“I am going to fix the US economy!” said every Republican ever.

A large aspect of this classic Republican campaign piece is dependent on government spending, a method which in reality does next to nothing for the economy. In fact, cutting spending in STEM sectors, as Republicans have been doing, will actually pull us further down the economic totem pole. Not only do we rely on new innovations to help us every day, but (as reported in the “New York Times”) economic data actually shows that investments in science and technology are the best bet for long term, sustained economic growth.

A perfect example of this is the Human Genome Project which ran from 1988 up until 2003. According to Battelle Memorial, a non-profit research group, the $3.8 billion that the government spent on the project has generated over $798 billion in economic activity. That $794.7 billion surplus marks a success rate that’s pretty much unheard of in congress.

And the Human Genome Project is not a special case. Families USA, a DC health advocacy group, found that for every one dollar the National Institute of Health spent on research, two dollars and twenty one cents of economic activity is generated as a direct result. In 2010 alone, NIH research grants sustained over 485,000 jobs across the nation.

Furthermore, private funding can only do so much as private companies tend to focus on projects with foreseeable, short-term results. The greatest breakthroughs and best results often come from basic science, not private product development.

With all this evidence it is shocking that, as NIH director Frances Collins stated, congressional budget cuts now force the NIH to reject more than half of the worthwhile research proposed. In fact, the department is now funding only one in six proposals (where they used to fund 3 in 6), even though the quality of scientific work has only increased. Collins later said that due to budget cuts “the stress on the biomedical community in the United States has never been more severe.”

In the past ten years cuts have contributed to the NIH losing one fourth of its previous purchasing power. This drop in funding is not only leaving hundreds of worthwhile projects unfinished, but is also driving researchers and scientists abroad to pursue their work elsewhere. Similar institutions like NASA have also had huge struggles.

Congressional Republicans are the biggest culprits here. As CalTech scientist Sean Carroll said in an interview, Republicans’ with their constant dismissals of climate change, evolution, and stem-cell research are “literally rejecting science in order to gain political advantage.”

Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Tx) is the current ranking member on the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. In short, this Texan, who consistently denies the role of human activity in climate change, is in charge of funding its research. He played a key role in defunding NASA’s earth-science program, which, surprise, contributes to the bulk of research being done on climate change.

American science has been severely damaged by the current Republican Congress, and, taking a look at the three GOP candidates left, it may not survive a Republican in the White House.

The oh-so classic “I’m not a scientist” retort (a direct quote from old House Speaker John Boehner, and then Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell when asked about climate change) is nothing but purposeful ignorance. Regardless of evidence that science is important to our education, power, and economy, conservatives in Congress defund and deny it. Looking at the state of science in the US today, you might think that it’s 1950, and that our researchers are in fact Comintern agents.