|
|
| Political Science |
|
|
| By Ian Berke | ||||||
| April 2004 | Editorials | |||||
Page 2 of 3 Climate change and its potential effects on our biosphere is one of the most pressing issues our generation is facing, yet even as report after report of the human impact on global warming emerges, the Bush administration continues to contend that various uncertainties are too great to introduce mandatory regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Unsatisfied with the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), who advocated stronger regulations, President Bush asked the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to review the IPCC’s work and provide further assessment. The NAS supported the findings. In a potential case of corporate cronyism, Exxon Mobil lobbied the White House for the removal of Dr. Robert Watson as the head of the IPCC (President of the Panel since 1996) shortly after the 2001 release of the IPCC report. The State Department soon opposed his re-election (no scientific justification given) and he lost his position in April 2002. Further abuse of this issue came when the administration pressured the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make major revisions to a draft report on air pollution. They demanded the removal of any mention of research demonstrating sharp increases in global temperature over the past decade and even objected to reference of the NAS report the administration itself requested. In the end, the EPA chose to eliminate the section on global warming altogether, even though the report on the state of air pollution had contained similar sections for the proceeding five years. In an internal EPA memo during these events, it was noted that the section “no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change.” For nine months, White House offices suppressed an EPA report on children’s health and the environment with a lengthy review process. The report found significant levels of mercury in women that could lead to reduced IQ and motor skills of their offspring. The Bush administration has been advocating looser restrictions on mercury emissions from coal fired power plants. The EPA report was finally released days after a frustrated EPA employee leaked it to the press. Would the report have ever seen the light of day if not for the leak? In another case of censorship, a research microbiologist at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) was prevented at least eleven times from publicizing his research on airborne bacteria resulting from hog farm wastes and its potential impact on human health. In an interview with the Union of Concerned Scientists, the researcher alleged that USDA officials censor controversial findings by forcing them through an extended approval process, preventing publication in scientific journals and presentation at public meetings, and by cooperating with industry groups to suppress results that do not meet their satisfaction. The above are not isolated incidents during this administration. Detailed in the Union of Concerned Scientists report and the investigation findings by the Congressional Committee on Government Reform are cases where the White House has stepped into the workings of federal agencies to censure information. In several instances, government websites such as the CDC’s and EPA’s had been altered to remove information that conflicted with administrative policies. Also laid out in the reports are cases where scientific advisory panels were stacked with scientists having industry ties, passing up, or even dismissing well published and respected scientists in the relevant fields. |
||||||