• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

More trump corrupt destruction: illegal presidential political control of all science grants

Craig234

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
58,958
Reaction score
30,043
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Remember how the Soviet Union had a 'political officer' placed in all kinds of institutions, to be able to monitor and control the activities to ensure they were politically aligned? trump wants to do that, but IMO worse, having his political appointees control every dollar of science grants, demanding the power to be able to cancel them any time. Scientists of course point out the huge harm this will do.

Trump executive order gives politicians control over all federal grants, alarming researchers

An executive order signed by President Donald Trump aims to give political appointees power over the billions of dollars of grants that are awarded by federal agencies.
apnews.com
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if this is a case where MAGA is evil or treason. Maybe both, hard to tell.
 
So we are complaining that elected and politically accountable folks have control over how tax dollars are spent?

I thought progressives supported democracy?
 
Athanasius68 said:
So we are complaining that elected and politically accountable folks have control over how tax dollars are spent?

I thought progressives supported democracy?
Click to expand...
Yes, we are complaining. Politicians in a democracy should not be involved in quashing scientific enquiry.
 
The far right demonstrates through its actions and inactions that it is anti-science.
 
Athanasius68 said:
So we are complaining that elected and politically accountable folks have control over how tax dollars are spent?

I thought progressives supported democracy?
Click to expand...
I support science! Science is something which should be supported more, not less.
 
ataraxia said:
Yes, we are complaining. Politicians in a democracy should not be involved in quashing scientific enquiry.
Click to expand...

Nobody is quashing scientific inquiry.
Elected officials are deciding what to spend money upon.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Nobody is quashing scientific inquiry.
Elected officials are deciding what to spend money upon.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that Congress was responsible for spending. Apparently I was mistaken. I guess the way it works now is each year Congress hands over a bucket of money to the president and he gets to do whatever the **** he wants with it.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
I was under the impression that Congress was responsible for spending. Apparently I was mistaken. I guess the way it works now is each year Congress hands over a bucket of money to the president and he gets to do whatever the **** he wants with it.
Click to expand...
Trump is usurping the powers of the legislative and judicial branches.
And the right-wing approves. Rightists just love them a big, strong Daddy.
 
Grand Mal said:
Rightists just love them a big, strong Daddy.
Click to expand...
I think there is a lot of personal insecurity and fear. That's why they need things like a big strong daddy figure to crush their perceived enemies, and their big guns just to go to the mall.
 
ataraxia said:
I think there is a lot of personal insecurity and fear. That's why they need things like a big strong daddy figure to crush their perceived enemies, and their big guns just to go to the mall.
Click to expand...
I've actually seen Trump called 'Big Daddy' here.
And don't get me started about grown men demanding the right to carry a handgun for protection but denying a far more vulnerable 14 year old girl the same right.
 
Grand Mal said:
Refusing funding for political reasons doesn't alarm you?

From the first sentence in the report...
"...give political appointees power over the billions of dollars in grants..."
Click to expand...

Political appointees were named by elected officials.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
I was under the impression that Congress was responsible for spending. Apparently I was mistaken. I guess the way it works now is each year Congress hands over a bucket of money to the president and he gets to do whatever the **** he wants with it.
Click to expand...

That is how a lot of the spending is appropriated by Congress.
The spending has to be along that which Congress specified (eg can't use money for scientific research to upgrade bathrooms in national parks).
But yes, unless Congress specifically allocates for a specific expenditure, then a president has wiggle room.
 

At what point do Congressional Republicans wake up and realize they actually are supposed to be a separate co-equal branch of government? Most of the legislating being done now is by the stroke of one man's pen. We're living in a de facto (for now, soft) dictatorship.
 
ataraxia said:
Yes, we are complaining. Politicians in a democracy should not be involved in quashing scientific enquiry.
Click to expand...
I disagree.
Not spending the public's money on some science grants, 'inquiry', isn't 'squashing it'.

If politicians can't manage which scientific inquiries are funded and which are not, the result is that ALL supposed scientific inquiries MUST be funded, regardless of how ridiculous they are.

And we have already seen such stupid funding decisions.
  • Cardio for mountain lions – University of California-Santa Cruz
  • Bored Monkeys like to gamble – University of Rochester
  • Synchronized swimming sea monkeys – Cal Tech
  • Penn State morale-booster study – Penn State
  • and on and on and on

Athanasius68 said:
Nobody is quashing scientific inquiry.
Elected officials are deciding what to spend money upon.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
This is fundamentally misunderstanding how science works. All those studies can have numerous very helpful real world results. That's called "basic research"- exploration without necessarily an agenda.

Penicillin was discovered while they were just growing fungus on Petri dishes. X-rays were found because someone was playing around with weird metals and accidentally left one in their drawer. That's how science works. Would you have stopped funding to all that nonsense?
 
ataraxia said:
This is fundamentally misunderstanding how science works.
Click to expand...
Not at all.

But you are showing that you believe that the government has infinite financial resources to spend on so called 'scientific research' of questionable value.
The government doesn't.

Someone somewhere is going to have to make the decisions as to what 'scientific research' to fund, and not to fund.

Given that the money in question is the public's money, that would then be publicly elected officials which represent the public.

How do you propose to arbitrage which 'scientific research' should receive public funding and which should not? Funding all of them, isn't an answer.

 
eohrnberger said:
I disagree.
Click to expand...
Of course you do. You think there ought not be any area of society that Republican politicians should not exercise influence on.
Good for you. Nice cherry picking.
Giving elected politicians the right to vet scientific research is just an extension of that low-functioning rightists attitude that 'common sense trumps intelligence'.
The idea that "Hey, maybe someone with scientific knowledge and background should be in charge of vetting research funding!" is rejected by people who are suspicious of higher education.

It's funny. If the politician is from one party then nothing they say has any value but if the politicians are from the other party they're qualified to be in charge of every bloody thing.
 
Grand Mal said:
Of course you do. You think there ought not be any area of society that Republican politicians should not exercise influence on.
Click to expand...
This claim clearly not in what I posted, and is nothing more than you angry and antagonistic commentary.

Grand Mal said:
Good for you. Nice cherry picking.
Click to expand...

Yet more of the same.

Grand Mal said:
It's funny. If the politician is from one party then nothing they say has any value but if the politicians are from the other party they're qualified to be in charge of every bloody thing.
Click to expand...
And still more.

Here's a novel idea for you:
How about actually responding to what was posted?
How about contributing your thoughts to how to arbitrage which research gets funding and which does not?
 
I did that. You just don't hear what I'm saying.
Put people with science education and background in charge. Don't leave it in the hands of politicians, fergawdsakes. It's guaranteed to get ****ed up. That list you posted- who approved funding for all those?
 
Grand Mal said:
I did that.
Click to expand...
Disputable.

Grand Mal said:
You just don't hear what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

Grand Mal said:
Put people with science education and background in charge. Don't leave it in the hands of politicians,
Click to expand...
This a start to a possible proposed alternate way of arbitraging the research funding, but could use a bit more fleshing out.

Grand Mal said:
fergawdsakes. It's guaranteed to get ****ed up. That list you posted- who approved funding for all those?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…