|
Vitter Calls on White House to Account for “Scientific Misconduct” in
Federal Agencies By Kevin Mooney On November 16, 2011 6:00 Am “Scientific misconduct” within key federal
agencies has given rise to regulatory policies that burden an already
beleaguered economy and erode the public trust, Sen. David Vitter warns in a letter addressed
to the White House. At issue is a report from the U.S. Department of Interior’s
(DOI) Office of Inspector General (OIG) that describes how the agency
manipulated and altered a 30-day report from the National Academy of Engineers.
Sen. Vitter and several House colleagues, including Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.),
Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), called for the OIG
investigation in response to allegations that officials with Interior had
deliberately misrepresented scientific opinion on the merits of the deepwater
drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. “We’ve seen facts manipulated and science
ignored across the administration while they’ve developed policies with huge
negative effects on the economy,” Vitter said. “We want the public to be aware
of the administration’s misconduct, but we also want agencies to be transparent
and explain their methods.” The letter from Vitter, co-authored by Sen.
James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Rep. Darrel Issa (R-Calif.), is addressed to John
Holdren, President Obama’s science advisor. “The IG investigation showed that not only had
Interior violated the Information Quality Act (IQA), but there was direct
involvement by the White House, specifically Carol Browner, to manipulate the
summary documentation in violation of peer-review protocol,” the letter says.
“…The investigation revealed blatant political influence, on what should have
been an independent scientific assessment, to inaccurately represent the views
of a particular team of scientists.” In response to the explosion of British
Petroleum’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig on April 20, 2010, Interior declared a
moratorium on deepwater drilling, which it extended for six months that
following May 27 in tandem with the 30 day report. An engineer who was asked to
participate in the peer review process of the report’s recommendations sent a
letter to Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sen. Vitter and Sen. Mary Landrieu (R-La.) making
it clear that he and his colleagues did not officially endorse the moratorium.
The letter was co-signed by other engineers and reads in part as follows: “A group of those named in the Secretary of
Interior’s Report, “INCREASED SAFETY MEASURES FOR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON THE
OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF” dated May 27, 2010 are concerned that our names are
connected with the [deepwater drilling] moratorium as proposed in the executive
summary of the report. There is an implication that we have somehow agreed to
or “peer reviewed” the main recommendation of that report. This is not the
case.” (emphasis is included in the original letter) Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Vitter, identified
White House Climate Change Advisor Carol Browner as a key figure responsible
for manipulating and distorting the scientific language. “Carol Browner is one of the leading voices of
junk science,” he said. “She was the one who changed the summary language just
hours before the 30 day review was received and added a sentence to make it
appear as the engineers endorsed the moratorium when they hadn’t. That’s why we
needed the IG investigation.” Early in his term, Obama issued a
“Presidential Memorandum on Scientific Integrity” that emphasized the
importance of sound science in shaping and directing public policy, Vitter,
Inhofe and Issa point out in their letter to the White House. “Public trust in federal scientific work is
waning and the academic community has gone so far as to call the situation a
crisis,” the letter says. “Accordingly, we request that you provide us with an
accounting of your activities in response to serious questions raised about the
quality of science utilized by this Administration.” The letter concludes with a series of
questions put to Holdren. 1. When this IG
report became public, who did you contact at Interior to discuss scientific
integrity and allegations that Interior violated peer reviewed protocol? 2. Did you speak
directly with Secretary Salazar or anyone else identified in the IG report? 3. What was the
content of your conversations with the President and Carol Browner, as well as
any other White House officials? 4. What firewalls did
you put in place at the White House to prevent future political influence from
interfering with an independent scientific report? 5. What actions were
taken at both Interior and the White House, or otherwise government-wide, as a
direct result of your efforts following the IG’s findings? 6. What are your
suggestions for strengthening the Information Quality Act in light of this
incident specifically? 7. What are your
suggestions for strengthening the Information Quality Act in light of this
incident? Kevin Mooney is the Capitol Bureau Reporter
with the Pelican Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached atkmooney@pelicaninstitute.org and
followed on Twitter. |