Please share your opinions too!

I could not find much on any of their science policies yet. Can anyone else find links to their proposals for the research community if any?

Here is a little article on Obama from October - very brief mention of the need to increase basic research funding through elimination of tax cuts to the oil companies

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/22/news/letter23.php

Here is Hilary Clinton's policy page

http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/

Specifically her statement on Medical Research Funding

We live in a time of extraordinary and historic opportunity in medical research, and we need to lend support to research institutions, hospitals and education systems so they can forge a path to revolutionary treatments, disease management and, hopefully, cures. As an advocate for healthcare progress, I have long been a strong supporter of efforts to increase the budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). I supported efforts to double the budget of the NIH, and I believe that we must ensure that the NIH has adequate resources to engage in research.

REF: http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/health/index.cfm?topic=research

Obama's statement on Genomics

Genomics

Genomics is the study of how a person's genetic makeup affects propensity for disease and response to treatment. Research in this area has the potential to predict which people will get sick, diagnose illnesses earlier, and screen patients to determine which drugs will be safe and effective. In August 2006, Senator Obama introduced the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2006 (S. 3822), which would increase funding for research on genomics, expand the genomics workforce, provide a tax credit for the development of diagnostic tests that can improve the safety or effectiveness of drugs, and reaffirm the need to protect genetic privacy.

REF:http://obama.senate.gov/issues/health_care/index.html

MCCAIN STATEMENT ON STEM CELL RESEARCH

Washington D.C. -- Today, Senator McCain (R-AZ) submitted the following statement for the Congressional record on the issue of stem cell research:

Mr. President, I will vote in support of all three bills under consideration today, which together provide a framework for addressing the issue of stem cell research. This research holds the potential to unlock cures that could defeat deadly diseases and relieve tremendous human suffering. At the same time, one type of stem cell research, involving embryonic stem cells, has also raised serious ethical and moral concerns, both inside and outside the medical community. I believe the framework provided by the three bills before us today offers a way forward.

S.2754 offers increased federal funding and support for adult stem cell research and other types of stem cell research that do not involve the use of human embryos. Scientists believe this research holds tremendous potential, and I share their hope. Countless numbers are affected by the many diseases that this type of research may offer future cures.

In promoting stem cell research, one of the lines that must not be crossed is the intentional creation of human embryos for purposes of research rather than reproduction. A second bill before us, S.3504, draws a line that says we in the United States will not abandon our values in pursuit of scientific progress. This bill bans the practice of what has been referred to as "fetal farming." It makes it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo that was created for research purposes. This bill also makes it a federal crime to attempt to use or obtain cells from a human fetus that was gestated in the uterus of a non-human animal. These provisions close important gaps in our existing laws, and I urge my fellow Senators to join me in supporting this bill.
It is important that we act now to address these issues, because research involving embryonic stem cells is also proceeding outside the United States. Unfortunately, the intense focus on ethical and moral concerns that has driven the debate in America, as reflected in the President's Commission on Bioethics, is not always present in private industry and the scientific community in other parts of the world. I am concerned about the path that some of this unregulated research leads us down. Of particular concern is the potential for experimentation into human cloning. Our involvement through this legislation is another protection against sanctioning such practice within our own borders.

I am concerned that ongoing research elsewhere may result in the routine acceptance of deeply troubling practices, in particular the intentional creation of human embryos for purposes of research rather than reproduction.

However, it doesn't have to be this way. The United States offers a climate for scientific and medical research, because of the quality of our educational institutions, the strength of our economy, and the scope of our comprehensive legal and regulatory system for protection of intellectual property rights. The final bill before us, H.R. 810, will allow us to attract scientists to perform highly regulated embryonic stem cell research that will otherwise take place in an unregulated environment somewhere else. This bill authorizes federal support for embryonic stem cell research, but limits that support to scientists who use embryos originally created for reproductive purposes, and now frozen or slated for destruction by in vitro fertilization clinics. H.R. 810 requires that prior to even considering whether to donate unused embryos for research, the patient who is the source of the embryos must be consulted, and a determination must be made that these embryos would otherwise be discarded, and would never be implanted in the patient or another woman. This provision ensures that patients with excess embryos will first consider the possibility of embryo adoption, and only if this option is rejected, will the patient then be consulted concerning the possibility of embryo donation. A patient donating embryos that would otherwise remain frozen or be destroyed must give written informed consent, and H.R. 810 makes it illegal for anyone to offer any sort of financial or other inducement in exchange for this consent.
All of these carefully drawn rules contained in H.R. 810 do not exist in the status quo, and this sort of embryonic stem cell research remains largely unregulated in the private sector and in many parts of the scientific community overseas. Federal oversight that will come with approving this bill will allow us to ensure that this research does not expand into ethically objectionable ground in balancing the promise on the foreseeable horizon of stem cell research with the protection of human life. It should be clearly noted that this type of research will proceed with or without federal approval, so I believe that it is best carried out under strict federal guidelines and oversight. It is my hope that by offering limited federal support in the context of the framework provided by the three bills before us today, we can realize the benefits of stem cell research while also drawing clear lines that reflect our refusal to sacrifice our ethical and moral values for the sake of scientific progress.



REF: http://mccain.senate.gov/press_office/view_article.cfm?id=108

Barak Obama

http://obama.senate.gov/

Hilary Clinton

http://clinton.senate.gov/

Rudolph Giuliani

http://joinrudy2008.com/


John McCain

http://www.exploremccain.com/?sid=google

http://mccain.senate.gov/

Thanks for all the great links frasermoss!

Update on Hillary - She has declared she is in

here is her web site

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/

here is her video

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/video/?sc=8

And here is an update on Obama

http://www.barackobama.com/?gclid=CLfR59LQ9IkCFR8eYQodjxALHQ

video message

http://www.barackobama.com/video/

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson jumped into the race this weekend too.

http://www.americaforrichardson.org/

And dont forget John Edwards

http://johnedwards.com/

frasermoss:

Would you like to post an opinion on which candidate you are backing and why? I really think that we need a candidate who is not afraid to fund science as they were in the Clinton years. I think Hilliary would restore that, especially with the Dems controlling both the Senate and the House, but I'm not quite convinced that this country is ready to elect a woman president.

Do you think Obama would be a strong candidate for science? Unfortunately, his name is going to be an issue in light of the war in Iraq. His middle name is actually Hussein. As ridicules as that may sound, it is an unfortunate reality in the world of US politics.

Thanks again for all the links.

The question I ask myself: Is America (in a first stage the Democrats) more likely to elect a woman or an African-American?

If you look at TV series, Obama is more likely to be elected. Why?
Dennis Haysbert has been 'president of the US' for several seasons in "24" now, whereas Geena Davis only made it one or two "terms" in "Commander in Chief"
:-)

Despite the TV history I think America would choose a woman first (although I may be a bit biased).

Its funny we all talk about how the funding situatuation is so bleak under the Bush administrations, however the US still funds 28.6 billion dollars for research (more than all other countries combined). There was an interesting article in Nature in 26/08/06 issue that details how universities may have created the current funding vaccum by expecting further research budget increases and building much larger science departments to get that money, thereby hiring too many researchers/graduate students etc for the money that is available. Be careful what we wish for. (Of course I wish for more funding too!)

I look forward to the candidates and congresspeoples science statements in the near future. Given her husbands track record it will not surprise me if Hilary is the best for science.


Rb