It's nothing like the systematic attack on sound science undertaken by the Bush Administration... or is it?
This weekend, the LA Times ran a broad-scope story on how the Obama Administration has falled far short of the promised sweeping reversal of Bush-era polticization and silencing of government scientists:
Scientists expected Obama administration to be friendlier
A culture of politics trumping science, many say, persists despite the president's promises. The use of potentially toxic dispersants to fight the gulf oil spill is cited as just one example. By Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger
When he ran for president, Barack Obama attacked the George W. Bush administration for putting political concerns ahead of science on such issues as climate change and public health. And during his first weeks in the White House, President Obama ordered his advisors to develop rules to "guarantee scientific integrity throughout the executive branch."
Many government scientists hailed the president's pronouncement. But a year and a half later, no such rules have been issued. Now scientists charge that the Obama administration is not doing enough to reverse a culture that they contend allowed officials to interfere with their work and limit their ability to speak out.
"We are getting complaints from government scientists now at the same rate we were during the Bush administration," said Jeffrey Ruch, an activist lawyer who heads an organization representing scientific whistle-blowers [PEER].
White House officials, however, said they remained committed to protecting science from interference and that proposed guidelines would be forwarded to Obama in the near future.
But interviews with several scientists - most of whom requested anonymity because they feared retaliation in their jobs - as well as reviews of e-mails provided by Ruch and others show a wide range of complaints during the Obama presidency:
In Florida, water-quality experts reported government interference with efforts to assess damage to the Everglades stemming from development projects.
In the Pacific Northwest, federal scientists said they were pressured to minimize the effects they had documented of dams on struggling salmon populations.
In several Western states, biologists reported being pushed to ignore the effects of overgrazing on federal land.
In Alaska, some oil and gas exploration decisions given preliminary approval under Bush moved forward under Obama, critics said, despite previously presented evidence of environmental harm.
The most immediate case of politics allegedly trumping science, some government and outside environmental experts said, was the decision to fight the gulf oil spill with huge quantities of potentially toxic chemical dispersants despite advice to examine the dangers more thoroughly.
And the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based organization, said it had received complaints from scientists in key agencies about the difficulty of speaking out publicly.
"Many of the frustrations scientists had with the last administration continue currently," said Francesca Grifo, the organization's director of scientific integrity.
On can easily argue that the Obama Administration is just putting its thumbs on the scales in these and other cases, where the Bush Admihnistration used its elbows. But is that supposed to be a good thing?
Speaking of those quidelines that "White House officials" said "would would be forwarded to Obama in the near future," PEER sent out a press release today, calling for the removal of a gag order on scietntists at National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]:
I intersperse today's focus on the aftermath of the House vote on health care with this interview that shifts focus back onto the Obama Administration. Although the underlying subject matter is the environment and public health, the focus on openness, transparency, accountability, freedom from corporate influence, and fulfilling the promise of the 2008 campaign have application to virtually every issue in the book.
Part one of this interview discussed issues in general. It ended with PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch saying that Obama Administration stalling on whistleblower issues, "adds to the sense they don't have a policy, and without a policy, nobody is empowered to make decisions and so it almost operates as a de facto continuation of a third Bush term."
Part two looks more closely at some specific examples--two whistleblowers PEER is defending, and EPA's compromised relationship with the coal industry.
OL:Can you tell me about the case of Teresa Chambers?
Jeff Ruch: She was chief of the US Park Police. She was appointed by the Bush Aministraiton following a nationwide search in 2002. She's been a police chief in Durham, and a career law enforcement professional, and she came into office after 9/11.
OL:Could you explain what the Park Police Chief position is?
Jeff Ruch: The US Park Police is the oldest uniformed force in service. It was founded by George Washington. It was the first federal police force. They're part of the National Park Service, and they're responsible for everything from primary security at Camp David to the national monuments here in Washington DC, to the Statue of Liberty, and even sections of the Golden Gate Bridge. They're the urban professional police force of the National Park Service, they have about 600 officers. And so it's a fairly high level law-enforcement position. In Washington DC, they also have responsibility for all the parks and parkways, so they're a major presence here in the capital.
After 9/11, there were orders to drastically increase patrols on the National Mall, where the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument are. That took officers off of the parks and parkways. And the union representing the park officers had gone to the Washington Post with internal documents showing they were not sufficiently staffed to occupy all of these ports. And she as the Park Police Chief was designated to respond. For the agency. And she confirmed that the documents were accurate, which they were. And indicated that they in fact didn't have the force level.
Her interview called a tantrum in the Park Service and the parent agency, the Interior Department, as well as the White House. And three days after that article was published in the Post, she was called to the director's office, where the director was not present. A deputy and two armed guards were there and she was stripped of her badge and gun and identification, given a cardboard box for her personal possessions and marched out into the street.
Jeff Ruch is executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). I interviewed him in response to an October 30 email PEER sent out, "Why Whistleblowers Are Worse Off Since The Inauguration". Because I'm on PEER's media email list, I've aware of the general tenor of how little seems to have changed in their world below the radar of most political reporting. Public employees trying to fulfill their duty to protect the environment and public health, through their own actions, and through informing others--citizens and government officials alike--had a very hard time under the Bush Administration. With the Obama Adminstration, they were expecting, as promised "Change We Can Believe In". That change has yet to come.
This email spoke about the general pattern of inaction and frustration that has set in, and it seemed to be the perfect time to take a closer look, with a broader focus than just one case in isolation. As I suspected, the picture painted by Jeff Ruch in this interview is one that provides greater specificity for the more general sense of disconnect between Obama's campaign promises and how his Administration has governed so far. While the issues PEER deals with a vitally important in themselves, the insight into a more general pattern of how the Obama Administration operates makes this interview even more valuable. Because of the interview length (over 5,000 words), I've divided it into two parts. The first part introduces PEER, what it does, how it works, and the general problems that have emerged with the Obama Administration. Part two gets into greater detail, focusing on two high-profile whistleblowers PEER is defending, as well as discussing some of the problems involving EPA and the coal industry.
STATE BLOGS
I intersperse today's focus on the aftermath of the House vote on health care with this interview that shifts focus back onto the Obama Administration. Although the underlying subject matter is the environment and public health, the focus on openness, transparency, accountability, freedom from corporate influence, and fulfilling the promise of the 2008 campaign have application to virtually every issue in the book.