Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 676 posts

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#101

Post by khriss »

soerxpso wrote: post #88
pstuart wrote: post #4

I'm curious to see how this is defended by the party members here. Science should be guided by science, not ideology.

"Science" can do as much science as it wants on its own dime then. Public funding should be guided by public oversight, not career bureaucrats.

> Public funding should be guided by public oversight, not career bureaucrats.

Isn't congress the elected, public oversight body? Or are you proposing that each and every employee of the federal govt be elected to prevent the horror of the 'career bureaucrat'?

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#103

Post by stouset »

thisisit wrote: post #94

It seems seeding chaos is the only thing these guys know how to do. What happens (or happened) when the shoe is on the other foot and the other guy wants to push climate science and vaccines? Run to Texas courts to stop the federal government? Thereby wasting lot of time doing nothing. I can only say Bravo to Americans who think this constant fighting is somehow going to help the country.

I think we all need to be honest with ourselves about the fact that they are very clearly not intending to ever allow the shoe to be on the other foot.

The upcoming midterms are very plausibly the last free and fair elections we will ever have in this country. As deeply unpopular as this administration is right now, the Democrats will need an enormous amount of luck for the size of historic landslide it will require to take the house and senate, and even then they need to do so by enough that they can impeach and convict.

That is just about the only plausible path towards preserving democracy at this point. And I’m not really holding out hope.

I’d be happy to be told that I’m wrong. So please, tell me I’m wrong.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#104

Post by KingMob »

soerxpso wrote: post #88
pstuart wrote: post #4

I'm curious to see how this is defended by the party members here. Science should be guided by science, not ideology.

"Science" can do as much science as it wants on its own dime then. Public funding should be guided by public oversight, not career bureaucrats.

Unless you're advocating for mass direct democracy, with public votes on everything under the sun, a certain level of delegation is inescapable at scale.

You say "career bureaucrats" as if they can't be fired or controlled, but that's obviously wrong (since they're being fired and/or controlled right now).

QED, they ARE still under public oversight. (1) Voters vote for (2) elected officials who oversee (3) agency bureaucrats.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#105

Post by nomilk »

This means research projects will be optimised for political boasting.

Sounds terrible, but is it? It incentivises high-impact research (otherwise politicians can't boast about it), and less research into trivialities that common sense says aren't worth the public funding.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#108

Post by insane_dreamer »

rayiner wrote: post #82
spacedoutman wrote: post #66

Well, america had a good run i guess? Hope china can step up and fill the gap.

[flagged]

And the USSR experienced tremendous economic and technological progress under Stalin, propelling it to an industrial and military superpower second only to the US.

Similarly, Germany experienced great economic growth under the Third Reich.

To each his own, I guess, but personally I'll take a less corrupt and more equitable country over a wealthy and powerful one any day.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#109

Post by digitaltrees »

After all the work to build a meritocracy and professional non political expert bureaucracy… in only a year they have reintroduced the spoils system. Politicians will now be given budgets to reward supporters with the financial spoils of their power. So gross

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#110

Post by kelnos »

nomilk wrote: post #105

This means research projects will be optimised for political boasting. Sounds terrible, but is it? It incentivises high-impact research (otherwise politicians can't boast about it), and less research into trivialities that common sense says aren't worth the public funding.

It means research projects will also be optimized for political ideology. That's not good.
Post reply on HN