EPA science under scrutiny by Trump political staff
ASSOCIATED PRESS
President Donald Trump, accompanied by Vice President Mike Pence, give a ‘thumbs-up’ as they walk to the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on Wednesday after a visit to the Homeland Security Department.
WASHINGTON >> The Trump administration is scrutinizing studies and data published by scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency, while new work is under a “temporary hold” before it can be released.
The communications director for President Donald Trump’s transition team at EPA, Doug Ericksen, said Wednesday the review extends to all existing content on the federal agency’s website, including details of scientific evidence showing that the Earth’s climate is warming and man-made carbon emissions are to blame.
Ericksen clarified his earlier statements he made to The Associated Press, which reported that the Trump administration was mandating that any studies or data from EPA scientists undergo review by political appointees before they can be released to the public. He said he was speaking about existing scientific information on the EPA website that is under review by members of the Trump administration’s transition team.
He said new work by the agency’s scientists is subject to the same “temporary hold” as other kinds of public releases, which he said would likely be lifted by Friday. He said there was no mandate to subject studies or data to political review.
Former EPA staffers under both Republican and Democratic presidents said the restrictions imposed under Trump far exceed the practices of past administrations.
Ericksen said no decisions have yet been made about whether to strip mentions of climate change from epa.gov
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
“We’re taking a look at everything on a case-by-case basis, including the web page and whether climate stuff will be taken down,” Erickson said in an earlier interview with the AP. “Obviously with a new administration coming in, the transition time, we’ll be taking a look at the web pages and the Facebook pages and everything else involved here at EPA.”
Asked specifically about scientific data being collected by agency scientists, such as routine monitoring of air and water pollution, Ericksen responded, “Everything is subject to review.”
Trump press secretary Sean Spicer appeared to distance the president from the issue, telling reporters the communications clampdown at EPA wasn’t directed by the White House.
Trump’s nominee for EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, said during his Senate confirmation hearing last week that he disagreed with past statements by the president alleging that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese to harm U.S. economic competitiveness. But like Trump, Pruitt has a long history of publicly questioning the validity of climate science.
William K. Reilly, who was EPA administrator under Republican President George H.W. Bush, said what seems to be happening with science at the agency is “going down a very dark road.”
The EPA’s 14-page scientific integrity document, enacted during the Obama administration, describes how scientific studies were to be conducted and reviewed in the agency. It said scientific studies should eventually be communicated to the public, the media and Congress “uncompromised by political or other interference.”
The scientific integrity document expressly “prohibits managers and other Agency leadership from intimidating or coercing scientists to alter scientific data, findings or professional opinions or inappropriately influencing scientific advisory boards.” It provides ways for employees who know the science to disagree with scientific reports and policies and offers them some whistleblower protection.
George Gray, the assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Research and Development during the Republican administration of President George W. Bush, said scientific studies were reviewed usually at lower levels and even when they were reviewed at higher levels, it was to give officials notice about the studies — not for editing of content.
“Scientific studies would be reviewed at the level of a branch or a division or laboratory,” said Gray, now professor of public health at George Washington University. “Occasionally things that were known to be controversial would come up to me as assistant administrator and I was a political appointee. Nothing in my experience would go further than that.”
“There’s no way to win if you try to change things,” Gray said.
The AP and other media outlets reported earlier this week that emails sent internally to EPA staff mandated a temporary blackout on media releases and social media activity, as well as a freeze on contract approvals and grant awards.
Ericksen said Tuesday that the agency was preparing to greenlight nearly all of the $3.9 billion in pending contracts that were under review. Ericksen said he could not immediately provide details about roughly $100 million in distributions that will remain frozen.
The uncertainty about the contract and grant freeze coupled with the lack of information flowing from the agency since Trump took office have raised fears that states and other recipients could lose essential funding for drinking water protection, hazardous waste oversight and a host of other programs.
The agency also took a potential first step Tuesday toward killing environmental rules completed as President Barack Obama’s term wound down. At least 30 were targeted in the Federal Register for delayed implementation, including updated pollution rulings for several states, renewable fuel standards and limits on the amount of formaldehyde that can leach from wood products.
Jared Blumenfeld, who served until last year as EPA’s regional administrator for California and the Pacific Northwest, compared what is happening to a “hostile takeover” in the corporate world.
“Ericksen and these other folks that have been brought in … have basically put a hold on everything,” said Blumenfeld, who regularly speaks with former colleagues still at the agency. “The level of mismanagement being exercised during this transition is startling and the impact on the public is alarming.”
For example, he said EPA employees aren’t clear whether they can direct contractors who handle all of California’s Superfund sites. Some EPA employees have taken to their own social media accounts to say what’s happening inside the agency, despite fears of retaliation.
“There’s a strong sense of resistance,” Blumenfeld said.
The AP and other media outlets reported earlier this week that emails sent internally to EPA staff mandated a temporary blackout on media releases and social media activity, as well as a freeze on contract approvals and grant awards.
Ericksen said Tuesday that the agency was preparing to greenlight nearly all of the $3.9 billion in pending contracts that were under review. Ericksen said he could not immediately provide details about roughly $100 million in distributions that will remain frozen.
The uncertainty about the contract and grant freeze coupled with the lack of information flowing from the agency since Trump took office have raised fears that states and other recipients could lose essential funding for drinking water protection, hazardous waste oversight and a host of other programs.
The agency also took a potential first step Tuesday toward killing environmental rules completed as President Barack Obama’s term wound down. At least 30 were targeted in the Federal Register for delayed implementation, including updated pollution rulings for several states, renewable fuel standards and limits on the amount of formaldehyde that can leach from wood products.
