The President Must Lead

Alan I. Leshner, chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and executive publisher of the journal Science, had an important opinion piece a few days ago in the Des Moines Register:

Some experts have predicted that computer speeds will increase a billion times in coming decades, creating almost unimaginable possibilities in fields ranging from medical care and robotics to manufacturing and education. Nanotechnology -- the science of creating microscopic machines comprised of a few molecules -- could create a new industrial revolution. Nano-implants in human brains may allow us to network directly with computers. Breakthroughs in medical research will help cure many diseases and could dramatically extend our lives.

But these promising developments would not be cost- or risk-free. We need to be talking about such issues now, so we can shape coming breakthroughs to our best advantage.

Many elected officials from both parties in Congress understand this; they've introduced ambitious bills to deal with energy needs, climate change and stem-cell research. Polls show that the public, too, is deeply concerned about the climate, energy, and education.

Leshner goes on to say that the (U.S.) President must lead the way in discussing costs and risks of new scientific discoveries and technological developments:

President Thomas Jefferson, in the early days of the 19th century, was an accomplished inventor with broad knowledge of botany, paleontology, astronomy, anthropology and other fields. We're not likely to find such a scientist-statesman today, but for those who would lead us in this century of science and technology, comfort with science is a necessary virtue.

The President, more than any figure in our culture, is in a position to lead an ongoing public discussion about critical science-related issues. [Abraham] Lincoln knew the necessity of taking the long view. "You cannot escape the responsibility for tomorrow by evading it today," he famously said. We need to hear, in detail, what the candidates think about these issues. Sound bites just aren't enough.

Here in the United States, we are early in the cycle of a campaign that will elect our next President in 2008. CRN agrees with Leshner that it's vital to learn how well each of the leading candidates understands cutting-edge scientific research and how well he or she can assess and communicate appropriate priorities:

We use our presidential campaigns to assess candidates' vision in economic matters, domestic policy, national security and global affairs. As we embark on a century of unprecedented scientific discovery and technological development, the campaign also should help us gauge the candidates' readiness to lead as we negotiate the opportunities and challenges ahead.

Now more that ever, with change rapidly accelerating and issues becoming more acute, we in the United States should look hard at the candidates and evaluate their fitness to lead the country -- and, to a large extent, the world -- toward an abundant future, assured through safe development and responsible use of emerging technologies.

Mike Treder

Tags: nanotechnology nanotech nano science technology ethics weblog blog

Comments

[Ted Stalets]

If the United States president that emerges out of the election of 2008 is not well versed on the promises and perils of emerging technologies, we will not - as noted above - have the benefit of a competent leader in this important area.

We do have the National Nanotechnology Initiative, which has been in place for several years. It is funded quite heavily, and represents 26 federal agencies, 13 of which have an R&D budget for nanotechnology.

It should be noted that the US federal nanotech initiative is being mirrored by governments of another dozen large countries around the world. Others recognize fully the powers associated with harnessing this new scientific knowledge.

And after hearing the words of Russia's Vladamir Putin lately about military goals of nanotechnology (not that the US pentagon isn't pursuing as well)- I get more and more scared.

The absolute minimum requirement for the president of the United States - in my opinion - is to thoroughly understand the ELSI (Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues) of emerging technologies.

Nanotech, biotech, robotics, and the cognitive sciences present global challenges and opportunities that reach well beyond the nation state.