Questions for Hartley-Nagle, Northington and Miller
Tomorrow night at 6 pm, the three Democratic candidates seeking to replace Mike Castle in Congress will appear in studio on WDEL 1150 am to debate the issues.
The host of the debate, Allan Loudell, has asked for your questions of the candidates. So post them in the comments. Thanks.
I will start things off….I want to know about the candidates’ perspectives on Our-Shore Drilling. Do they support drilling off the Delaware coast in any comprehensive Energy plan?
Unfortunately, any off shore drilling is likely to be on the outer continental shelf so it is not likely to be close to the Delaware coast. That is my question, though.
Do you support oil and gas exploration and development off of the outer continental shelf?
Do you believe any modifications need to be made to No Child Left Behind, if so what are they and if not why not?
One of the biggest problems we have is the declining value of the dollar. We see it in commodity prices. What will you do to control entitlement spending and the national debt?
Do you favor a comprehensive ban on human cloning?
Scientists and Engineers for America created a list of 7 questions focused on science and technology policy that I think legislators (at all levels) really need to provide some thinking on:
1. Innovation. Science and technology have been responsible for half of the growth of the American economy since World War II. But several recent reports question America’s continued leadership in these vital areas. What policies would you support to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation?
2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change—a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, and research? Are there other policies you would support?
3. Energy. Many scientists and policymakers say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet the demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future?
4. Education. A comparison of 15-year-olds in 30 wealthy nations found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 17th, while average U.S. math scores ranked 24th. What role do you think the federal government should play in preparing K-12 students for the science and technology driven 21st Century?
5. Water. Thirty-nine states expect some level of water shortage over the next decade, and scientific studies suggest that a majority of our water resources are at risk. What policies would you support to meet demand for water resources?
6. Research. For many years, Congress has recognized the importance of science and engineering research to realizing our national goals. Given that the next Congress will likely face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in basic research in upcoming budgets?
7. Health. Americans are increasingly concerned with the cost, quality, and availability of health care. How do you see science, research, and technology contributing to improved health and quality of life?
Do you believe that massive central planning can make for a more prosperous nation? If so, where has it worked?
Ugh, say what you mean and mean what you say, Art. “Central planning?” Come on, dude. Just say it: “Socialism!” “Communism!” Oh, mommy I’m scared!
—-
Global warming is threatening our coasts and our communities here in Delaware. Do you support a science-based cap and trade policy to reduce global warming pollution by the levels necessary to avoid catastrophic global warming?
Global warming poses a serious threat to Delaware. Do you support a science-based cap and trade policy to limit global warming polution and prevent catastrophic global warming?
What actually happened at Common Cause?
I was entirely kidding with that last post.
Art Downs is pissing his pants because anything other than shoving money at corporations a la Mike Castle and Tom Carper is Communism.
Art Downs should be watching the current Olympics for an answer to his question.
LOL. The irony was hiding in plain sight.
“Central Planning” and government subsidies for “research” tend to be counterproductive.
While there has been a lot of benefit from R&D associated with military and space programs, many “research” programs are pure pork and often outright fraud.
Representative Kanjorski (D) has certainly enriched his family with such a scheme.
Just who are the Scientists and Engineers for America?
How many are into ‘hard’ science and how many are mere ‘social scientists’ where opinions are more meaningful that the scientific method?
Does a ‘non-artisan’ claim hide an undeniable leftward political bias? How many of the members of the group held sinecures in the Clinton Administration?
The same holds true for the Federation of American Scientists, another front for curve-fitters with credentials (and agendas).
How many remember a Clinton-appointed Director of Central Intelligence who had been an “Institute Professor” at MIT. His gross disregard of basic security got him the boot and he ducked prosecution on the basis of one of those last minute pardons. Anyone know his name or the duties of an “Institute Professor”?
Art, if you were looking at the SEA website (and why would you, when you can just make shit up), you would have seen:
Scientists and Engineers for America (SEA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, educational organization exempt from taxation under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Our mission is to facilitate evidence-based decision making at all levels of government. Our programs include both a short-term focus on the 2008 national elections – through the SHARP Network – and a long-term focus on building a more engaged and politically active scientific community – through SEA Chapters and the Campaign Education and Training program.
They are made up of a number of the premier engineering and science professional organizations like the National Academy of Sciences, AEG, ASCE and a bunch of others decidedly in the “hard” engineering and science business.
selander // Aug 11, 2008 at 10:23 pm
What actually happened at Common Cause?
*
Brian Selander, I am calling you out right now as a nasty shill for the PDDer clique that ruined Common Cause.
Do you want an answer to that question, Bri, or are you just playing with yourself here.
How do you feel about the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban? Would you have voted for or against it?
Wow, Nancy, he did say he was kidding in the very next post.
Just add a question, already.
I didn’t see the #12 retort before I wrote that comment.
And probably just as well since it was not-so-funny and deserved a calling out.
Cassandra, you have put the science debate questions in which takes care of most of my concerns for the debate. Thanks.
How old is the planet earth is my question for Loudell!!!
Why DBB? Is there a law proposed to change the age? We don’t even know exactly what that age is. One thing for sure, it is not even close to infinite and therefore demands an intelligent designer. There is no other known mechanism for this system to be so fine tuned in less than 10 billion years.
Of course Congress can’t pass a law to change that either.
There is no other known mechanism for this system to be so fine tuned in less than 10 billion years.
Yes we do and the presumed age figure is more like 4, 4.5 billion.
And perhaps a great question to the candidates would be would you oppose using public funds to teach Intelligent Design as science?
Nancy – I am calling you out for the funniest post of this thread. Well done!
selander — can you email me at firststatepolitics at gmail.com?
I’d like to send out a big “go fuck yourself” On behalf of myself and the other “mere social scientists” who despite all we do to ensure the validity of our studies still have numbskulls like Art Downs claiming that we think “opinions are more meaningful than the scientific method.” Morons like yourself who make broad dismissals of our work without actually reading or understanding it are a large part of why it’s so hard for us to make real progress.
By the way, don’t get me started about how “the scientific method” as you’re probably thinking of it from your high school textbook doesn’t really exist. I’ve got both a “hard science” degree and a “mere social science” degree so I’ve seen both sides of the coin.
While I’m at it – intelligent design is bullshit and if you buy into it then I’m sorry. That pretty much sums up all that needs to be said there.
/rant
Art Downs sure has a knack for pissing people off with his cavalier stupidity.
I think Johnny X just took Art to school — you go!
Sorry if I get a bit peeved when I’ve been working my ass off on a conference proposal for the past couple weeks and some nitwit comes out with “mere social scientists” and the BS about “the scientific method” (oh how I cringe every time I type that expression).
You are doing fine, JohnnyX — we are just delighted when these folks get chased back to their caves.
Cassandra, be careful about calling them cave dwellers – it will only reinforce their crazy belief that cave men were the exact same species as modern humans and that they hung out in their caves in order to hide from the dinosaurs!
Flintstones, meet the Flintstones, they’re the evolution deniers’ fantasy. Livin’ with the dinosaurs, why they all looked just like you and me…
I was hoping Ludell would ask the question of the day. What is your opinion on Russia vs Georgia?
If anyone bothers to check the Democrats are now calling for “some drilling off the coasts”!
I am personally opposed to any drilling off the coasts, these oil companies have millions of acres they could have already been drilling in.
I find it rather amusing that some of the angriest posts come from folks who hide behind an alias.