During each of the past several U.S. presidential elections, Science has posed questions about science policy to the major-party candidates. The editors have tried to ask hard questions that challenge the candidates and their staffs to develop thoughtful answers--responses that will not only help Science's readership evaluate their positions before the election but might clarify important science and technology issues for a much larger number of thoughtful Americans.

This year, as in the past, the candidates have been good enough to cooperate fully with Science, and the results provide some significant insights about how the next president might deal with the multiple aspects of U.S. national interest that have scientific and technical roots. We won't insult your intelligence by rehashing or evaluating the responses, the full texts of which are available in a side-by-side outlay beginning on page 262 as well as on Science Online. But here are a few areas that, in the view of the editors, are worth highlighting.

It is a large country with a volatile, multi-ethnic population, held together for decades by authoritarian rule and a strong military. The collapse of this regime provides an opportunity for more open and participatory politics. However, civil unrest, a leadership vacuum and weak political institutions threaten the country's stability and cohesion.

Food policy will be of paramount concern to economic development efforts for at least the next two decades. Governments are trying to confront their food problems, and they need good analysis and good analysts to do so. This book attempts to show that food problems are immersed in the broader problems of economic development and that solving food problems is a complex task involving a long-run vision of how food systems evolve under alternative policy environments. Our goal is to establish for the reader a sense of that vision.