Researchers, Pro And Con, Cite Gore's Science Acumen

As some hail the VP nominee's grasp of the issues, others claim he exploits science in order to advance his own political agenda When Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton tapped Tennessee Sen. Al Gore as his vice presidential running mate last month, many political pundits found it easy to challenge the wisdom of Clinton's decision. They pointed out the striking similarities between the two men--both young political moderates from neighboring southern states--wondering what, indeed, Gore was adding to the ticket in terms of electability. For many scientists, however, the selection of the 44-year-old Democrat as Clinton's running mate immediately made sense. Far more than other lawmakers, Gore during his career in Washington has gained a reputation in the science community for being concerned, knowledgeable, and articulate on matters of science and technology. Researchers of various disciplines interviewed by The Scientist attest to this, saying they are impressed that Gore is well versed in scientific areas as diverse as space science, supercomputing, and biotechnology. On the other hand, some critics contend that Gore has misused scientific arguments in his recent book on global ecology--which they contend is a reflection of either undue influence on the senator from specific groups or a devious advancement of a political agenda. I think his credentials, in terms of science, are probably better than those of anybody in the Congress," says Robert Park, public affairs director for the American Physical Society (APS) and a professor of physics at the University of Maryland, College Park. But Fred Smith, president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market policy group in Washington, D.C., says of Gore's book, it's a highly selective use of science. It's a lawyer's use of science, not a scientist's use of science." Overall, those who have seen Gore in action on Capitol Hill agree that--in addition to being well briefed by his staff--he has educated himself thoroughly enough on key areas so that he is able to discuss major scientific issues more knowledgeably than his fellow lawmakers. Also, they say that if Gore is elected along with Bill Clinton in November, it is likely that the Tennessee Democrat will play a more significant role than Vice President Dan Quayle has in shaping national science and technology policy. F. Sherwood Rowland, an atmospheric chemist at the University of California, Irvine and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), says of Gore: I have interacted with him a number of times, at many conferences. And he is surely the most knowledgeable major politician in terms of his actual scientific knowledge. The kinds of the questions that he asks are just at a different level [from those asked by] most people who are not scientists, whether in Washington or anywhere else. His questions on carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere have to do not with the question of whether it's going up, or whether there's a seasonal effect, but whether there are changes in the seasonal effect with time. That requires a knowledge of what's going on-- of the atmosphere--that most lay people simply don't have." Regarding Gore's likely role in dealing with science and technology policy, he says that if the Democrats were to win in November, and if they were to maintain control over the House and the Senate, I would be surprised if Gore didn't have a major influence." Rowland, a leading expert on atmospheric ozone depletion, emphasizes that he is speaking as an individual scientist and not on behalf of AAAS, which he says has no official position on Gore. APS's Park recalls that last year, just after returning from a plane trip to Antarctica, Gore gave members of the society a one- hour talk in which he got into a sort of philosophical discussion of modern physics. It was kind of stunning. He didn't have it all right, but it was pretty close." In this and other areas, Park says, Gore learns very quickly. He's always had somebody technical on his staff who can brief him. And when he gets briefed, he gives every impression of really understanding, because he asks questions at hearings that are pretty deep." John Pike, space policy project director for the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) in Washington, D.C., notes that on key issues such as the space station, Al Gore actually knows what he's talking about. He's not just mouthing words that some staff person wrote for him." FAS, with about 4,000 scientist members, is a Washington group that, in addition to space, focuses on arms control and nuclear dismantlement; tighter curbs on chemical and biological weapons; and human rights, particularly in Third World countries; it also opposes excessive government secrecy. Pike observes that if the Democrats win the White House, Gore as vice president would take over chairmanship of the National Space Council, in which Quayle's current role has come under criticism. I think that Quayle is clever enough to pick good staff, but clearly--unlike Gore--Quayle does not have a reputation as a heavyweight. And unavoidably, I think, that has limited his influence. There's only so much staff can do to make up for that," Pike says. Peter Boyce, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based American Astronomical Society, which has about 5,800 members, most of them Ph.D. astronomers, says that, overall, he has a really favorable" view of Gore. He says he was somewhat concerned that in the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation--where Gore chairs the science, technology, and space subcommittee--in mid-June, Gore voted against further funds for the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) program. But, he says: In general, I would say that he's been a pretty good supporter of science." Catherine Didion, executive director of the Association for Women in Science, a Washington, D.C.