Excerpts from the WSPA Candidates Forum on Science Policy

Transcript of Q&A Session with Henry Kelley (Kerry-Edwards) and Bob Walker (Bush-Cheney), moderated by Mary Woolley (Research!America)

Mary Woolley: "Some of the challenges that are facing our society right now and are about to become even more expensive are in the areas of human behavior that we don't understand as well as well as we might like to as we look at the toll of obesity that its taking on both the health and economy of the country and there are other areas as well.

The questioner has asked what areas of the social and behavioral sciences are of key importance in an administration headed by John Kerry or a second administration by President Bush and how these areas would be appropriately supported?"

Henry Kelley: "Well, Kerry has talked on several occasions about the need to include public information and public health information about obesity in the mission of both NIH and other agencies. Plainly, this is one of the things he would like to see included as part of a responsibly expanding NIH budget. I believe that almost 10% of health care costs can be traced to obesity, I believe, as in the analysis of it. The other part of this, of course, is to provide people adequate information about the nutritional consequences of their diet. Now the social and behavioral research in NSF is also a key part of this, and one of the reasons that there has been keen concern about increasing the NSF budget is to show that is one of the main places where you can look to for support for this exact kind of behavioral work, and that's why its particularly tragic that we're facing a situation where you may find a real decline in NSF's funding over the coming years."

Mary Woolley: "Social and behavioral research?"

Bob Walker: "Well, I don't have a lot of specific information in the area. I will say that this administration has been very much in favor of moving fast and more toward a preventative health regime, because clearly you cannot continue to practice crisis health in this country. Its unaffordable going forward to do that, and so the administration has attempted to move programs toward preventative health. The human behavioral regime certainly fits into figuring out how you make preventative health into a substantive program going forward. But I don't know the specifics of what may have been proposed."

Mary Woolley: "As a follow up to that question about the social and behavioral sciences, there has been some threat recently to the peer review process raised among your former colleagues on the floor of the House, questioning some specific grants and their value, and I wonder whether the administration overall has a position on that, and whether a Kerry administration would?"

Bob Walker: "Well, I think the administration has shown that its very much in favor of peer reviewed science, and this is something that happens in Congress from time to time. If you don't have people who can consistently go to the floor and explain why science has to have some latitude to look at a variety of subjects, you find people who go through the grant process and find projects that they can bring to the floor as wasteful spending. Its been a long tradition in the congress, and sadly some scientists do a very poor job of sometimes describing their science in the title of their projects, and it leads to a political dialogue which is not at all helpful. I'm hopeful that the powers that be on Capitol Hill at the present time in the various science committees will take it upon themselves to come out and defend the idea that you ought to have science which is based upon peer review and not on political decision-making. I would say that's also the case that they ought to come out and do the same thing on earmarks. But clearly that does not represent the administration's point of view. The administration has been very, very good throughout the four years in backing peer-reviewed science."

Mary Woolley: "And how about a Kerry administration - would they strongly support peer review and the integrity of science?"

Henry Kelley: "Well, as Donald Kennedy said in his editorial review and column and in AAAS comments, it's one area where we are in violent agreement…essentially an identical statement about concerns about earmarking and the need for consistent high quality peer review."

Back to SPIN October 2004