Contents
1. Summary
2. Raising awareness about the abuse of science
3. The National Academies of Sciences speaks out
4. The abuse of science in the press
5. Congressional awareness
6. Responding to specific abuses of science
7. What's next

Summary

Since its launch in February 2004, the Restoring Scientific Integrity in Federal Policy Making (RSI) campaign has received an unprecedented amount of attention from policy makers, the media, and the general public. Sustained concern from citizens and scientists is laying the groundwork for reforms that will protect the integrity of government science and improve the way in which science informs government policy making.

Raising awareness about the abuse of science

UCS activists sent more than 25,000 emails to their senators this spring calling for an investigation into the Bush administration’s manipulation, distortion, and suppression of science. In addition, many action network scientists have joined more than 6,000 other scientists thus far in signing a statement —originally signed by just 62 scientists—denouncing the abuse of science and calling for significant reform.

This fall, local volunteers and UCS campaign staff organized campus roundtables at universities from coast to coast, bringing together students, senior scientists, and interested citizens to discuss the abuse of science and brainstorm solutions that will protect government science. The roundtables increased awareness about the issue and launched a long-term effort to engage the academic community in protecting government science and including issues of scientific integrity in science-based education.

The attention brought to this issue by activists, combined with the scientific community’s willingness to speak out against this crisis, has influenced a National Academy of Sciences report, alerted Congress to the problems, led to sustained and widespread media coverage of scientific integrity, and given UCS the platform to push Congress for reforms.

The National Academy of Sciences speaks out
On November 19, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report that strongly criticized the use of political litmus tests when evaluating candidates for scientific advisory committees and recommended that such appointments be based solely on scientific and technical knowledge, professional credentials, and personal integrity.

UCS has documented numerous cases in which the Bush administration, during its first term, imposed political litmus tests on candidates for science advisory committees. UCS and several prominent scientists provided written comments and oral testimony to the NAS committee, charging that the ideological and political litmus tests applied to potential federal advisory committee members by the Bush administration have had a chilling effect on the composition and quality of such committees. It is clear that the willingness of UCS activists and scientists to speak out against political litmus tests influenced the report.

Former Republican Congressman and NAS Committee Chair John Porter said that the Committee has already met with congressional leadership and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Director John Marburger to discuss the report and that both were receptive to the Committee’s findings.

The abuse of science in the press
Thanks to sustained uproar from UCS activists and scientists, there continues to be extensive national and international media coverage of the abuse of science and our campaign to restore scientific integrity into federal policy making. For links to just a few of the most recent media reports visit our RSI media page.

Congressional awareness
It is clear that the outcry from the public and from the scientific community has begun to resonate with Congress. For example, the influential Senator John McCain (R-AZ) put together a hearing on the issue in the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee that was canceled at the last minute because of scheduling problems.

The minority staff of the House of Representatives Science Committee held a public forum in May to discuss ways to improve the integrity of the scientific advisory committee appointment process, and to release a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the issue that was requested by Representatives Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) and Brian Baird (D-WA). Because of the report, the General Service Administration (GSA) will require federal agencies to make publicly available the process by which they select advisory committee members by the end of 2005. More transparency like this will help to protect the integrity of advisory committees and will ultimately improve the scientific advice that the government receives.

Responding to specific abuses of science

UCS activists submitted tens of thousands of letters and comments calling for the protection of government science on specific issues. For example:

• In May, activists sent more than 14,000 letters to urge members of Congress to stop the administration from eliminating scientific input from the U.S. Forest Service's national forest policy decision-making process. While the amendment failed on a close vote, the letters sent a clear signal to the administration that the public is taking notice of its abuse of science in forest policy.
• This summer, activists flooded the inbox of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Mike Leavitt with more than 15,000 emails encouraging him to release critical documents pertaining to public health, clean air, toxic mercury, and global warming as required by Congress.
• Activists in October submitted more than 15,000 public comments asking the National Park Service to pay attention to scientific advice in determining acceptable levels of snowmobile use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. A final ruling is pending.

What's Next

UCS recognizes the challenges that lie ahead in the current political landscape. However, it is more important than ever that we continue to speak out against the abuse of science out of concern for our public health, safety, and environment.
Over the coming year, we anticipate asking our activists to join us in protecting government science by speaking out on specific issues, from the way science informs decision making at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the use of science in the Endangered Species Act. We will also ask activists to help us press for reform in several different areas:

• Protecting government scientists: Scientists should be shielded from requests that require them to sacrifice scientific integrity.
• Providing better science advice to Congress: A Congress more fully informed about science and technology could play a stronger oversight role in ensuring that federal policy making is informed by the best available science.
• Strengthening the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): The OSTP Director should report directly to the president and should have an adequate staff to independently assess scientific controversies and priorities.
• Ensuring the independence of scientific advisory committees: Advisory committee members should fully divulge all conflicts of interest and should not be subject to political litmus tests during the selection process.
• Access to information: Government scientific research should only be withheld from the public only in cases of a clear threat to national security.

Your action is essential in protecting the integrity of science in federal policy making and ultimately safeguarding our nation’s welfare.

Top of Page