Education

TechNet has articulated a clear industry goal for doubling within 10 years the number of Americans annually completing under- graduate degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Democrats are generally calling for an overhaul of the Bush Administration's No Child Left Behind (NCLB) program, which rewards or punishes schools based on their performance on standardized tests. Republicans are typically calling for only minor tweaks to NCLB.

Obama has proposed an $18 billion increase in spending for federal education programs across the board. He has suggested targeted improvements in math and science education through reforming and funding NCLB, though he has not said what reforms he would make.

Edwards would expand math and science education and increase teacher pay as much as $15,000 a year for successful teachers, especially those working in so-called high-poverty schools. He also wants to create a national teachers university as well as a program that would pay for a year in college for students in college-prep programs who work part-time and perform well academically.

Edwards would also radically overhaul NCLB, by improving tests; allowing broader measures of school success, such as individual students' progress; and offering schools more resources and flexibility to identify and reform underperforming institutions.

Among the Republicans, Romney echoes Edwards' call for giving more flexibility to states that do well in NCLB tests and putting more focus on a student's, rather than a school's, progress on the tests. He also supports performance-based pay for teachers.

Huckabee would go further, letting states develop their own benchmarks for NCLB. On the other hand, Huckabee wants to test teachers as well as students, replacing educators who don't meet standards and rewarding successful teachers who move to low-performing schools by giving them bonuses and forgiving their student loans.

Giuliani, McCain and Romney all support giving parents more choice in which public schools their K-12 children attend. Giuliani wants to set up a competitive grant process to fund new school voucher programs for students in failing schools. Both he and Romney support more charter schools.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science has said that both Giuliani and Huckabee lack a focus on engineering, math and science education.

eHealth

A handful of candidates are weighing in on issues surrounding the migration of the healthcare system to digital technology. But the public debate here has been small compared with the breadth of the emerging issues.

Obama takes the most aggressive stance from a financial standpoint. He would invest $10 billion a year over the next five years to move the U.S. healthcare system to broad adoption of standards-based electronic health information systems, including electronic health records.

Clinton said she would require people who do business with Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration to move toward adoption of electronics-based medical record-keeping systems.

On the Republican side, Giuliani has said he would invest in healthcare systems but focus on private-public partnerships and not burden industry with many new regulations.

McCain, for his part, has simply said he would push for the use of telemedicine in areas where services and providers are limited and electronic services are cost-effective.

Energy, environment

Nearly all of the candidates have articulated the general goals of making the U.S. energy-independent and promoting research in alternative fuels. But their respective plans and spending goals vary widely.

Obama has taken the strongest stance on energy, articulating a plan to invest $150 billion over the next 10 years in biofuels and fuel infrastructure, plug-in hybrids, renewable energy sources and the transition to a digital electric grid. He also supports caps on carbon emissions and an auction system through which emission permits could be traded, which would generate some of the funds for energy research.

Obama aims to lower the nation's total carbon emissions level to 1990's carbon footprint by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990's total by 2050. He also wants to double fuel economy standards in 18 years.

Clinton has called for setting up a $50 billion energy fund, paid in part by oil companies, to pay for research in alternative technologies and provide incentives to individuals and businesses that use them. She would also set up a National Energy Council under the White House to cap carbon emissions and establish an auction system for trading emission permits.

Further, Clinton wants to reduce electricity consumption 20 percent from projected levels by 2020. She also would seek to institute policy to increase fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030, and she would set up a $20 billion program to help automakers retool to meet the new standards.

Edwards would look to create a $13 billion fund to invest in renewable energies such as wind, solar and bio- fuels, and to develop a new generation of efficient cars, trucks, buildings, public transport and industry. The initiative would generate a million new jobs, he claims.

Republicans are generally less specific on their plans in this area, although they all subscribe to the goal of making the U.S. energy-independent. Huckabee has said he could achieve that goal in eight years.

Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain and Romney all advocate investments in alternative energy. Huckabee would use federal funds as well as matching funds for private-sector investments.

Romney has said he would "substantially increase" U.S. investments in basic energy research in several areas, including "reinvigorating" nuclear energy programs.

McCain is alone among Republicans in advocating caps on carbon emissions and a system to trade in carbon credits. Romney has pointedly said he would not tax carbon emissions.