In an age where the vast majority of this country is concerned about terrorism, national security and the restoration of a sagging American economy (and where at least 48% of the country is worried about an overtly conservative Christian agenda being imposed by a new Congress and a reelected conservative administration), here’s what the lame duck Senate wants to accomplish in the next couple of weeks:

The Senate might vote on HR2391, the Intellectual Property Protection Act, a comprehensive bill that opponents charge could make many users of peer-to-peer networks, digital-music players and other products criminally liable for copyright infringement. The bill would also undo centuries of “fair use” — the principle that gives Americans the right to use small samples of the works of others without having to ask permission or pay.

The bill lumps together several pending copyright bills including HR4077, the Piracy Deterrence and Education Act, which would criminally punish a person who “infringes a copyright by … offering for distribution to the public by electronic means, with reckless disregard of the risk of further infringement.” Critics charge the vague language could apply to a person who uses the popular Apple iTunes music-sharing application.

The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip objectionable content — like a gory or sexually explicit scene — in films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

Emphasis added, of course.

Also in WIRED, tonight’s title fight: the reelected Bush administration vs. world heavyweight champion Science:

For the past four years, scientists have accused the Bush White House of ignoring widely accepted scientific studies in favor of fringe theories that support the administration’s political agenda. Meanwhile, government officials say scientists are exploiting research for political purposes.

Never was this rift more clear than at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in February, when former House Science Committee chairman Bob Walker, speaking on behalf of the Bush re-election campaign, warned scientists that their moaning about the government’s treatment of science could lead to a “push back” from the federal government.

So far, scientists haven’t been cowed. The Union of Concerned Scientists distributed two damning reports in 2004 accusing the administration of suppressing and manipulating research and stacking independent scientific advisory panels with ideological or industry-connected members.

“This administration has had a very uneasy relationship with science and scientists because of allegations that the administration has contorted science to fit political aspirations,” said Kathy Hudson, director of the Genetics and Public Policy Center, a think tank that focuses on genetic research and policy. “And part of it is an absence of genuine enthusiasm about science by the administration.”

And remember: every viewpoint is worth discussing.