Jun/Xinhua/Photoshot/Newscom
Romney (left) and Obama greet one another at last week’s debate.
09041-notw3-debatecxd.jpg
Credit: Zhang Jun/Xinhua/Photoshot/Newscom
Romney (left) and Obama greet one another at last week’s debate.

President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney both support improving education and achieving energy independence but disagree over how to do so. The candidates affirmed their positions on the two issues at the first presidential debate, held on Oct. 3 in Denver. The hour-and-a-half-long event focused mainly on economics, the federal deficit, taxes, health care, and Medicare.

Obama underscored his Race to the Top education program, which he said has led to reforms in 46 states, higher standards, and improved teacher training. He also cited his Administration’s goal of hiring 100,000 new math and science teachers, as well as his plan to create 2 million more slots for students in community colleges and to ensure that college tuition remains low.

Romney, too, emphasized the need to improve U.S. schools. Although he supported the portions of Obama’s program that provide funding to states and school districts, he said his education program would strive to offer funding directly to students and parents. He also criticized redundancy in federal government training programs, saying some 47 training programs in eight agencies carried too much overhead.

On energy, both Obama and Romney stressed support for development of fossil-fuel resources, including drilling and production of oil and gas. Obama emphasized that increased drilling and production had taken place during his Administration but underscored the need for government investments in “energy sources of the future—like wind and solar and biofuels.”

Although Romney agreed that oil and gas production was up during the Obama Administration, he credited it to industry’s efforts, not the President’s actions. A Romney Administration, he said, would greatly increase fossil-fuel production; would double permits for drilling on federal lands, including offshore and in Alaska; and would build the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

The candidates’ remarks on education and energy during the debate echo their responses to C&EN’s science policy questions (see page 32). Two other presidential debates and one vice presidential debate will take place this month. It is unlikely that basic science policy questions will be addressed at any of these events.

Advertisement

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

Comments
Chad (October 4, 2012 7:51 PM)
Romney's plan requires cutting spending from today's 25% of GDP down to 20% of GDP. With defense, interest, Medicare and Social Security essentially off the table and ammounting to approximately 15% of GDP, this math indicates that the average non-defense discretionary program must be cut by about 50% in order to meet the target. This would include all federal education spending. It would also include NSF, NIH, NIST, NASA, NOAA, and any other federal organization that does non-defense R&D.

You get what you pay for, folks. We have some of the lowest tax rates in the world, and in order to keep them, we have to sacrifice these programs. Is that what you really want?

Leave A Comment

*Required to comment