The 112th Congress has five engineers. We need a lot more. That's where you come in.
On April 1, in the EE Life newsletter, I wrote about an amazing turn of events: President Obama cashiered his entire cabinet and replaced it with engineers.
The president was quoted as saying:
“For too long Washington has been dominated by insiders who have no notion of things like Planck’s Constant or Moore’s Law, who wouldn’t know an IC chip from a potato chip, who can’t distinguish electronics design from fashion design. Our country’s economy, indeed its future, rests in the hands of engineers, the very professionals who invent the future."
The April Fool's gag got a few people, but the point was made. Today, "Gears" posts on Engineer Blogs
an exceptionally thoughtful rationale as to why engineers WOULD be great for Congress (tip of the cap to Chris Gammell
for pointing it out!).
"(Engineers) lay out the options, look at the problems, look at the correlations to other problems ... and ultimately find ways to solve the problem. Most importantly, engineers learn how to compromise. That’s something you don’t see professional politicians do often.
In a similar vein, Jack Ganssle wrote about this very issue
six years ago.
The 112th Congress has 541 members
. The average age in the Senate is 62.2 years, in the House 56.7 years.
The top four occupations
are business, public service, law and education. There are five engineers (chart below)
. None in the Senate. This meager representation is ridiculous for a profession that is crucial to the economy. But then we know that.
So let's get policy problems solved by people who are in the business of solving problems. If not you, who? It not now, when?