It's Friday, November 9th, 2018, and you're listening to Up to Date. I'm in Dreyvis Gantus.

And I'm Kishar Hari. So there was election this week in the U.S. or something.

Wait, what? Yeah, I know. And it didn't make much news. And I get it. You're probably sick of

midterm election recaps at this point. But I think it's important

for us to talk about how science did in the context of this election, because that was a big

storyline entering the midterms on Tuesday night. Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, from the fact that

the Democrats took the House, that seems like a good thing for the environment, at least.

Yeah, you know, I think it's actually kind of mixed, depending on how you see it. Because on the

surface, people are saying, okay, Democrats control the House means that, hey, let's start with the House

Science Committee. That's going to be led by somebody who's going to

believe in climate change, and that's a good thing. And generally speaking, people think that

Democratic control means better outcomes for science. But the data doesn't necessarily bear that

out. During Republican administration science budgets, if that's your sort of measure of how

science is doing,

have increased at about the same rate as it has during a Republican-led Congresses. So there's

really not anything there to say that there's a huge difference between the two parties in terms of

what happens at the end of the day. The way they talk about science is really different,

though. Yeah, you know, I'm not surprised to hear you say that because a friend of mine who is

a lobbyist in Washington for science also worked for Rush Holt. And, you know, she told me that,

like, when Trump got elected, even or even before that,

when the Republicans took over the House, even during the Obama administration,

she said that we don't have to worry as much as we think we do, because Republicans

...