American physicist Neal Lane delivered a lecture titled “Lessons from Physics, Academia and Washington - Can We Save Science?” on September 4 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Lane, who served as director of the National Science Foundation and science advisor to President Bill Clinton, discussed his career as a physicist, researcher, administrator, and civil servant. He talked about how his time at the NSF and the White House affected his views on science and academia as they are treated today.
Lane began his talk by discussing the early career of his good friend, colleague, and mentor, Chun Lin. Lin taught physics at the University of Oklahoma, where he met Lane.
Lane described his early career, including earning his master’s and PhD, working as an assistant professor at Rice University, and eventually moving into administration before becoming director of the NSF in 1993.
While at the NSF, he most notably got to speak with Al Gore and Newt Gingrich, along with other top members of the political sphere. He spent much of his time at the foundation overseeing their move to a new building and learning about the people in the political sphere who funded the NSF and the universities as a whole.
Lane described a number of projects he directed, such as resolving several funding issues for major projects that were already underway and helping to secure funding for a project between Caltech, MIT, and the government. After some upgrades, it eventually detected the first merger of two black holes and continues to provide major scientific data. Lane also secured funding to refurbish the Amundsen-Scott Research Station to its current form, which is still in use today.
He then discussed his time working in the White House as Clinton’s science advisor and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in 1998. Lane remarked on a number of personal stories during his time in the White House and the political turmoil that the president’s impeachment caused. Lane continued advocating for more funding and attention to the sciences, especially the material sciences, which he believed had been long neglected.
Lane said the most important project during his tenure as science advisor was the launch of the first module of the International Space Station, which required convincing senators to work with the Russian government. With political support from the White House, this was eventually achieved and began one of humanity’s most impressive engineering and scientific achievements.
Lane also discussed work on the Human Genome Project and the National Nanotechnology Initiative, which, as he believed, were far easier to convince senators to support, with promises of scientific breakthroughs and more easily understood benefits for the people and businesses of America.
Lane talked about the state of the NSF, science, and academia during the current political climate and administration. Lane gave an example of the politicization of science, explaining a current issue being debated in the legislature that research should not just undergo peer review but also political review. Lane said this would effectively hand research power to Congress and make it something that could be exploited and forcefully guided for personal interest rather than developing more naturally under researchers in the field. He believed that this would put the future of academic-led research in jeopardy.
Lane discussed the current science advisor, Michael Kratsios, and his new report that was released, titled “Science: A New Golden Age.” Kratsios, unlike many of his predecessors, had little background in the key areas of science, technology, and research that typically characterize the role. However, Lane acknowledged he had some experience in related fields.
Lane addressed Kratsios’ report, which he explained was related to a very similar document titled “Science: The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush, who was the first science advisor to the president. The document acknowledges problems in the direction science has taken in the United States and attempts to help improve the organization.
After his talk, Lane answered a few questions and offered suggestions to the faculty and graduate students present. He explained that the scientific community needed to do more than explain its research in ways the public could understand; it needed to show the benefits independent academic research has provided for the U.S.
He answered a question about the decline of DEI and related initiatives in the scientific fields, saying, “I was stunned that they were able to push that so fast, with no pushback … and I think it’s because they are all afraid. Or maybe more people disagree about what’s been done to diversify the science workforce.”
Lane concluded by calling on the audience and telling them they can make a difference by standing up and fighting for the independence of science in the current political climate.
