Justin Park

April 26, 2008

889 of nearly 1,600 EPA scientists surveyed by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) reported personally experiencing "political interference during the past five years." The report, published April 23, found that political appointees have "edited scientific documents, manipulated scientific assessments, and generally sought to undermine the science behind dozens of EPA regulations." Twenty-two percent reported frequently or occasionally experiencing "selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome."

UCS conducted the survey to determine the extent to which lobbyists and politicians have pressured scientists to falsify findings. "While every regulatory agency must balance scientific findings with other considerations, policy makers need access to the highest-quality scientific information to make fully informed choices," the report stated. The survey results show that scientists respect their direct supervisors, but blame political appointees in EPA's senior leadership for interfering with their work.

"The case studies in this Union of Concerned Scientists report document all too well how Bush political appointees hogtie EPA scientists," said Professor Craig Pease, an expert on risk assessment at Vermont Law School. "As it makes abundantly clear, these are not just a few isolated incidents. It is the policy and practice of this Administration to suppress, distort, impede and simply ignore the best available science."

UCS placed an A to Z list of incidents on its website along with the full report and scientist essay responses. The most prominent of these included manipulation of data regarding climate change, mercury pollution, revision of air quality standards for ozone, and interagency review of toxic chemical assessments.

Rep. Henry Waxman, chair of the House Committee on Oversight, sent a copy of the report to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson on the day of its publication. Congressional inquiry into the behavior of the agency charged with protecting human health and the environment is not unexpected. As Pease put it, "the successful Presidential attack on the institution of science documented in this report denies the American people the scientific information they have paid for, have every right to, and need." Johnson will respond to questions regarding political interference with EPA scientists at the Committee's Oversight hearing in May.

Sources:
Email from Craig Pease, Professor, Vermont Law School (Apr. 25, 2008) (on file with author).

Henry Waxman, Letter to Administrator Stephen Johnson, http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080423123558.pdf (Apr. 23, 2008).

Union of Concerned Scientists, The A to Z Guide to Political Interference in Science, http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/a-to-z-guide-to-political.html (last visited Apr. 25, 2008).

Union of Concerned Scientists, Interference at The EPA: Science and Politics at The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Apr. 2008), available at http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/Interference-at-the-EPA.pdf.

Union of Concerned Scientists, Press Release, Hundreds of EPA Scientists Report Political Interference, http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/hundreds-of-epa-scientists-0112.html (Apr. 23, 2008).