One thing that Obama did well at first, and for which he doesn't get any credit, is giving money to higher education. Effects of better higher education are hard to quantify within any short time frame and so it's hard for him to take credit for anything tangible. I don't know if this trend continued, but I do know that almost immediately after becoming the president many higher-education funds and scientific foundations received a lot of money. It is safe to assume that under a creationist president the fate of public higher education will be the fate of the UC system once Schwarzenegger became the governator. That is, total destruction. The University of California system is currently on its way to becoming similar to a private university (tuition-wise), and public education will be reduced to far far lesser schools.
There are currently only a few top ranked universities which are public universities. These seem on their way to extinction. (Under Obama at least we may mourn the extinction of those dinosaurs, while under a creationist they never even existed.) When people think of improving education they think of 10 year olds, or high-school, but higher education is critical for the development of a country and I feel this is where a creationist may have the most impact, or should I say, create the most damage.
Good point Mike. University of Michigan, another of the top public universities, is also on its way to becoming a de-facto private university.
Do you really believe, Mike, that children educated to the age of 18 in a school system designed by creationists would be able to take advantage of higher education, public or private? And what of all the people (voters) who never get as far as college? Of course, the impact of an anti-science, anti-intellectual government goes far beyond schools or universities -- energy, medicine, conservation, agriculture, industry, whathaveyou -- the list would be endless. Back to the Stone Age?