The Political Science of Small-Government Science
If they had proper regard for science, politicians in both parties would fight harder against the devastating cuts to federal research that have happened under sequestration, endangering medical progress and jeopardizing our global leadership. And lawmakers trying to prove their fiscal prudence wouldn’t irresponsibly smear all scientific inquiry by cherry-picking and theatrically denouncing the most arcane, seemingly frivolous studies the government has funded.
— Republicans, Meet Science, Frank Bruni, New York Times, today
It should be noted that Gary Peters, the Michigan congressman who easily won the open Senate seat of the retiring Carl Levin, discussed climate change at length in his campaign.
And as I said in my earlier post today: When Republicans use the mantra of incompetent big government, ask them whether they are suggesting we try fighting Ebola with small government.
It hasn’t worked out that well in Liberia or Sierra Leone. But this is America! So maybe it will work out well here.
When they say small government, they mean government that does not help people, only government that helps big business and big money.
Is it not Texas that has been run on the principle of small government that had to export its’ Ebola problem to another state for reliable treatment?