A wave of doctors and scientists won seats in this week’s midterm elections, supported in part by the 314 Action Fund, a political action committee that works to elect candidates who favor science-based policymaking. The group spent more than $30 million during the election cycle, and its congressional candidates won more than 80 percent of their races, reflecting growing concern among medical and scientific professionals about the direction of federal policy.
Doctors and scientists enter public office
U.S. Sen. Abdul El-Sayed, incoming South Carolina Sen. Annie Andrews, incoming Ohio Gov. Amy Acton and incoming North Carolina Rep. Jamie Agar all have backgrounds in medicine or science in addition to winning this week’s elections.
Each was backed by the 314 Action Fund, which focuses on electing pro-science voices to public office.
“We really benefit from having data-driven, fact-based decision-makers in the seats of governance,” said Shaughnessy Norton, a chemist and former congressional candidate who founded 314 Action after losing her race in 2016.
This election cycle, the political action committee spent more than $30 million on donations and other campaign support, including fundraising for individual races. Norton said Lindsey Graham raised $3.6 million for Dr. Andrews, a pediatrician running for a Senate seat in South Carolina, and another $3 million for Dr. Acton’s campaign in the closely contested Ohio gubernatorial race.
Science candidates win across the country
More than 80 percent of 314 Action’s congressional candidates won this term. Fourteen of its 17 candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives were elected, along with hundreds of candidates in down-ballot races. Nine of those contests flipped seats from Republicans to Democrats.
The congressional candidates who won districts that changed party control included an oncology nurse, a mathematician, a microbiologist, a nuclear engineer and an agricultural scientist.
“It ended up being a health care election,” Norton said.
Experts link the trend to attacks on science
Richard Frank, director of the Center for Health Policy at the Brookings Institution, said medical professionals and scientists have long served in Congress, but rarely in such numbers at once.
“What’s unusual is how many people came in one wave,” he said.
Frank attributed the increase partly to what he described as the Trump administration’s hostility toward medical and technological expertise. “Science is under attack,” he said. “It’s not surprising that scientists recognized this and some even ran for Congress.”
Christopher Shields, a historian who heads the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, cited several factors behind the rise of science-focused candidates. “Part of it is certainly a reaction to what’s happening at the federal level, the defunding of a lot of labs and scientific exploration,” he said.
Shields also pointed to the legacy of the pandemic, when many health care workers began considering how political decisions affect public health.
Public health at the center of El-Sayed’s campaign
Earlier this year, El-Sayed told WIRED that his campaign centered on public health. He said the Cyclospora outbreak that affected Americans over the summer was likely linked to decisions made by the Trump administration.
“We have confidence in our entire service to keep lettuce safe,” he said at the time, referring to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which is directing mass layoffs at the Food and Drug Administration.
Source: www.wired.com