Abstract

Much of what has been written lately about politics and science suggests that the intersection of the two has become far more treacherous because of the actions and attitudes of the Bush administration. The interaction of politics and science is, however, being altered more by fundamental, systemic, and probably long-term political trends than by the policies of a single administration. In the political arena, "science" still has the air of objectivity, of offering up incontestable facts. Everyone in politics now tries to frame his or her position as the one and only view that is justified by "sound science." The most deleterious result of this embrace of science is that it obscures debates about values—debates that need to occur to make clear and coherent decisions. Scientists, policymakers, and concerned observers ought to be examining how science is employed in policy debates now, while science's reputation and funding are intact. And that means looking beyond charges and countercharges about the Bush administration to analyze how issues are being framed and how scientific certainty is being characterized more generally