-based group, says she believes that Gore would also be very supportive" of the organization's goals of improving science career opportunities for women. Didion says she hopes that if the Democrats win in November, Gore will help make science policy a priority" for the new administration. Bob Powers, chairman of an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) committee on communications and information policy, praises Gore's work in Congress to help promote high-speed networks linking powerful supercomputers across the country. IEEE has been very pleased with his leadership in this area," says Powers, who works with a major communications firm in Texas. Referring to Gore's father's role in advocating the interstate highway system while he was serving earlier in the Senate, he notes that the younger Gore has been on target in terming such new information networks superhighways for computers." Before he was elected to the Senate in 1984, Gore as a congressman served as chairman of the oversight and investigations subcommittee of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee. The panel conducted a series of hearings on genetic engineering, including to what extent new federal regulations might be needed for biotechnology labs and issues such as environmental release of genetically altered organisms. Gore in recent years has had less to say in this area. But William Small, executive director of the Association of Biotechnology Companies in Washington, D.C., says his group is now trying to get more information from the Clinton-Gore campaign about its prospective policies. Considering Gore's strong interest in ecology issues, Small predicts that if he is elected, I think that we might see a tightening of regulations relating to biotech in the environmental area, at least in agriculture." Allen Goldhammer, chief scientist at the Washington, D.C.-based Industrial Biotechnology Association, agrees that it is unclear whether a Clinton-Gore administration would adopt significantly different policies on biotechnology research and regulation. But, pointing to Gore's congressional hearings on various issues related to biotech, Goldhammer says: I think that in general, it's very difficult to find members of Congress who are as well- versed on those issues." Janet Shoemaker, congressional affairs officer for the American Society of Microbiology in Washington, D.C., says that the society has had the opportunity to interact with Sen. Gore in the past on biotechnology." Shoemaker says of the nominee: It is very clear that the senator has a real interest in this area and has spent considerable time thinking about the challenges facing the makers of public policy in science and technology. We are very pleased that as a policymaker, he has looked to the scientific community for assistance and advice." Over the last several years, Gore's scientific interests have focused heavily on the debate over global warming and other worldwide ecological issues, such as destruction of rain forests, alternatives to burning of fossil fuels, and support for environmentally sound development in the Third World (see story on page 5). Reid Wilson, political director of the Sierra Club's legislative office in Washington, D.C., says about Gore: We think it's an excellent decision Gov. Clinton made--politically, because some people see Clinton as being potentially vulnerable on the environment, and adding Al Gore gets rid of that problem immediately. Gore has been talking about global warming, rain forest destruction, the ozone hole, longer than anyone else. And it's largely through his efforts that those issues are now in the public's consciousness." Gore's environmental concerns are outlined in his book Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit (New York, Houghton Mifflin), which was published early this year and has gotten special attention since Gore's emergence on the Democratic ticket. In the book, Gore warns that as long as civilization as a whole, with its vast technological power, continues to follow a pattern of thinking that encourages the domination and exploitation of the natural world for short-term gains, this juggernaut will continue to devastate the earth no matter what any of us does. "I have come to believe that we must take bold and unequivocal action: we must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization," he writes. Gore advocates a "Global Marshall Plan" to deal with the situation through measures including new taxes to help reduce use of oil, coal, minerals, wood, and other "virgin materials"; a new system of economic incentives to encourage environmental protection; phasing out internal-combustion engines within 25 years; new, environmentally sound technologies; programs to stabilize population; and new environmental treaties. While enthusiastically received by ecology groups, Gore's book also has drawn some criticism from conservative-oriented environmental policy specialists. They contend that Gore has let political interests distort his effort to present scientific evidence on global warming and other potential dangers. Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist with the University of Virginia and director of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a group based in Arlington, Va., says he believes that Gore is an "alarmist" in urging that drastic steps be taken to deal with global warming. "He's been influenced by one or two activists in the scientific community, and he only listens to them," Singer says. "He doesn't listen to the majority. Not that the majority is always right, but at least he should admit that there is a majority which disagrees with him." The Competitive Enterprise Institute's Smith calls the Gore book "thoughtful" and well written. But he adds that major gaps in the book's discussion of key environmental issues also demonstrates that there are "profound problems" in Gore's overall understanding of the field. Smith-- who previously was an Environmental Protection Agency staffer for five years--says Gore fails to take into account, for example, risks of technological stagnation that may result if companies are inhibited by government regulations from implementing new production methods. "As the scientific community knows well, there are risks of innovation, there are risks of technology, there are risks of processes," he says. "But there are risks of technological stagnation; there are also risks of economic slowdown." With Gore's book, Smith says, "science is just being marshaled to provide evidence for a predetermined political agenda, which is nothing more than extending to the ecological sphere the failed policies of economic central planning." Barton Reppert is a freelance writer based in Gaithersburg, Md.

Researchers, Pro And Con, Cite Gore's Science Acumen

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of