Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa Bay news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Charlotte news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

In 1945, engineer and science administrator Vannevar Bush laid out a framework for support of science in the U.S. that drove prosperity and American dominance. That model isn't enough anymore, experts said at an event this week in Washington, D.C.

The big picture: With China threatening to overtake the U.S. in R&D spending even as research becomes more international, science must manage the tension between cooperation and competition.

Background: As President Franklin Roosevelt's scientific advisor during WWII, Bush was known as the "General of the Physicists," organizing the massive scientific contribution to the war effort, including the Manhattan Project.

  • The wartime accomplishments were astounding: advances in food production and medicine, the development of radar and proximity fuses on bombs, and ultimately, the atomic bomb.

In July 1945, two weeks before Hiroshima, Bush authored a report titled "Science, the Endless Frontier," arguing that significant and centralized government funding of basic scientific research was vital for America's economic well-being and security.

  • Bush's report led to the establishment of the National Science Foundation in 1950, the chief federal agency for basic scientific research.
  • In 1940, the U.S. government and private industry spent the modern-day equivalent of $5.6 billion on scientific research. Today the U.S. as a whole spends $549 billion on R&D.

Yes, but: For years, the American proportion of total global R&D spending has been declining.

  • In a Jan. 29 congressional hearing, National Science Board chair Diane Souvaine testified that "in 2019 China may have surpassed the U.S. in total R&D expenditures.”
  • “There are a lot better teams in our league for the next 75 years than there have been for the past 75 years in science and research,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) at the National Academy of Sciences event on February 26 celebrating the 75th anniversary of Bush's report.
  • On the same day of the event, China's biotech giant BGI Group claimed it could sequence a human genome for just $100 — cheaper than any American company.

Reality check: While China has stolen a march in some fields, like 5G and some fields of machine learning, according to Souviane's testimony Washington still spent nearly $70 billion more than Beijing on basic research in 2017.

What they're saying: Beyond increased international competition, the changing nature of the U.S. demands shifts in how basic science is done and what it should accomplish. The country is more diverse than it was at the end of World War II, life expectancy is now lower than other industrialized nations, and there are massive health disparities.

  • "Most exciting scientific advancements are creating moral quandaries that worry citizens partially because they know they will bear any burdens and partially because they feel they have no voice over the direction of science and tech even in a democracy," said Shobita Parthasarathy, professor of public policy at the University of Michigan.
  • Parthasarathy says the country's political polarization has spilled over into science. Diversity, equity and inclusion efforts can't just be about building up the scientific enterprise, but must allow it to be "more representative and ultimately more politically legitimate," she said.

What's next: "The Bush model alone is no longer enough," MIT president Rafael Reif told the audience at the event, which marked the 75th anniversary of Bush's report. While it remains credible, the world faces workforce changes from automation, climate change and other pressures Bush couldn't have envisioned, Reif said.

  • Reif called for focused investment in a short list of scientific fields including AI and quantum computing, and a "DARPA-like approach to fostering fundamental research in specific fields in pursuit of advances."
  • The U.S. must remain open to foreign talent, Reif argued. "Foreign students should be properly vetted and then we should in effect staple a green card to their diploma," he told the audience.

But in a world where science is more international and cooperative than ever, is there still a place for the national science policy Bush advocated? Panelists said science as a global enterprise and as a national competitive advantage aren't incompatible and that the tension can be productive.

The bottom line: Bush's "endless frontier" laid the groundwork for postwar American prosperity. But if science is to help the U.S. and the world meet the challenges of the next 75 years, the colossus Bush helped create will need to grow more nimble.

Go deeper

Jan 22, 2021 - Health

Fauci: Trump administration's lack of facts on COVID "very likely" cost lives

President Biden's chief medical adviser Anthony Fauci acknowledged on CNN's "New Day" Friday that the Trump administration's resistance to following the science on coronavirus policy "very likely" cost lives.

Why it matters: Fauci, the government's top infectious diseases expert, clashed on numerous occasions with former President Trump after contradicting him on scientific issues like the efficacy of masks and the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine in combating COVID-19.

Biden picks up his pen to change the tone on racial equity

Vice President Harris looks on as President Biden signs executives orders related to his racial equity agenda. Photo: Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images

President Biden is making a down payment on racial equity in a series of executive orders dealing with everything from private prisons to housing discrimination, treatment of Asian Americans and relations with indigenous tribes.

The big picture: Police reform and voting rights legislation will take time to pass in Congress. But with the stroke of his pen, one week into the job Biden is taking steps within his power as he seeks to change the tone on racial justice from former President Trump.

Most Senate Republicans join Rand Paul effort to dismiss Trump's 2nd impeachment trial

Photo: Joshua Roberts-Pool/Getty Images

Forty-five Senate Republicans, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, supported an effort to dismiss former President Trump's second impeachment trial.

Why it matters: The vote serves as a precursor to how senators will approach next month's impeachment trial, making it highly unlikely the Senate will vote to convict. The House impeached Trump for a second time for "incitement of insurrection" following events from Jan 6. when a pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol.