I am all for government grants to study seals and crabs in Alaska

[question everything]

After the Soviet Sputnik, many young students were encouraged to study science and during the 60s and 70s there were generous grants for academic research.

Then came Reagan with his anti-intellectuals administration and grants for basic research - except for "Star War" - were cut. Many bright graduate students, who could have been very good basic research scientists, were forced to go to the private markets where, when companies are faced with a down turn in the economy, R&D is the first to be hit.

So now when Bill Gates and others say that they have to hire foreigners because there are not enough American Ph.D in science and technology - why should there be?

Of course, there were enough Democratic members of Congress who had no understanding of a basic research. I think that the "inventor" of the "fleece award" was a Democrat. And Dingle had the audacity to grill a Nobel Laurette about how he ran his lab.

We, as a society, can be richer if there are grants for scientists and philosophers and poets to stay in academia and conduct their research, even if, especially if, one cannot see an immediate, or even future returns in dollars and cents.

I believe Sarah Palin when she said that those grants were in the open, not like real earmarks that are added after a bill is approved, without the knowledge of many members of Congress.

For Charlie Gibson to raise this was either a cheap shot or simply ignorance.

End rant.

[cobalt1999]

1. Bill Gates and others hire foreigners for one reason...they are cheaper

There is plenty of Americans with the intelligence and education to do those jobs. The American just expects enough to pay the bills and cover the student loans.

Get a foreigner in on an H1-B and he's basically an indentured servant.

[question everything]

7. No. If you've visited graduate departments in the past, oh, 20 years,

you would see that they were dominant by foreigners. For one thing, they pay full tuition..

But Americans have stayed away from advanced degrees in drove and, to a lesser extent, the engineering schools. If you've ever worked at a place where engineering services are used, you'd know that whenever a project is being shipped out, so are the engineers.

[lonestarnot]

9. So Americans can be both unqualified for those high paying positions that are here, and

so that that they CAN be shipped out! a twofer!

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

2. But that's not really the point, is it?

The point is her ranting about busting earmarks in every speech she gives, while at the same time taking millions of dollars in earmarks for her own state.

It's not the earmarks, it's the HYPOCRISY. But I'm sure Ms. Palin appreciates you defending her. :eyes:

[question everything]

4. Earmarks vs. Grants

It was not clear whether the grants to study crabs and seals came through the back door. Whether they fit any of these definition

Earmarks Include:

1. Add-ons. If the Administration asks for $100 million for formula grants, for example, and Congress provides $110 million and places restrictions (such as site-specific locations) on the additional $10 million, the additional $10 million is counted as an earmark.
2. Carve-outs. If the Administration asks for $100 million and Congress provides $100 million but places restrictions on some portion of the funding, the restricted portion is counted as an earmark.
3. Funding provisions that do not name a recipient, but are so specific that only one recipient can qualify for funding.

http://earmarks.omb.gov/earmarks_definition.html

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Seems to me that Alaska has enough of it's own money to piss away.

Why do they need mine?

[tannybogus]

5. I get really pissed when people crack on research.

If they took the time, they would see that the end result can yield very useful and practical info.

Some of it may be wasteful, but don't judge a study by its title. This is why we are so screwed in science.

[boppers]

6. Charlie was pointing to HER ignorance.

By their campaign simplistically pointing to earmarks (in general) as "waste", they got bigger traction with the "gubmint is bad" folks, and they needed to be called on their amateurish logic and sloganeering (pandering?).

The solution is not eliminating earmarks, but reporting them.

As Obama does.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Gibson forced Palin to defend these grants because McCain had specifically criticized them as waste

You don't understand that?

Don

[alarimer]

10. Earmarks are not the way to go for that stuff though.

They need to apply through the National Science Foundation etc.

On edit:

Everyone gets to compete for the pile of research money that way. That levels the playing field for all those scientists that aren't friends of governors.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Charlie was pointing out raving hypocrisy

McCain and Palin have been mocking the State of Montana's grants for the study of bear DNA, specifically and frequently.

John McCain: ""We're not going to spend $3 million of your tax dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana,"

So the point is not if the grants were open, it is about the mocking of Montana for doing what she's been doing, and doing openly, I guess.

Gibson was doing his job, he knew exactly why he was asking those questions. A very worthy question, asked for good reasons.

Were you, shall we say, unaware of the derision of research grants by the very people you are defending for taking research grants?
I'm all for research grants too. Even in Montana.