Nixon on science

AMERICA PETER J. SMITH

One of the more interesting, though perhaps inconsequential, developments in the American scientist's love affair with politics over recent years has been the steady growth of semi- formalised scientific support for the presiden- tial aspirant. Kennedy, it will be recalled, was the first postwar President to gain notoriety for his seduction of the academics, including scientists; and during his term of office overt support by the traditionally non-partisan (in public, at least) even attained some sort of respectability. Much, though understandably less, of this ardour was inherited by Johnson; but in the face of the greater danger of 1964 support had become loosely organised in 'Scientists and Engineers for Johnson.' To scien- tists, Au+H20 was a catalytic combination, though not quite in the way that Republicans had hoped.

The precedent having been set, 1968 saw the extension of the group-support principle to scientists and engineers for McCarthy, Humphrey and Nixon, respectively. Senator McCarthy attracted the largest, most impressive (especially Nobel-wise) gang of scientific sup- porters, to be closely followed by Humphrey, whose group made up in vociferousness what it lacked in size, and with Nixon trailing far behind on all counts. Scientists as a class were hardly enamoured of the Nixon candi- dacy. But it is Mr Nixon who has come to office —and he has done so at a time of great despondency among the scientific community, which has little to do with the fact of his elec- tion. For, despite all its successes, American science is feeling the financial pinch as much as the British variety, though for different reasons. Wilbur Mills's insistence on no income tax surcharge without budget cuts coincided with public doubt, on the part of even the most sympathetic and pro-science of congress- men, in the ability of the scientific community to justify increased support from the Federal government. Even allowing for exaggeration among those affected, there is little doubt that academic science is being gravely damaged by the reduced budgets imposed on the National Science Foundation; 1968 was the year the dream faded for scientists, as for others. - Little wonder, then, that since November eyes and ears have been focused closely upon Richard Nixon for that gleam of hope. Not that science has been particularly excluded from Mr Nixon's encyclopaedic reticence. Nor is his record in science such as to give much hope. McCarthy's huge scientific support stemmed far more from his anti-Vietnam stance than from any particular concern for science; Humphrey's from his highly regarded chair- manships of the Space and Marine Science Councils. Nixon rates on neither of these scales. He last held office in the days when Vice-Presidents were far from overemployed, least of all in scientific affairs. The suspicion engendered by his, admittedly incidental, asso- ciation with the security panics of the Eisen- hower era still lingers on. And though never overtly anti-intellectual, Nixon has expended little effort in wooing the academics.

In fact, Mr Nixon's few public pronounce- ments on science have merely tended to enhance a schizophrenic condition long in- herent within the scientific community, although relatively muted until Vietnam. In a nutshell, he has promised increased scientific support but for dubious motives. The theme of his speeches has been fairly consistent in this respect, and is typified by the following ex- ample: 'The American scientific and techno- logical community.' he notes, 'plays a key role

in maintaining our wellbeing and our national security. Science and technology compose a new Atlas that upholds our economic growth, our military defence, our educational system and our bright hopes for the future of man.' (The italics here and below are mine.)

The new President has continually linked the alleged 'gap' in military spending between

the us and the USSR with scientific research

in general. His argument is that the United States has been 'shortchanging' its scientific community, thereby risking the 'opening of a research gap.' The danger, as he sees it. arises from 'possible breakthroughs by the huge

Soviet research and development establishment. . . . [We] can afford to be selective in our weapons only if we are resolute in maintain- ing a comprehensive lead in research and development.' And so on.

To those scientists concerned solely with science as a neutral discipline, and their own future in it, Nixon's attitudes are far from pleasing. It has not escaped notice, for example. that science received its greatest im- petus at the height of the Cold War; and that since the Bay of Pigs emphasis on the Cold War and congressional interest in science have

been decreasing hand in hand. The implication is that the vitality of the scientific estate is closely dependent upon that of the military- industrial complex—a rather unpalatable rela- tionship to the intellectually inclined.

Nor has the odd scientific statement devoid of military overtones been calculated to appeal to the more socially aware. Nixon's main criticism of the Johnson administration's scien- tific record is that it was based on the 'static philosophy that technological potentialities are limited—that we have reached a technological

"plateau." ' In fact, this criticism is invalid— the plateau, which certainly exists, merely re- flects superimposed financial stringency. What

the Johnson administration never fully grasped, and (of greater importance for the future) what Nixon has clearly not perceived at all, is the widespread feeling in favour of a deliberately imposed plateau to allow man to come to terms with the results of technology already in existence. Ironically, this does not imply a cut-back in spending but rather an increase directed towards more socially inspired goals. Thus Nixon has boosted the scientific com- munity's financial expectations while simul- taneously alienating many of its constituent members on moral grounds by his military justification of increased scientific expenditure. By refusing to favour ratification of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty he touched the scientist on one of his most sensitive moral nerves. In reaffirming his intention to ensure that the us leads in space he has run counter to prevailing doubt on the morality of space expenditure for national prestige.

What President Nixon makes of his relations with science and the scientific community over

the next four years only time will tell. At the moment, however, he has succeeded not so much in splitting the scientific community into two camps but rather in splitting the majority of individual scientists right down the middle.