Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Industry Execs Meet with Cheney to Promote Research Agenda
EE Times ^ | 12/16/2005 | Mark LaPedus, George Leopold

Posted on 12/16/2005 1:08:43 PM PST by nickcarraway

WASHINGTON — U.S. high-tech industry executives met earlier this week with Vice President Dick Cheney to lobby for more U.S. support for basic science research, sources said Friday (Dec. 16).

The meeting came as two U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation this week designed to boost U.S. innovation. The National Innovation Act of 2005 introduced Wednesday by Sens. John Ensign (R-Nev.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) seeks to increase investment in basic research, improve science and technology talent and develop a robust innovation infrastructure.

The proposal would also create a President's Council on Innovation to "develop a comprehensive agenda to promote innovation in the public and private sectors," according to Lieberman's office.

Details of the meeting between Cheney and executives from the U.S. semiconductor and other high-tech industries were not known. However, industry sources said the meeting with Cheney illustrates how the threat to U.S. competitiveness will be a key issue in next year's budget battles.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: 109th; business; cheney; economy; government; hightech; liberalscientists; lieberman; research; science; technology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 12/16/2005 1:08:45 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Who is stopping researchers from researching? Oh, nobody is. They just want the government to give them money.


2 posted on 12/16/2005 1:13:17 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

Here comes another senate investiagtion.


3 posted on 12/16/2005 1:20:27 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (Liberal Talking Point - Bush = Hitler ... Republican Talking Point - Let the Liberals Talk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
They just want the government to give them money.

What would you propose...no basic scientific research?

4 posted on 12/16/2005 1:55:36 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
What would you propose...no basic scientific research?

Huh? You think research only occurs if the government sponsors it? Which grant's did Ben Franklin and Thomas Edison get from the government?

5 posted on 12/16/2005 1:57:43 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

There's no way basic science research could be done for free in today's high-tech world. Now what do propose?


6 posted on 12/16/2005 1:59:48 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
There's no way basic science research could be done for free in today's high-tech world. Now what do propose?

I propose that your premise is absurd on its face, as witnessed by all the reasearch done at Intel, the biotech's, etc. And besides, what Edison did was just as difficult for his time as the challenges for today are for our time.

7 posted on 12/16/2005 2:08:54 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

According to you, we should stop subsidizing science so only those who can generate income from their discoveries, like Edison, can continue. The problem is that kind of short-sighted thinking will eliminate our entire basic research program. Do you know the difference between basic research and applied research? Hint: Edison did not do basic research. Basic research does not generate "inventions" or products that can be sold for profit.


8 posted on 12/16/2005 2:30:04 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Its another "shakedown" to increase the number of H1B visas.


9 posted on 12/16/2005 2:31:12 PM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
We should stop subsidizing science because socialism is ruining science. There can be no innovation when everyone is on the same page and refuses to deviate for fear of losing funding.

Eisenhower warned of this and Tom Bethell writes of it convincingly.
10 posted on 12/16/2005 2:37:05 PM PST by IRememberElian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IRememberElian

I'm glad you're not running the country. If the government's subisidization of science is socialism, then so is the US military. And the results of eliminating basic science research (which must be subisidized since it does not make new products) would be as disasterous as eliminating our military.


11 posted on 12/16/2005 2:43:55 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

That's what I was think too.


12 posted on 12/16/2005 2:45:18 PM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

How about we just make it so tech companies don't get sued into oblivion if their vaccine makes someone sick or they infringe on some obscure patent only tangently related to what they are doing.


13 posted on 12/16/2005 2:48:54 PM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IRememberElian
...everyone is on the same page and refuses to deviate for fear of losing funding.

I take it you're not involved in science as a profession, because this assertion is a gross exaggeration of the situation in science and, while you might find a few disgruntled scientists who claim this, it is not reality.

14 posted on 12/16/2005 2:50:16 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

The article is about basic research. Basic research doesn't make vaccines or any other product. There's no liability in basic research...it merely produces knowledge.


15 posted on 12/16/2005 2:53:53 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
If someone at NIH found that say .... smoking is good for you, do you think he would have a career?

That's why everything is now caused by a virus or genetics. That's what sells.
16 posted on 12/16/2005 3:11:02 PM PST by IRememberElian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

Intel, the Biotech's and other private technology-based companies do two kinds of 'research': applied research and development. They do applied research only when it can be expected to lead pretty directly to development.

As far as Thomas Edison and other 'scientists' are concerned, much if not all of what was done up until the last 50 years was at most applied research and mostly what would be called development today. Inventions are development, which in no way diminishes the brilliance of the inventor. And the difference between R&D then and now is not a matter of difficulty, it's a matter of cost. Most R&D, including engineering and biotech research, is vastly more costly than it would have been in Edison's time.

There is definitely a place for American technical brilliance in industry. But it's imperative to maintain our dominance in scientific academia, as well.


17 posted on 12/16/2005 3:13:02 PM PST by JustaCowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
Intel doesn't do ANY research... as a matter of corporate policy established at the founding of the company. It doesn't make sense to pay for research when you can buy what you need at below market rates... because of the massive subsidies from government, and because our intellectual property market functions have long been broken through a combination of neglect and the accumulated impact of too many lawyers over too much time.

If you want to re-energize innovation, all you need to do for a quick start... is fix what's broken with the patent system. That doesn't mean "conforming" to consensus opinion on international norms, either... it means structuring systems that encourage innovation because they can readily identify it, and because they enable that recognition rather than create obstacles to recognition.

Beyond that basic function, as long as a patent provides only a "right to sue" rather than some more basic legal property protection... so that patent infringement is a criminal offense of trespass pursued by the state, like breaking and entering, rather than a "civil" matter which pits individuals against the lawyers and $ of international conglomerates in legal battles... we'll get more of what we've got... which is a system which prevents recognition of accomplishment outside the corporate controlled market scheme that the patent office has become.

Microsoft would not survive in a world where theft of others ideas was considered serious... but it is that lack of serious concern for non-corporate IP use and ownership rights that is the problem.
18 posted on 12/16/2005 3:13:37 PM PST by Sense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: IRememberElian

If you're saying science is politicized, you're right. It's especially but not exclusively true of the health and social sciences.

It would be far better if more scientists were more open-minded about science issues. It would also be far better if more nonscientists were more open-minded about nonscience issues.


19 posted on 12/16/2005 3:18:34 PM PST by JustaCowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: IRememberElian
If someone at NIH found that say .... smoking is good for you, do you think he would have a career?

IF he had good data and evidence to back up his point, then he would still have a career. Case in point:

I did research that demonstrated that prenatal alcohol was disruptive to both fetal and maternal endocrine systems. It was funded by the National Distlled Spirits Council.

20 posted on 12/16/2005 3:22:41 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson