By:

Randy Batts
Benjamin Dickens
Joseph Barger
Omar Baksh
Daniella Aking
 Issue summary
Our topic is about politics and whether or not they affect
decisions the government makes when discussing matters of
scientific issues. Throughout history, there have been many
disputes over the credibility of science. Although its
information revolves around logic and reason, the vast
majority still chose ideology. Nowadays, people have come to
rely on science for an immense amount of issues and
concerns. It is through science that our way of life evolves.

In the United States, the relationship between the government

and science has been very special. This is mainly because
science has made discoveries in a lot of different areas, such
as medicine, technology, and even war. In return, the
government funds the research for these breakthroughs and
for any question they might need answers for.
 ViewPoints
The “Yes” side argues that “the Bush administration
displays a clear pattern of suppression and distortion
of scientific findings across numerous federal
agencies. These actions have consequences for
human health, public safety, and community well-
being.”

The “No” side believes that “the Bush administration

strongly supports science and applies the highest
scientific standards in decision making.” Although it is
important, science is not the only thing that the
government has to take care of.
 Topics

• Distorting and Suppressing Climate

Change Research
• Censoring Information on Air Quality
• Distorting Scientific Knowledge on
Reproductive Health Issues
• Manipulation of Science Regarding the
Endangered Species Act
The Bush administration has refused to take action to
diminish human-caused changes in the climate,
even though the NAS and the IPCC rendered
statements about the importance of the matter. “Yet
Bush administration spokespersons continue to
contend that the uncertainties in climate projections
and fossil fuel emissions are too great to warrant
mandatory action to slow emissions,” (Taking
Sides).
Additionally, the administration tried to force the EPA
to significantly modify their report about climate
change.
 Response to Accusation of Suppression
and Distortion of Climate Change Research
• “The President has created the new U.S. Climate Change Science
Program to refocus a disorganized interagency activity into a
cohesive program,” (Taking Sides). Not only that, but in 2004, the
U.S. used $4 billion for climate change and technology.
• The President openly stated in a Rose Garden Speech 2001 that the
concentration of Greenhouse Gases has increased. He can be
quoted saying, “While scientific uncertainties, remain we can begin to
address the factors that contribute to climate change,” (Taking
Sides).
• In the same speech, he also cited the Academic Change Science
Report that was initiated at his administration’s request, and launched
a scientific effort to improve our understanding of global climate
change.
• In addition, the President’s Climate Change Program has developed
its plans through a transparent and open process. This strategic plan
released in 2003 by the Climate Change Scientific Program
incorporated the opinion of many scientists locally and around the
world.
• In the report, “The U.S. Climate Change Science
Program”, on page 8, it clearly states the goal of the
CCSP supervisor by the Bush Administration are:
– Improve knowledge of the Earth’s past and present climate
and environment.
– Improve qualifications of the forces bringing about changes
in the Earth’s climate and related systems.
– Reduce uncertainties in projections of how the Earth’s
climate may change in the future.
– Understand the sensitivity and adaptability of different
natural and managed ecosystems to climate.
– Explore the use and identify the limits of evolving knowledge
to manage risks and opportunities related to climate change.
How then can we accuse the bush Administration of
turning a blind eye on climate research and
environmental policies
For some time, the Bush administration has neglected to
submit any new policies toward regulating mercury
emissions from power plants. “Mercury emissions from
coal-fired power plants and other industrial sources
are making the fish in our lakes, rivers, and streams
unsafe to eat,” (Opposing Viewpoints). Because of
their inattention, all of society is to suffer. “Mercury can
affect multiple organ systems, including the nervous
system, heart, and immune system, throughout an
individual's lifespan,” (Opposing Viewpoints).
 From the other Standpoint…
The administration, in fact, used reports from the Environmental Protection Agency to decrease
emissions. “These updated risk levels were used by the Administration in the preparation of its
two regulatory proposals to reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants,” (Taking
Sides).
• The claim that the administration is withholding publications by the EPA on children health
specifically on mercury emission by coal power plants is simply not true.

