Before Eric Schultz calls to yell at me, I should point out that the “innovation agenda” is another one of those things that John Edwards talked about before anyone else but doesn’t get much credit for it. I should also point out that, generationally, it resembles Clinton’s plan more than Obama’s:
• Make R&D tax credit permanent, increase spending on research at NSF and NIH, modernize patent laws (Obama has a plank on patent laws as well).
• “New Energy Economy Fund” (n.b., Clinton’s “Strategic Energy Fund” and Obama’s “Clean Technology Fund”)
• Increase teacher pay and create programs to attract science teachers. (Obama would offer free tuition to those who get a masters and teach for four years in an under-served field or location.)
• Universal broadband (Ditto Obama and Clinton)
• Use digital technology to make providing health care more more efficient and affordable. (Clinton introduced legislation to mandate this in 2005, similar legislation never passed the House. Obama talks about this too, as well as improving the “interoperability” of VA and Pentagon medical information systems.)
• Depoliticize science. I should have mentioned this in my previous post, it’s part of all three’s platforms. And, obviously, is a big partisan issue.
To look at where I’ve noted policy overlap, you might think Edwards has more in common with Obama. But the key difference is how Obama addresses government openness and action, those planks don’t exist in the Clinton or Edwards proposals. Clinton and Edwards may support those ideas, of course, they just weren’t framed as part of their “innovation agendas.”
