House Republicans: Science out, Corporate lobbyists in at EPA

The Republican majority in the House got a bill passed this week that stops scientists from giving any advice to the EPA's "Science Advisory Board"!!

The bill even goes so far as to forbid scientific experts from participating in “advisory activities” that either directly or indirectly involve their own work. This means that world-leading experts are banned from sharing their expertise in their own research. While the GOP are big fans of ‘industry experts’ a.k.a lobbyists playing a role in such activities (from which they have a direct financial stake in the result), they argue that having conducted peer-reviewed studies on a topic would constitute a conflict of interest.

If you thought both parties were the same, you can now (again) see that there is at least 1 real difference!

This practice, which only seems to get worse by the year, is really sad. Ignorance guiding the country.

edit:

I'll say it again, it all about money. We all know it.

What happens when Obama signs it?

A similar thing has happened in Canada . I think the politicians believe that the science is already settled and will chose which papers they want to use for policy law . We are frigged ... a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Is this it? .....

H.R.1422 -- EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2014

(2) Each member of the Board shall be qualified by education, training, and experience to evaluate scientific and technical information on matters referred to the Board under this section. The Administrator shall ensure that--

`(A) the scientific and technical points of view represented on and the functions to be performed by the Board are fairly balanced among the members of the Board;

`(B) at least ten percent of the membership of the Board are from State, local, or tribal governments;

`(C) persons with substantial and relevant expertise are not excluded from the Board due to affiliation with or representation of entities that may have a potential interest in the Board's advisory activities, so long as that interest is fully disclosed to the Administrator and the public and appointment to the Board complies with section 208 of title 18, United States Code;

`(D) in the case of a Board advisory activity on a particular matter involving a specific party, no Board member having an interest in the specific party shall participate in that activity;

`(E) Board members may not participate in advisory activities that directly or indirectly involve review or evaluation of their own work;

`(F) Board members shall be designated as special Government employees; and

`(G) no federally registered lobbyist is appointed to the Board.

Crap. Tried to edit and wiped every thing.

Ok - if true, we're going from protecting species that don't need it to wiping out anything in the way of profit. The EPA are the last folks that should be in charge of protecting the environment.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

We NEED a nation ran by scientists. This is the exact opposite direction.

If this is the one time our president decides not to exercise his power, I'll be upset.

Not sure but it might have something to do with this thread at Climate Audit . Gavin Schmidt and the EPA Denial Decision

About eight weeks ago, Jean S postulated that Gavin Schmidt had been involved in writing the documents supporting EPA’s decision denying various petitions for reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding (the “RTP documents“), documents that Mann had cited to the D.C. Court as a supposedly “independent” investigation into allegations against him. Obviously, if Schmidt had been involved in the evaluation of evidence for EPA, any claim to “independence” of the EPA’s supposed investigation would be risible.
Jean S directly asked Schmidt, but Schmidt ignored the question.
However, Jean S’ post led to the discovery of new and convincing evidence on Schmidt’s involvement in the RTP documents, which I’ll report today for the first time. Searching for an answer also revealed that EPA appears to have violated federal peer review policies in respect to the peer review of the RTP documents supporting the denial decision.

climateaudit.org... There was a good discussion in the comment section . It might be that this latest move is in a attempt to close all means to figure out just what is going on and by whom . a reply to: xuenchen

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

The only thing I can say is that it probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. With the way scientists are funded and rewarded in general, they are bought and paid for just as much as corporate lobbyists are.

The top of any field in the sciences rarely is the most gifted scientists, but rather the best balance between scientific capability and charisma/sales. You have to be able to use a word like "projection" while having the public hear "certainty", not "made up".

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

We NEED a nation ran by scientists. This is the exact opposite direction.

If this is the one time our president decides not to exercise his power, I'll be upset.

That depends....who is signing their paycheck? And how bout their future plans...who is signing those checks?

Science being funded by business creates significant conflicts of interest. I am sure any of us old enough can remember how tobacco companies had scientists, too.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

In what might be the most ridiculous aspect of the whole thing, the bill forbids scientific experts from participating in “advisory activities” that either directly or indirectly involve their own work. In case that wasn’t clear: experts would be forbidden from sharing their expertise in their own research — the bizarre assumption, apparently, being that having conducted peer-reviewed studies on a topic would constitute a conflict of interest. “In other words,” wrote Union of Concerned Scientists director Andrew A. Rosenberg in an editorial for RollCall, “academic scientists who know the most about a subject can’t weigh in, but experts paid by corporations who want to block regulations can.”

Speaking on the House floor Tuesday, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., summed up what was going on: “I get it, you don’t like science,” he told bill sponsor Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah. “And you don’t like science that interferes with the interests of your corporate clients. But we need science to protect public health and the environment.”

I feel nauseous

LOL. the OP thinks the EPA under democrats was scientific. how cute!

Well that thread title is all about intellectual DISHONESTY.

Corporate lobbyists have been at the EPA since the beginning of the 'green' movement.

Hell go check out any alternative energy website, and they pretty much all tell people to buy that solar panels( MADE BY CORPORATIONS) and get 'free government money' to do so.

LOL.

We are all doomed...the idiocy of these people has no bounds.

You mean the advisory board will no longer be packed with enviro-whackos?How disasterous!

originally posted by: xuenchen
`(A) the scientific and technical points of view represented on and the functions to be performed by the Board are fairly balanced among the members of the Board;

WTF is that? We'll get the EPA investigating the age of the planet; half are actual scientists and the other half are creationists.

Someone tell me I'm reading too much into that, please.

originally posted by: links234

originally posted by: xuenchen
`(A) the scientific and technical points of view represented on and the functions to be performed by the Board are fairly balanced among the members of the Board;

WTF is that? We'll get the EPA investigating the age of the planet; half are actual scientists and the other half are creationists.

Someone tell me I'm reading too much into that, please.

Hmmm.

Why would the EPA want to investigate the age of the planet?

a reply to: xuenchen

Because the chair of the house science subcommittee calls it into question and demands the EPA evaluate it. By law, if I'm reading it right (I hope I'm not), the EPA will have to create a board of half creationists and half scientists.

Help me xuenchen, you're my only hope!

a reply to: links234

The Vatican will send a delegation.

The Archives will be valid reference.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

If you think there was ever any science involved with the EPA you are mistaken. There is no difference. Under Obama the EPA let fracking companies pollute the water. Does the GOP control California too?

No difference.