What's with the China bashing? We all believe in what we are used to. That simple.
The author, as many commenters stated, does not define his article correctly? To say America does not elect scientists assumes that the US has many scientists who are rejected at the polls. A better question...Why don't more scientists run for office.
First, an engineer or scientist in Germany is not the same as an engineer/scientist in the US. The Bachelors degree (4 years of college), from what I hear, is almost non-existent in Germany where a Diploma is standard.
Science is not Enough to Affect Change
The author does not state what problems scientists could solve. And science is not everything. No policy can be implemented without the people's support. Example, South African scientist Ivor van Heerden being told "Americans don't live in tents" by US Army Corps of Engineers when discussing ways to house citizens after a Hurricane, pre-Hurricane Katrina.
transcript
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9178501/ns/nightly_news-nbc_news...
Many engineers and scientists in the US are immigrants. Herbert Hoover's, the only engineer/scientist president, parents or grandparents came from Germany. Their original name was Huber. Hoover's technocrats were discredited after the 1929 stock market crash.
From my knowledge and little experience in advocacy, politics is ahem ...politics. Your successes are more about knowing and coercing the right people, not really if the numbers add up. For instance, defunding a program to balance the budget, might cost you and your party their hold on power.
Look how many scientists and doctors were researching HIV/AIDS. Their effect was miniscule. The major investments did not come from scientist advocates. The investments into HIV/AIDS came largely because Gay and Lesbian activists (e.g. ACT-UP) pressured and coerced the pharmaceutical industry. The most infamous act being the real 1987 occupation and shutdown of Wall-Street which resulted in real concessions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_Coalition_to_Unleash_Power
This is how politics changes, by dedicated action.
As for Singapore, Singapore was ruled by Lee Kuan Yew (sp?) for about 36 years (1970-1990s) so it should not be compared to democratically elected governments,
Science has to be Accepted by the Population
As for climate change due to pollution. Politicians can't single handedly change the climate, only a curtailing of the excessive consumption patterns of the public can do that. I think it's silly to point at "anti-intellectuals" as the source of climate change when 50% of the nation turns the air condition to 20C/68F when it is 30C/88F in the summer time. The air-condition being the most energy expensive item in the household.
http://205.254.135.7/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electric...
Electricity use and hence pollution is more affected by climate and price in the US as opposed to politics.
US Electricity Use vs. price and climate (grouped by color)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60012884@N00/4921667405/in/phot...