The ‘enlightened party' has just made you its candidate for president. Debates with your rivals from the other parties loom. You have to be prepared to respond to these burning issues

To promote the general welfare The government should double the amount of money allocated to support scientific research, theoretical and applied? Or to provide ‘free’ medical coverage for all? Or put the money into primary and secondary education What are the advantages of each? And [given the financial constraints] you cannot do all three.

Politically you must hold other agencies ‘harmless’ financially, hence to cover the costs of this critical investment… you will either have to double taxes or double worker / industrial productivity Attempt to cut or limit access to other popular government programs or some combination of the three. What is your strategy? What does reason tell you will deliver the maximum advantage / benefit? What does your political sense tell you about the the countervailing forces. That is: Are there costs associated with your strategy? And who will object?

Geneticists tell you that they can produce a cloned strain of wheat that is resistant to drought and insecticides and has has a yield and nutritional value 50% greater than conventional wheat. They assure you that there are no health concerns, and the need for this product in the fight against hunger is manifest. Can you embrace and promote this product? For you country? Or for other countries that experience famine?

The National Institute of Health tells you that population growth is unsustainable given the national and global resources. A new policy is required… Some of your more enlightened and scholarly advisors want to: Limit the number of female children to one per family Others want to raise the taxes on those who choose to have more than one child. Still others want to: Limit the number of Pampers / Huggies that can be sold Require those whose GPA is below 3.5 to have a vasectomy or tubal ligation Use advertising / persuasion to convince potential parents that their life style will suffer. Other?

The CDC informs you… With a simple screening test of both parents, we can insure that no child is born with genetically determined disabilities or deformities (congenital deafness, blindness, epilepsy, etc.) – What should be done with this ‘assessment of risk’? – Should the test be required of all those who wish to marry and / or have children? – And what should be done with those who wish to proceed anyway to have children? Should society cover their medical expenses?

Your ‘science advisory board’ anticipates that: It will soon be possible to use therapeutic cloning to generate tissues and organs for transplant. To do this the DNA would have to be extracted from each the person in the fetus stage and inserted into an enucleated egg. Organs would be generated from the cloned human embryos. What is your policy? Who will support this program? Who might object and why?

Your ‘science advisory board’ informs you That with a ‘simple restructuring’ of human DNA of each American we can insure that congenital diseases will be eliminated. Who will support such a program? And who will object? What is your policy recommendation to the voters?

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate?? An outbreak of influenza [or measles? Or polio, or whatever] is at hand. Your’ science board’ assures you that vaccinations are safe and effective, and that if 95% are vaccinated even those who cannot be will be protected by the ‘herd’. Many of your political supporters reject vaccination as dangerous and as an offense against ‘freedom to choose’ what is best for their children. Science and culture appear to be at odds with one another. What is your solution? Politically: Can you afford to offend your most progressive and energetic supporters?

Resources are disappearing; we need a new strategy to stop the ‘bleeding’. Your program for saving the planet involves : ?

Bothun and Nicols argue… – Because our scientists are trained to be skeptical and rational [aka ‘beyond politics’] and – Because they are also apolitical and amoral, and – Because the average voter is venal and un- enlightened we should put ourselves into the hands of the enlightened scientific ‘establishment’ when it comes to deciding the critical policy issues of the day. Do you agree?