• The review of the EPA report on children health and environmental issues occurred
independently of the administrations deliberation on mercury emission. There reviews are
standard operating procedures for areas that include areas of scientific and policy importance to
multiple agencies. As such the report was reviewed by a number of scientists and analysts
across federal lines.
• Agencies like the OSTP along with the EPA came together to make sure that the proposed
indicators had a firm scientific basis. So to say that the bush administration censored
information from the children health report on mercury emission is simply wrong and bias.
• An illustration would be, the report the EPA presented sighted that 8% of women of children
bearing age had a mercury blood level above the EPA reference document. This percentage
was actually 10% and it was through the reviews by different agencies that the literature was
republished with updated figures. So how then can the bush administration be accused of
withholding and censoring information.
• In conclusion I refer you to an article published by the National Review titled “ Cleaning the air”.
A recent news report by the EPA shows, air pollution has fallen to the lowest level ever
recorded. I guess the green group has some explaining to do. A table in the 1988-2002: EPA
Index of Leading Scientific Indicators shows that since 1976- sulfur dioxide decreased by more
than 65%, carbon monoxide by 70% and lead by 90%. How then can the EPA be accusing the
bush administration of sloppy environmental policies when the EPA data seem to indicate there
is no immediate threat. The public is often doped by the green and their potential migraine
about the enviroment.
When President Bush was Texas’ governor, reports showed
that the state was last in the nation in the decline of birth
rates among teens from 15 to 17. Furthermore, he distorted
“science-based performance measures” so that he could test
the implementation of the abstinence-only programs he
created (Taking Sides). In October 2002, the Bush
administration replaced a fact sheet that posted “condom
education does not promote sexual activity” with “a
document that emphasizes condom failure rates and the
effectiveness of abstinence” (Taking Sides).
 On the other side…
The Bush administration rebuts that, “there were no CDC science-based performance
measures associated with this program,” (Taking Sides). They also include that the
subject involving the fact sheet, “is a distortion of the facts. The CDC routinely
takes information off its website and replaces it with more up-to-date information,”
(Taking Sides).
A Department of HHS-funded study, started in 1998, tracked 2,310 students; 60
percent were assigned randomly to an abstinence-based program, and the rest were
assigned to control groups.
The results are now in: Teens in abstinence programs are more likely to hold strong
views in favor of sexual abstinence and against out-of-wedlock sexual relations than
their counterparts who were not enrolled in abstinence-based programs. Those
enrolled in the programs also were far more likely to understand the negative
consequences of sex outside of marriage.
“Students who are in these [abstinence education] programs are recognizing that
abstinence is a positive choice,” HHS Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation Michael O’Grady said. “Abstinence education programs that help our
young people address issues of healthy relationships, self-esteem, decision-making,
and effective communications are important to keeping them healthy and safe,”
( Physicians for Life).
• The Bush administration uses is trying to
weaken the power of the ESA by limiting the
population modeling.
• In addition, the Bush administration may write
new regulations to make it more difficult to get
new species listed as threatened or endangered.
• “Perhaps most troubling, however, has been the
way in which the Bush Administration has
suppressed or even attempted to distort the
scientific findings of its own agencies to further
its political agenda,” (Taking Sides).
 In Response….
“We are trying to change that focus. We are trying to focus on
recovery, what is necessary to bring those species back to
sustainable population,” (Pombo).
“One of that things we have looked at quite extensively is a system or a
series of grants and aid and tax incentives that would make it
possible for someone to maintain an improved habitat on their own
property to not attract endangered species and have the
government be a partner with that. Nearly 90 percent of the listed
species have the majority of their habitat on private property,”
(Pombo).
“The ESA should reward and encourage landowners for their
conservation efforts. Since 80 percent of threatened and
endangered species live on privately owned land, our only hope to
improve and recover many species will depend on conservation
efforts by private citizens,” ( Taylor).
 References
• Hansen, Brian. "States decry Bush budget proposal to cut funding for air-
quality grants." Inside Energy 20 Mar. 2006: 8. ProQuest. McGraw Hill
Publications Company. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1014506991&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=20175&RQT=309&VName=PQD>
.

• Taylor, James M. "Pombo Calls for Changes to Endangered Species Act:

Citizens driving away species to avoid scope of law." Environmental News
[The Heartland Institute] 1 Mar. 2004, Pombo Calls for Changes to
Endangered Species Act: ed. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?
artId=14552&CFID=10801610&CFTOKEN=87138356>.

• California. U.S. House of Representatives Resources Committee. "

Statement of The Honorable Richard Pombo, Chairman, Committee on
Resources." ISSUES AFFECTING JOBS IN THE FORESTS INDUSTRY.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2004. 2. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/documents/cong_hearings
/house/108/househearing108_91602.html>.
• California. U.S. House of Representatives Resources Committee. " Statement
of The Honorable Richard Pombo, Chairman, Committee on Resources."
ISSUES AFFECTING JOBS IN THE FORESTS INDUSTRY. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 2004. 2. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/documents/cong_hearings/
house/108/househearing108_91602.html>.

• Easton, Thomas A. "Issue 1: Does Politics come before Science in Current

Government Decision Making?" Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Science,
Technology, and Society. Seventh Edition Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill
Contemporary Learning Series, 2006. 2 - 25

• Moore, Stephen. "Clearing the Air." National Review 56.25 (Dec. 2004): 10.
Wilson Web. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com/hww/jumpstart.jhtml?
recid=0bc05f7a67b1790e0d514c58f237fb0f879d954e0a8d9d7601bbd6fcefecef
bf051541ff962646f0&fmt=C>.

• Emily Figdor. "Coal-Fired Power Plants Produce Dangerous Mercury

Emissions." Current Controversies: Alternative Energy Sources. Ed. Darrin
Gunkel. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2006. Opposing Viewpoints Resource
Center. Thomson Gale. Florida International University. 14 Oct. 2006
<http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/infomark.do?
&contentSet=GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T010&prodId=OVRC&docId=EJ3010
426208&source=gale&srcprod=OVRC&userGroupName=miam11506&version=
1.0>.
• United States. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on
Global Change Research Science Program. "Integrating Climate and Global
Change Research." Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change. By United
States House of Representatives Subcommittee on Global Change
Research. Washington, D.C.: Subcommittee on Global Change Research,
2003. 11-28. U.S. Climate Change Science Program. U.S. Climate Change
Technology Program. 14 Oct. 2006 <http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/
stratplan2003/final/ccspstratplan2003-all.pdf>.

• "HHS Study: Abstinence Education Effective." Physicians for Life. 5 June

2005. 14 Oct. 2006. <http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/791/27/>.