Pro-science Republican running for TX School Board!

April 30th, 2009 RWA Posted in Politics, Science | 1 Comment »

With the Republican party still in disarray, various individuals, from David Frum to Meghan McCain, have been challenging its base, sagely informing them that unless they change their tune on such issues as the environment and  gay marriage, they’ll be doomed to minority status for many elections to come. So far, none of these would-be reformers have called for an end to the so-called “Republican war on science” or taken on the task of trying to unshackle the creationist deadweight that has crippled the party amongst educated voters, but now, a fresh new face running for the Texas School Board may be the beginning of a sea change in this matter.  Charlie Johnson (keep fighting the kooks, Charles!) has just introduced his readers to Joel Walker, a theoretical physicist and professor at Sam Houston State University. Defying all stereotypes, Joel happens to be a conservative Republican and is active in his family’s church. He’s also very concerned about where science education in Texas is headed, and so should you.

As has frequently been noted, Texas is one of the largest purchasers of textbooks in the nation, and decisions made by the state school board therefore have potentially massive ramifications for textbook standards everywhere. With biology textbooks slated to be up for approval in the state by 2011, it is imperative that pro-science legislators be on board as a majority in order to avert attempts at either approving creationist tracts as part of the curriculum, or watering them down to the point that evolution is barely even mentioned, if it all.  Having an actual scientist on the Board, someone with a full grasp of both the facts and the scientific method itself, would only be a bonus.   But does it matter at all if this board member happened to be a Republican? Should we support Walker’s run not just because of his scientific expertise and teaching experience, but because of his party affiliation?

Yes. The fact that Walker happens to be a conservative Republican only makes it all the more imperative that he get elected.

Before you impulsively retort that this constitutes putting politics over science, consider what the election of someone like Walker would represent in the public eye, not just on the state level, but nationally as well. As mentioned upwards, Walker defies stereotypes of what conservatives believe, or what sort of political views most scientists hold.   By emphasizing and explaining these seeming contradictions,  Walker has the potential to change attitudes, by demonstrating that one’s personal beliefs or poltical and religious affiliations are no obstacles to embracing science and evolution. Lately, the commentators at both Panda’s Thumb and Pharyngula have been sparring over what some perceive as the  NCSE ’s overly accommodating approach to religious citizens.  The fact is, science needs all the help it can get in the face of hostile opposition, and that means bridges must be built, not burnt, between people of varying political, cultural  and social perspectives. Walker already has posted on his website a written response to a newspaper piece by Don McLeroy, creationist head of the Texas School Board.  It’s a skillfully-written piece which provides  providing a litany of evidence and good reasons across different fields of science, connecting them to support the evolution side of the argument.  Even more important is how Walker presents himself, and the ethos he establishes for his audience.  From the very beginning, Walker defines himself as a political and fiscal conservative who is responding to McLeroy not just as a scientist, but as a concerned citizen motivated to conserve those institutions most worthy of conserving. He brings this home in his conclusion, where he not only expounds on how voting against science represents a betrayal of students, but of the entire citizenry. He finally ends with a declaration of solidarity with the three dissenting Republicans on the Texas School Board who voted against the recent attempt to insert creationist language into textbooks, affirming not just their commitment to sound science, but to the principles of their party, in refusing to allow mob rule dictate educational standards.

If  Walker wins this election, and continues the rhetorical strategies he established in this piece, he has the potential not just to dispel stereotypes, but change minds on the issue of evolution and to realign the debate. There will always be hardcore creationists clinging stubbornly to their delusions like Velcro, but there are others who will be successfully persuaded, and other pro-science Republicans, including  working scientists themselves, may not only be emboldened enough to speak up, but run for office themselves.  The Republicans have already elected Michigan physicist Vernon Ehlers and Maryland physiologist Roscoe Bartlett to Congress, but both are nearing retirement.  There are also a number of Republican scientists who have been elected to state legislatures, including Fermilab physicist Mike Fortner of Illinois and medical researcher Cliff Bayer of Idaho, but neither has given any indication of running for even higher office. Election to a state school board may seem like just a small step in the right direction, but all eyes, not just those of the NCSE, will be watching the decisions made by the Texas board, given that they will have ramifications for the rest of the country.  Here’s hoping that Walker will be able to make a difference not just for Texas, but for the entire nation.

UPDATE: special thanks to Richard B. Hoppe  at Panda’s Thumb for linking to us and bringing more attention to Walker’s run.

UPDATE #2:  Alas, Walker did not win…this time. Hopefully, he’ll continue to be actively involved in state and local politics, and shoot for a run in the next election.