student's voice

Building a Communication Bridge (Part 1)

by Patrick E. Meyer

During the summer of 2005, I had the opportunity to intern with IEEE-USA's Energy Policy Committee (EPC) in Washington, D.C. Over the course of the summer, I tracked and analyzed the progress of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 as it crawled, at first — then sprinted — through the marathon of the legislative process. Over the course of three months, I attended numerous congressional hearings and media events, learning first-hand how Capitol Hill works. My final analysis of the bill culminated in a near-100 page eBook summarizing the Act, with specific attention paid to reforming the electricity sector and engineers' future roles relating to the electricity sector.

Although I gained invaluable knowledge on the workings of the Nation's capitol, my true take-away was a deeper understanding of the ever-widening relationship between engineers and policy-makers. Yes, it's true: a serious "communication gap" exists between U.S. engineers and policy-makers. At a time when engineers are in high demand, I found it astonishing that people making regulations regarding the future of engineering-heavy fields, such as the electricity industry, pay more attention to non-technical experts. You may be wondering: who could possibly offer more valuable insight into how to solve problems regarding electricity infrastructure than an electrical engineer? Many policy-makers would answer: "economists."

Now would be a good time for me to provide some background on myself. I am currently a Masters of Science candidate at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) in the Science, Technology and Public Policy program. The concept of teaching public policy at a technical university is rather a new one, especially for RIT. In fact, RIT accepted its first students into the public policy program in the fall of 2001. RIT has been devoted to providing a new and innovative program, drawing upon the strongest fields of the institute, namely applied science and technology. I have studied public policy agendas within the energy, electricity, space, environmental, information technology, intellectual property, and numerous other technical fields at RIT.

Many of my professors at RIT are engineers by training. I attend engineering-related lectures and presentations. I study the many implications of the engineering profession. And I even live in a house with three engineers — one electrical, one computer and one mechanical — all regardless of the fact that I don't have an engineering degree. With this level of exposure to the engineering community, it may not surprise you that I have become strongly interested in applying my own knowledge of public policy to the engineering world. However, such an application is much more complicated than I ever imagined — and becoming more complicated with every passing day.

Over the course of this year, I will write three more Student's Voice articles, all with the central theme of bridging the gap between America's engineers and policy-makers. I will discuss the specifics of the communication gap; explore how engineers can better be heard by policy-makers; and examine what role economists play in the engineers' arguments. I have come to realize that some policy-makers take the advice of those with the most valid arguments and evidence — while others take the advice of those with the loudest, and sometimes most controversial, voices. My ultimate goal is to fuse the two, so that those with the most valid and well-supported arguments may be heard more clearly — allowing engineers to have their arguments heard, and most importantly, properly understood by present and future policy-makers.

Patrick E. Meyer is IEEE-USA Today's Engineer Students' Voice Editor, and a graduate student at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Comments may be submitted to todaysengineer@ieee.org.