Lynne Kiesling
Over at Marginal Revolution, Alex reminds us of Tyler’s 12 economic policy recommendations for a second Bush term. I agree with Alex that they are all good ideas.
One quibble, though: in point 5 Tyler says we should strengthen our commitment to science, by which he is referring to medical science. But one of the most active funders of scientific research is the Department of Energy, and in point 9 Tyler recommends the abolition of the DOE. While I think there’s value in a conversation about the value of that research funding, whether or not it crowds out private research funding, and so on, doesn’t this strike you as a contradiction in Tyler’s recommendations? When we talk about a strong commitment to scientific research, why preclude energy research and focus on medical research?