ScienceInsider

In addition to saving the banks, shoring up the cratered real estate market, and capping greenhouse gas emissions, President Barack Obama had another ambitious goal for the stimulus package in his speech to Congress last night: curing cancer. Presumably, that's a reference to the $10 billion headed for the National Institutes of Health.

Our recovery plan will invest in electronic health records and new technology that will reduce errors, bring down costs, ensure privacy, and save lives. It will launch a new effort to conquer a disease that has touched the life of nearly every American by seeking a cure for cancer in our time. And it makes the largest investment ever in preventive care, because that is one of the best ways to keep our people healthy and our costs under control.

As lofty a goal as it is, curing cancer in the next few decades is a far cry from the ambitions of Andrew von Eschenbach, who directed the National Cancer Institute until 2005. He often cited his plan to "eliminate death and suffering" from cancer by 2015, later moving the goal up to 2010—a plan generally considered unrealistic (and unlikely to be met in the next 10 months). 

—Erik Stokstad and Jennifer Couzin

In his speech last night to Congress, President Barack Obama promised that his education policies would help more people attend college, ensuring that "by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world."

But guess what? We're already there.

Data compiled by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, affiliated with the European Union, show that the United States leads the world, with roughly 30% of its adult population holding 4-year college degrees. NSF's 2008 Science and Engineering Indicators, the gold standard for such statistics, puts the United States atop a bar graph of 27 industrialized countries among adults aged 25 to 64, followed closely by Norway and Israel. OECD's Education at a Glance 2008 shows Norway barely ahead of the United States and Israel. In both rankings, the trio are head and shoulders above the rest of the E.U. countries.

So what is Obama worried about? "The concern is with younger people," says Thomas Snyder of the National Center for Education Statistics in Washington, D.C.

Howard Frumkin of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works today about the impacts of climate change on health. You may recall that in October of 2007, the last time CDC gave testimony on that topic, the Bush White House censored much of the written testimony—and it was later alleged that Vice President Cheney played a role.

It appears that President Barack Obama's White House is less inclined to filter the CDC message. Compare the removed sections of the 2007 testimony such as this one:

In the United States, climate change is likely to have a significant impact on health,
through links with the following outcomes:
• Direct effects of heat,
• Health effects related to extreme weather events,
• Air pollution-related health effects,
• Allergic diseases,
• Water- and food-borne infectious diseases,
• Vector-borne and zoonotic diseases,
• Food and water scarcity, at least for some populations,
• Mental health problems, and
• Long-term impacts of chronic diseases and other health effects

with sections from Frumkin's testimony from today, including this one:

In the United States, climate change is likely to have a significant impact on health,
through links with the following outcomes:
• Direct effects of heat,
• Health effects related to extreme weather events,
• Air pollution-related health effects,
• Water- and food-borne infectious diseases,
• Vector-borne and zoonotic diseases,
• Emerging pathogen susceptible to weather conditions
• Allergies, and
• Mental health problems,

—Eli Kintisch

TOKYO—Junichi Hamada is still a month away from taking office as the next president of the University of Tokyo, and it's clear he's already weary of one question. After Hamada gave a luncheon talk here on 24 February, a member of the audience asked whether he has a strategy to make the school number one in the world.

Hamada sighed.

In his "State of the Union"-like address just now, President Barack Obama touted the stimulus package's multibillion-dollar boost to renewable energy research, deployment, and infrastructure, as well as basic research funding: 

We know the country that harnesses the power of clean, renewable energy will lead the 21st century. And yet, it is China that has launched the largest effort in history to make their economy energy efficient. We invented solar technology, but we've fallen behind countries like Germany and Japan in producing it. New plug-in hybrids roll off our assembly lines, but they will run on batteries made in Korea.

Well I do not accept a future where the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root beyond our borders—and I know you don't either. It is time for America to lead again.

Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double this nation's supply of renewable energy in the next three years. We have also made the largest investment in basic research funding in American history—an investment that will spur not only new discoveries in energy, but breakthroughs in medicine, science, and technology.

We will soon lay down thousands of miles of power lines that can carry new energy to cities and towns across this country. And we will put Americans to work making our homes and buildings more efficient so that we can save billions of dollars on our energy bills.

—Eli Kintisch

Note: This item has been updated

Poor President Barack Obama. His would-be appointees keep slipping through his fingers. Now, even as the president prepares to make a third try at getting someone who will stick as Commerce secretary—former Washington Governor Gary Locke—his putative pick for director of the Census has dropped out.

That pick was Kenneth Prewitt, the highly respected census director under Bill Clinton (1998–2001). Senator Judd Gregg (R–NH) mentioned Prewitt's name when he announced his 12 February withdrawal from consideration as Commerce secretary; at the time a White House spokesperson confirmed that Prewitt was the top candidate. Prewitt was reportedly ready to answer the call. But in a podcast last week, The New York Times reported he had withdrawn his name from consideration. Prewitt says he withdrew "for reasons personal and professional." An informed source told Science that he determined after a White House interview that there were too many "differences between him and the White House on his role" as census director.

It's a confusing week with essentially three budgets crashing into one another. Here are the basics:

• Last week, President Barack Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus package, with roughly $21 billion in federal science funding. Most of that funding is expected to get spent this year, and by late April agencies have to spell out just how they're spending the money.
• Yesterday, the House of Representatives and the Senate released a joint, omnibus spending bill for the current year (fiscal year 2009). The bill covers federal agencies currently operating on a temporary budget that expires next week. (That's pretty much most agencies except for the Pentagon.) The House will probably vote on the bill tomorrow or Thursday, and the Senate will follow. No news yet on what amendments or changes to the bill the leadership will allow.
• On Thursday, the White House will propose a skeletal budget for FY 2010, which begins in October. However, we don't know how much detail that document will include. The Administration says that it will send a full 2010 budget, its first, to Congress in April.

Also, tonight President Obama will address Congress in his first State of the Union address and will probably lay out one or two initiatives that could have research components—energy, health care, and education are said to be focuses. But those initiatives won't be rolled out until 2010.

—Eli Kintisch

BANGALORE, INDIA—India is a step closer to fulfilling its aspiration of putting a human in space by 2015. A blue-ribbon government panel gave a nod last week to the Indian Space Research Organization’s $3.1 billion crewed space mission. Final approval from the Indian cabinet is expected in the next few weeks.

By 2013-14, India intends to flight-test an unmanned space capsule, and a year later a crew of two or three astronauts would be launched into low Earth orbit on India’s Geo Synchronous Launch Vehicle. India would become the fourth country after Russia, the United States, and China to have a homegrown crewed space program.

Some critics say that India should focus on alleviating poverty rather than space travel. ISRO Chairman G. Madhavan Nair told Science that India can well afford the venture. “Our economy is growing very fast, we have sufficient resources, and this will translate into merely something like 16% of the budget of the Indian space program. Putting an Indian in space using an Indian rocket launched from Indian soil is [my] dream."

—Pallava Bagla

Journal editors are always keen to ask authors to disclose individual contributions to papers and potential conflicts of interest. Today, the editors of PLoS Medicine published an editorial calling for editors to do exactly the same because their "political and scientific views, personal relationships, and professional and financial interests can all conceivably interfere with the objectivity of their decisions."

A $280 million NASA satellite designed to monitor carbon dioxide emissions failed early this morning because of a problem with the Taurus XL rocket. The Orbiting Carbon Observatory was a critical part of the space agency's effort to gather data on climate change, and the probe's failure is a major blow to earth scientists eager to collect more accurate data on carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas. The launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California went well at first, but a few minutes into the flight the fairing that contains the satellite did not separate properly from the rocket, according to NASA officials. That means the probe is in a useless orbit or plunged into the ocean near Antarctica. NASA managers intend to set up a mishap board to understand what took place. The failure comes just as the U.S. Congress approved a funding boost for NASA's Mission to Planet Earth.