The Agenda Behind Climate Change.

**eventhorizen** · April 23, 2008, 07:02 PM

U.S. environment scientists report political meddling

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nearly 900 scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency have experienced political interference in their work in the last five years, the Union of Concerned Scientists reported on Wednesday.
The nonprofit environmental organization said its investigation of EPA was in line with previous probes of other U.S. agencies which found "significant administration manipulation of federal science."
A government spokesman denied this, and said scientific findings were balanced with policy concerns.
"Our investigation found an agency in crisis," said Francesca Grifo of the Union of Concerned Scientists, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency. "Distorting science to accommodate a narrow political agenda threatens our environment, our health and our democracy itself."
The report included interviews with current and former staff members, analysis of government documents and a questionnaire sent to 5,419 EPA scientists, which generated 1,586 responses.
Of those responses, 889 scientists or 60 percent, said they had personally experienced at least one instance of political interference in the last five years; 394 said they experienced frequent or occasional "statements by EPA officials that misrepresent scientists' findings."
More than one-fifth, or 285, said they had experienced "selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome," the report said.
Nearly 100 scientists said the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was the main offender.
"OMB and the White House have, in some cases, compromised the integrity of EPA rules and policies; their influence, largely hidden from the public and driven by industry lobbying, has decreased the stringency of proposed regulations for nonscientific, political reasons," one scientist wrote in response to the investigation.
A spokesman for EPA, Jonathan Shradar, denied these allegations.
"Certainly OMB plays a policy role," Shradar said by telephone. "It's important that there is inter-agency cooperation. There's not interference against the scientific work that they're doing, that's still highly respected and taken into account."
U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat who chairs the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, called on EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson to respond to questions about the report at a committee hearing in May.
The EPA has come under fire recently for its standard for ground-level ozone, which critics claim is too high. The agency is also in a court fight with 18 U.S. states over its failure to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new cars and trucks, more than a year after the Supreme Court ruled EPA had the power to do so.

Coalition Letter regarding Federal Scientists and Whistleblowing

GROUPS ACROSS POLITICAL SPECTRUM URGE CONGRESS TO INCLUDE FEDERAL SCIENTISTS IN PENDING WHISTLEBLOWER BILL
March 18, 2008
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator:
In the next few weeks, House and Senate negotiators are working to reconcile bills to enhance whistleblower protections for federal employees. Your leadership on this issue will help to ensure that the final version of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act contains specific protections for federal scientists who blow the whistle on the suppression or distortion of federal research or technical information. Such protections, which were incorporated into the House passed whistleblower bill, H.R. 985, are crucial for the health and safety of all Americans.
Federal government scientists play a crucial role in providing data and scientific analyses to policy makers so they can make the best, most informed decisions about our environment, health, and national security. Whether it is toy safety, drug efficacy, or air quality, we count on federal agencies to use independent and unbiased science to protect us from harm.
Federal law has defined a whistleblower as someone who reports waste, fraud and "abuse of authority." This definition, however, fails to address the problems facing too many federal scientists.
Surveys, investigations, and media reports increasingly show that federal science is being manipulated, suppressed, and distorted. Indeed, of the nearly 3,400 federal scientists across nine agencies who have responded to questionnaires by the Union of Concerned Scientists, more than 1,100 scientists report that they fear retaliation for openly expressing concerns about their agency’s mission-driven work.
Scientists who expose the suppression and distortion of their work should be protected for alerting the public to potential dangers. For this reason, any comprehensive whistleblower law that Congress approves this year must define "abuse of authority" to include the suppression and/or distortion of federal research and technical information.
Specific whistleblower protections would not give federal scientists the right to usurp legitimate supervisory oversight or policy making that appropriately is delegated to political appointees and senior managers, nor would it allow them to violate federal law shielding national security and proprietary information. Rather, they would afford a federal scientist whose work has been suppressed or distorted protection from reprisal if the scientist publicly reported these attempts.
At a time when Congress has serious concerns about an aging federal workforce and the United States is facing unique scientific and technical challenges, it is crucial that federal agencies do all they can to retain their most experienced and skilled scientists and technicians. Whistleblower protections for scientists and researchers would improve morale at federal agencies and help to retain and recruit dedicated civil servants.
We urge you to advocate for a final bill that would provide protection from retaliation for exposing attempts to censor, distort, or suppress any scientific or technical research. Congress must recognize that scientists must be able to work to protect the health and safety of Americans, without interference, and should be able to speak out about distorted or suppressed scientific findings without retribution.
Sincerely,

Mary Alice Baish
Acting Washington Affairs Representative
American Association of Law Libraries

John W. Curtis, Ph.D.
Director of Research and Public Policy
American Association of University Professors

Christopher Finan
President
American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression

Lynne E. Bradley
Director, Office of Government Relations
American Library Association

Patricia S. Schroeder
President & CEO
Association of American Publishers

Wayne C. Shields
President and CEO
Association of Reproductive Health Professionals

Terry Francke
General Counsel
Californians Aware

William Snape
Senior Counsel
Center for Biological Diversity

Paul Kurtz
Chairman
Center for Inquiry

Kirsten Stade
Program Manager, Integrity of Science Project
Center for Science in the Public Interest

