|
|
Get Four
|  | OCTOBER 4, 2004
By Bruce Nussbaum Innovation President: Bush or Kerry? [Page 2 of 2] PUSHING FRONTIERS. Now for the third measure of who would best stimulate innovation investment. And it's one President Bush scores well on. The federal government's contributions for basic research, adjusted for inflation, have risen at 6.8% annually since 1997. (Clinton was generous as well.) Bush has poured many billions into the National Institutes of Health, supported R&D in hydrogen-based fuel-cell technology for cars and trucks, and pushed to free more spectrum for private use. Bush's increase in the military budget also helps push the frontiers of innovation through both basic research and new weapons, such as airborne drones. His No Child Left Behind educational program may be underfunded -- and it's certainly controversial -- but any effort to boost K-12 education is crucial for the next generation of innovators. Unfortunately, since 9/11, the government has shifted priorities to focus on homeland security and defense. Federal spending on basic research has flattened out, a trend that if it continues, doesn't portend well for the future. HUMAN CAPITAL. The most worrisome factor, however, is not money but people. Since 9/11, it has become very hard for foreign students and scientists to get visas to study and work in the U.S. The system is just too overloaded to process applications efficiently and weed out potential terrorists. Lately, some improvements have occurred, but more money must be spent on foreign-language-speaking staff in U.S. embassies overseas to interview students and scientists and allow in the 99% of them who should be able enter the country. The U.S. desperately needs them for innovation. Many scientists are also upset at the Bush Administration's limitations on stem-cell research funding. That could become a problem if more bioscience becomes involved in politics. WEAK ON SPECIFICS. John Kerry is all for more government spending on R&D. He's especially interested in expanding broadband to all households to make it universal (the U.S. ranks 10th in the world in high-speed Net access, way behind South Korea). Kerry favors setting up Manufacturing Business Investment Corporations (MANBICs -- not the most felicitous moniker) that would help provide incentives for venture capitalists to finance manufacturing startups using new technologies. Kerry also would boost spending on DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which has been very good at generating new technologies that move into the private sector. He wants a tax credit of up to $4,000 to make four years of college universally accessible. And more money to increase math and science education in K-12 classes. Kerry scores on specifics. But again, neither candidate discusses how to pay for all these initiatives. So to me, it looks like a wash. On investing in innovation, the debate would probably show a tie for both candidates. Unlike the foreign policy showdown, where polls show Kerry as the winner in the eyes of most voters who watched it on TV, the results of this one would be much closer based on the merits. Slight advantage: Bush, although both candidates love innovation. That's not bad for America.
 Nussbaum is chief editorial writer for BusinessWeek
BW MALL
SPONSORED LINKS
Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.
Buy a link now! Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed. Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video. To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here. Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page  | | |
 Copyright 2004, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of Use | Privacy Notice |
Printer-Friendly Version
