Vol. 7 | No. 2 | Fall 2008
UCS has published evidence of political interference in scientific research at the Environmental Protection Agency that puts our public health and wildlife at risk. We are making progress in stopping this and other abuses of federal science.
By Michael Halpern
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a simple yet profound mission: “to protect human health and the environment.” For nearly 40 years, the agency has developed and enforced regulations on topics ranging from acid rain to toxic waste cleanup (see the sidebar), and conducted scientific research into emerging environmental challenges such as climate change. The science behind these important issues, however, is being increasingly suppressed and distorted, putting us at risk for these environmental hazards.
Searching for Answers
Recent investigations by Congress, the media, and watchdog groups have all exposed the misuse of science at the EPA on issues as diverse as global warming, mountaintop removal mining, and vehicle fuel efficiency. Political appointees inside and outside the EPA have edited scientific documents, manipulated scientific assessments, and generally sought to undermine the science behind dozens of EPA regulations. Even the EPA’s own inspector general has found that some senior officials have ordered scientists to change their data to support pre-determined policies.
Yet UCS suspected that these reports merely scratched the surface, so we decided to dig deeper. Partnering with Iowa State University, we surveyed EPA scientists regarding the state of science at the agency. The results, released in our report Interference at the EPA: Science and Politics at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, were shocking: hundreds of scientists reported political interference in their work, significant barriers to the free communication of scientific results, and concerns about the agency’s effectiveness. And more than half of the nearly 1,600 scientists who responded personally experienced at least one incident of political interference during the previous five-year period. Many current and former EPA scientists shared their personal experiences with us (several of which wished to remain anonymous), which we included in our report as well.
Sharing the Story
We held a press conference in late April to release our investigation and notified Congress of the results. After stories describing the report’s findings appeared in leading newspapers throughout the country, on hundreds of radio stations, and even on the nightly television news, editorial reaction was swift. “Taxpayers spend billions each year on scientific research. That money is wasted if the results of the work are skewed towards political ends,” opined the St. Louis Post Dispatch. The Salt Lake Tribune weighed in as well. “In the EPA . . . accurate scientific data is vital, and it should not be manipulated to suit a political agenda that counts science as the enemy.”
Several congressional committees have jurisdiction over various parts of the EPA, making it difficult for Congress to assess the health of the entire agency. When our legislative champions learned that political interference was being felt throughout the EPA, they were outraged. “When EPA’s own scientists say Americans can’t trust the agency to protect our environment, it’s a scathing indictment of the Bush administration’s repeated efforts to twist, misuse, and ignore scientific facts in favor of special interests,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). And as Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) added, “These survey results suggest a pattern of ignoring and manipulating science in EPA’s decisionmaking.”
Both legislators vowed to investigate this issue further, so over the next several weeks they held hearings to air their concerns about science at the EPA, inviting UCS Senior Scientist Francesca Grifo, other public interest advocates, and senior EPA officials to testify. Dozens of members of Congress grilled EPA officials about the way science has been used in making policy decisions. While EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson repeatedly refused to answer many questions from members of Congress, EPA Assistant Administrator George Gray eventually admitted that the 889 scientists who reported personally experiencing interference in their work “is a number that is unacceptable to me.”
The Road Ahead
|
Changes for the Better Since its inception, the EPA has played a major role in protecting our health and environment. Here is just a small sample of the ways in which the EPA has helped keep us safe and healthy: 1972: The popular pesticide DDT is banned after extensive EPA research concludes the chemical causes cancer. 1973: The EPA begins phasing out leaded gasoline. 1979: The EPA shows how smokestack scrubbers can reduce air pollution from coal-fired power plants. This technology is widely adopted in the 1980s. 1983: Homeowners are encouraged to test for radon, an odorless, colorless gas that causes lung cancer. Thanks to the EPA, approximately 575 lives have been saved annually due to radon mitigation and radon-resistant building construction. 1990: The EPA launches its Toxics Release Inventory, which tells the public about pollutants being released from facilities in their communities. 1992: In conjunction with the Department of Energy, the EPA launches the Energy Star program to help consumers identify energy-efficient products. 2004: The EPA requires cleaner fuels and engines for off-road diesel machinery such as farm or construction equipment. | |
Political interference in science, while considerably worse under President Bush, is not unique to his administration. We must continue keeping a watchful eye on the EPA—and other federal agencies—to ensure scientists do not experience further abuses. We will also need to focus on fixing the damage that has already been done; many changes were made during the Bush administration that sideline science indefinitely from the policy-making process and reduce overall transparency at federal agencies.
We already see some progress on the horizon: as Catalyst went to press, Congress was debating legislation that would protect scientists from retribution if they report manipulation or censorship of scientific information. In addition to helping to shape and pass this legislation, we are pushing for policies that open up the policy-making process to public scrutiny. When political appointees know they are being watched, they will be less likely to brazenly interfere with the work of federal scientists.
Monitoring and preventing scientific abuse does not rest solely on the shoulders of Congress; for many years, the news media has done a fairly thorough job of investigating government corruption. Unfortunately, increased emphasis on media company profitability combined with a growing shift from print to online publishing has led to significant cuts in science and investigative reporting, resulting in fewer journalists and smaller investigative budgets. UCS and others have stepped in to pick up the slack, with dedicated staff working to uncover political interference in science and analyze the consequences of this interference on our health, safety, and environment. Independently and in partnership with national and grassroots public health, environmental, and government watchdog groups, we bring these stories to the media and Congress for further investigation.
Each year brings new and potentially toxic chemicals into our homes and workplaces. Air and water pollution still threatens our public health, and environmental challenges are becoming more complex and global. A strong and capable EPA is more important than ever to ensure these challenges are met. We hope our efforts, and those of our allies and the public, will make this a reality.
Michael Halpern is the program manager in the Scientific Integrity Program.