Dave Werntz
Science and Conservation Director
Conservation Northwest

Sarah Dufendach
Vice President for Legislative Affairs
Common Cause

Rachel Weintraub
Director of Product Safety and Senior Counsel
Consumer Federation of America

Ellen Bloom
Assistant Director of the Washington Office
Consumers Union

Jamie Rappaport Clark
Executive Vice President
Defenders of Wildlife

Dr. Jim Murtagh
Doctors for Open Government

Susan A. Holmes
Senior Legislative Representative
Earthjustice

Jon Hunter
Policy Director
Endangered Species Coalition

John Richard
Director
Essential Information

George Anderson
Ethics in Government Group

Daniel Hirsch
Executive Committee
Concerned Foreign Service Officers

Steven Aftergood
Project Director, Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists

Gwen Marshall
co-Chairman
Georgians for Open Government

Tom Devine
Legal Director
Government Accountability Project

Helen Salisbury, M.D.
Health Integrity Project

Brett Kimberlin
Director
Justice Through Music

Mike Kelly
Fish Biologist, Former Whistleblower

Michael D. Ostrolenk
Co-Founder/National Director
Liberty Coalition

Mary Treacy
Executive Director
Minnesota Coalition on Government Information

Joan E. Bertin, Esq.
Executive Director
National Coalition Against Censorship

Diana Zuckerman, Ph.D.
President
National Research Center for Women & Families

Amy Allina
Program Director
National Women's Health Network

Karen Wayland
Legislative Director
Natural Resources Defense Council

Kim Nelson
Research Wildlife Biologist

Rick Engler
Director
New Jersey Work Environment Council

Sean Moulton
Director of Information Policy
OMB Watch

Patrice McDermott
Director
OpenTheGovernment.org

Siobhan Reynolds
President
Pain Relief Network

Larry Siems
Director, Freedom to Write and International Programs
PEN American Center

Danielle Brian
Executive Director
Project On Government Oversight

David Arkush
Director
Public Citizen's Congress Watch

Jeff Ruch
Executive Director
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility

Kirsten Moore
President and CEO
Reproductive Health Technologies Project

James A. Landrith, Jr.
Founder
The Multiracial Activist

Ron Marshall
Chairman
The New Grady Coalition

Ellen Paul
Executive Director
The Ornithological Council

John W. Whitehead
President
The Rutherford Institute

Kevin Kuritzky
The Student Health Integrity Project

Dane vonBreichenruchardt
President
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

Francesca T. Grifo, Ph.D.
Director, Scientific Integrity Program
Union of Concerned Scientists

Bruce McIntosh
Staff Ecologist
Western Nebraska Resources Council

John Judge
9/11 Research Project

John Young
Retired Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

And in other news...

CO2, methane up sharply in 2007

By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The amount of two key greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere rose sharply in 2007, and carbon dioxide levels this year are literally off the chart, the U.S. government reported on Wednesday.
In its annual index of greenhouse gas emissions, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found atmospheric carbon dioxide, the primary driver of global climate change, rose by 0.6 percent, or 19 billion tons last year.
The amount of methane increased by 0.5 percent, or 27 million tons, after nearly a decade of little or no change, according preliminary figures to scientists at the government's Earth System Research Laboratory in Colorado.
Methane's greenhouse effect is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide's, but there is far less of it in the atmosphere. Overall, methane has about half the climate impact of carbon dioxide.
The primary source of carbon dioxide is the burning of fossil fuels, which is increasing, with China now the world's biggest emitter, said Pieter Tans, who studies greenhouse gases at the laboratory. The United States is second.
The greenhouse gas index, based on data from 60 sites around the world, showed that that last year's carbon dioxide increase added 2.4 molecules to every million molecules of air, a measurement known as parts per million, or ppm.
OFF THE CHART
Carbon dioxide levels were about 270 ppm in the mid-18th century, before the wide use of fossil fuels that began with the Industrial Revolution. Last year's levels were near 390 ppm, and they have been rising more steeply over the last three decades, Tans said in a telephone interview.
"The average (annual rise) over the last five or six years has been 2 ppm and that is actually steeper than it has been in previous decades," he said. "This whole decade the rate of increase has accelerated, and we have a very clear candidate (for the cause) and that's emissions from burning fossil fuels."
The rise continued in 2008, according to a chart of global carbon dioxide emissions online here, which showed world emissions of this gas heading off the chart at over 386 ppm.
"It's gloomy," Tans said. "With carbon dioxide emissions, we're on the wrong track, it's obvious. And I'm also fully convinced that we're in actually quite a dangerous situation for climate."
The increase in methane emissions after years of little change may indicate that methane locked for thousands of years in frozen Arctic soil known as permafrost is being emitted into the atmosphere as the soil melts.
"What used to be in the deep freeze is now being taken out in the warming," Tans said.
It is also possible that the 2007 rise in methane emissions is due to some other cause. Methane emissions rose sharply between 1978 and 1998 and then leveled off.

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/news/environment

Now sit back and observe why.