Concerns Over Economic Competitiveness Will Test the Next President

Related materials

Blog: Read Campaign U., our blog about the 2008 race.

Articles:

• Urgent Calls for Higher-Education Reforms Face 2008 Presidential Contenders

• With College Costs on Voters' Minds, Democrats Call for More Student Aid

• Candidates Grapple With How to Expand Access to College

Article tools

Printer friendly	E-mail article	Subscribe	Order reprints
	Discuss any Chronicle article in our forums
Latest Headlines U. of Delaware Approves New Diversity Discussions for Students The new, voluntary program will replace one tossed out last fall after coming under criticism as "thought reform." In Tight Employment Market, Career Services Gain Clout Borrowers' Uncertainty Has Colleges in Quandary How It Does It: The RIAA Explains How It Catches Alleged Music Pirates State High-School Exit Tests Do Not Improve Academic Achievement, Study Finds Commentary Business Students Should Learn More About Science

By KARIN FISCHER

Fifteen years ago, advisers to the presidential candidate Bill Clinton kept reminding campaign staff members of a central issue facing the country and his campaign: "It's the economy, stupid."

Economic concerns are again likely to be key in 2008. But this time around, the potential campaign promises aimed at maintaining the U.S. economy, such as increasing federal spending on basic research and enhancing mathematics and science education, are hard to fit on a bumper sticker or condense into a sound bite.

Higher-education officials and political observers say that whoever takes office in January 2009 will play an important role in setting the federal agenda for research and science education.

"The next president will be hit between the eyes by the full force of global competition and the realization that 21st-century jobs will follow knowledge, innovation, and expertise wherever it is found in the world," says Charles M. Vest, president of the National Academy of Engineering. "He or she will have to follow Thomas Paine's advice, 'Lead, follow, or get out of the way.'"

Mr. Vest, a former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, helped write an influential report from the National Academies in October 2005 warning that the United States would soon face an acute shortage of scientists and engineers, which could undermine the country's global lead in trade and jeopardize its ability to compete.

The report helped galvanize policy makers in Washington. Last month President Bush signed legislation that will put in place, at least in part, several of the academies' major recommendations, including significantly increasing federal spending on physical-science research and intensifying efforts to train more science teachers.

Beyond the Base Line

Supporters call the new law an important first step and say the United States cannot afford to stand still. The legislation "lays down a base line," says Debra van Opstal, senior vice president for programs and policy at the Council on Competitiveness, a nonprofit group made up of corporate chief executives, university presidents, and labor leaders. She and others say the next president must tackle the United States' relatively flat rate of production of scientists and engineers, as well as deal with the paucity of minority students and women who earn degrees in those fields.

The federal government, along with states and universities, must also do more to ensure that students at all levels are acquiring the right sets of skills, says Ms. van Opstal. Greater accountability was a key finding of the secretary of education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education. In the year since its report was issued, several higher-education associations have drafted voluntary plans to help members of the public better measure college performance.

Some efforts the president will be able to handle directly, such as increasing federal spending on academic research.

But finding the money to do so may be a challenge. Supporters note that the $10-billion called for by the National Academies report is just a small fraction of the money the federal government spends on other issues, not least the war in Iraq. "It's not about the money," says C.D. Mote Jr., president of the University of Maryland at College Park. "It's more about will."

The spending efforts will also face competing priorities. In fact, while the recently passed legislation puts the budgets of the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy's Office of Science on track to double over seven years, it does not actually provide the money to do so.

Other suggestions call for the president to form alliances with states and colleges. For example, the president would have to work with states and school districts to improve science and mathematics skills among public-school students, perhaps by promoting pilot programs or offering financial incentives, Mr. Mote says. The federal government could also do more to encourage colleges to work with the private sector on issues like job training and economic transformation.

"The presidency can be a true bully pulpit," says Charles Miller, who led the higher-education commission.

Research and Teachers

So far those issues have not made it to prime time in the presidential campaign, says Mr. Vest. A few of the candidates, however, have put forward some ideas.

On the Republican side, Rudolph W. Giuliani, a former mayor of New York City, has proposed increasing the number of visas available to foreign graduates of American colleges and to other skilled workers who are qualified for jobs in key industries. Sen. John McCain, of Arizona, said he would protect economic competitiveness by shielding intellectual property and retraining displaced workers. His proposals, though, have rarely touched on higher education.

Democrats, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Edwards, and Bill Richardson, have called for increasing federal spending on research and development.

Mr. Richardson, governor of New Mexico, has proposed hiring 100,000 new math and science teachers and working with colleges and businesses to build 250 "math, science, and innovation academies" throughout the country.

Ms. Clinton, a U.S. senator from New York, released a white paper on research and competitiveness in May. Among her ideas: tripling the number of graduate fellowships offered by the National Science Foundation and providing federal support to college programs that encourage women and minorities to earn degrees in math, science, and engineering.

While discussion of those issues has been mostly nonpartisan — the recent legislation passed both houses of Congress overwhelmingly — one area may prove divisive: stem-cell research.

Support for lifting limits on federal financing for research on human embryonic stem cells generally follows party lines: Democrats for, Republicans against.

Mr. Mote says the differences on that one issue could potentially polarize broader debates on research. "We have to be careful not to push people into corners," he says.