———
Follow AP environmental reporter Biesecker at Twitter.com/mbieseck
16 responses to “EPA science under scrutiny by Trump political staff”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Nixon was brilliant on international relations/national security, but in matters of domestic policy he often had a tin ear.
EPA, like his mis guided attempt at wage and price controls, was and remains a disaster.
Once the lying, cooked books, and subterfuge of the IPCC became exposed to some very public limelight, the credibility of the so called “science” in support of the man made glo-bal-oney warming hoax went right into the toilet …… where it belongs.
My hope is that PRESIDENT TRUMP and his team will crawl up the [redacted] of every EPA “scientist” with a microscope to see how much of this flat out hoax and fake “science” are still being peddled to credulous, arm waving, fast talking, grand standing saps who desperately want to make something of themselves and their “lives” other than a nuisance.
HUZZAH for our 45th President!
Nixon was brilliant on international relations/national security, but in matters of domestic policy he often had a tin ear.
EPA, like his mis guided attempt at wage and price controls, was and remains a disaster.
Once the l y i n g, cooked books, and subterfuge of the IPCC became exposed to some very public limelight, the credibility of the so called “science” in support of the man made glo-bal-oney warming hoax went right into the t o I i e t …… where it belongs.
brilliant on Vietnam? Trump is at war on science. He hates reality so makes things up as he goes along. It won’t work for him. Or America.
Seems like science has been kidnapped and is now being held for ransom.
No, rather it’s the other way around. If you instead bothered to read up on the subject you would know that the “theory” of climate warming has no substance, data is manipulated, and scientific critics who disagree with this theory are shunned.
Orwellian
German Emissions Increase in 2016 Due to Nuclear Plant Closure
German emissions increased in 2016 for a second year in a row as a result of the country closing one of its nuclear plants and replacing it with coal and natural gas, a new Environmental Progress analysis finds.
Germany added a whopping 10 percent more wind turbine capacity and 2.5 percent more solar panel capacity between 2015 and 2016, but generated less than one percent more electricity from wind and generated one percent less electricity from solar.
The reason is because Germany had significantly less sunshine and wind in 2016 than 2015.
As such, 2016 is a dramatic illustration of the limits of energy sources that depend on the weather. Their output varies dramatically not just hour-to-hour but also year-to-year.
See more at:http://www.environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/1/13/breaking-german-emissions-increase-in-2016-for-second-year-in-a-row-due-to-nuclear-closure
You need to do a better job of research before posting. Use credible references versus one owned by eco terrorists. Basically they lie.
Looks like Germany just got almost all their power from renewable energy. How about that.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-16/germany-just-got-almost-all-of-its-power-from-renewable-energy
Who better to question scientists than imbeciles who don’t believe in science?
Trump is profoundly mentally ill. His administration will result in a disaster for the United States.
I don’t think Trump is mentally ill…he is a twitter addict. That’s the way they over dose on twitter. If you notice…most of the pictures of him show him raising his twitter thumb to show how talented he is.
A Pew Research Center Poll in July 2009 showed that only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans. The Republican’s Orwellian disdain for facts, science, and truth should be disqualifying for any position of responsibility at any level of government.
You really are pushing a weak position: Taking a poll of alleged “scientist” is like asking w h o r e s how many of them attended church last Sunday.
Indeed in these days of junk science there is a marked resemblance between the so called “scientific community” and the worlds oldest profession.
The fact is that most of these “scientists” that allegedly put so much faith in the power of trivial life forms – – homo sapiens – – to cause planetary heating OR cooling typically rely on computers to “model” the dynamics of climate change and thus identify cause.
And for that reason it is all a crock of [redacted]. The weather TODAY cannot be accurately modeled – – there are far too many variables – – to predict what it is going to be TOMORROW with any great reliability, yet we are expected to believe these “scientists” can predict what the climate will be to a tenth of a degree ten our a hundred years from now.
This does not pass the sniff test.
Anyone who has ever written code for any kind of computer model knows how easy it is to tweak a few lines of that code – – which the public NEVER sees – – to deliver any “scientific finding” the “scientist” has been paid to deliver.
Thos is right again about these so-called scientists and their phony facts. The dramatic and pictures of rapidly retreating gkaciers and polar ice, the records of ocean surface temperature rise, the record hurricane frequency, the increase in severe storms, droughts and fires, and the fact that flasks with higher CO2 or methane concentration get warmer that those with lower CO2 when left in the sun are all meaningless. Why scare people and hurt the glorious fossil fuel industry? It’s just a conspiracy. Consider these alternative facts. Scientists have been wrong about things before, so they should never be trusted.
Sure our entire society is built on the achievements of science, but this is just a reflection of how deep the conspiracy goes. This includes weather and geoscience. Thos is right.
Turn off your computers everyone, the scientists are tweaking lines of code to kill America! Throw away your cell phones too. Don’t use GPS or ride in cars or airplanes. Those are designed based on “science”. Don’t go to the doctor either if you are sick. Just go live off the land, maybe in a cave, and pray more. Listen to Thos.
Embrace “alternate facts” instead of science facts. Listen to your gut, and to Thos and to Trump.
Especially listen to the fossil fuel industry lobby. Thos has no criticism for climate deniers, and we know be never holds back when he sees fault with people, so they must have the real facts. Ignore and attack those pin-head science losers, Thos is the real expert… on everything.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2015/03/05/who-is-more-anti-science-republicans-or-democrats/#351f023855b1
Was there mention “rogue” emails being sent by unauthorized individual who had access to communication channels within the EPA? In my opinion, the EPA’s management may need to be investigated.
“The AP and other media outlets reported earlier this week that emails sent internally to EPA staff mandated a temporary blackout on media releases and social media activity, as well as a freeze on contract approvals and grant awards.”