Is President Bush Good for Tech?

James Fallows of the NY Times served up a very interesting article analyzing the Bush administration's impact on technology. I'm pleased to see someone apply a bit of intellectual rigor and careful reading of history to an article (so rare nowadays - most journalists seem to believe the Internet and press releases are accurate), and observe that technology initiatives are driven by many interests over time (industry, government, investment, military,...), and not usually a quick doc by a particular administration. It is well-worth reading.

I do believe Mr. Fallows has omitted two critical groups that have influenced inexpensive access to information more than all the others - the American taxpayer and the American free press.

Unlike Europeans, who believe information is owned by the government and not the citizen, Americans believe that "their money" in the form of taxes permits them access to that information funded by taxes at an affordable rate. This demand is brought to bear by the press in the form of reports, essays, and analysis.

This public pressure / demand for this access, coupled with laws that encourage release of information upon demand, forces the government to provide (often under duress) data for use in scientific, personal, and business initatives. And when business attempts to in turn privatize information (e.g. the human genome mapping races and attempts to "patent life" of the 1990's), the press is able to report on this as part of their role, encouraging the public to resist this privatization as a blatent seizure of their "rights", resulting in an editorial (and eventually legislative) push for government oversight and release of information to all citizens.

This interplay between the citizen who funds research, the press who observes the lack of access to this research, and the government which prefers to keep information access limited (it's cheaper to not respond or provide information upon demand than respond and corrolate information upon demand) has been the main factor in keeping access to information for new business and scientific initatives in the US ahead of both Europe and Asia.

It is likely that this viewpoint will continue, no matter what administration is in office. And if an administration is hostile or even uncaring in this regard, other initiatives (e.g. stem cell research funded by California bonds) will rise in their place.