Federal Agencies Investigate Claims that Bush Administration Muzzled Scientists
Friday November 3, 2006
The inspectors general at NASA and the U.S. Commerce Department have begun investigations to determine whether the Bush administration has tried to muzzle government scientists and to censor or alter their research on global warming. The investigations were prompted by a request from 14 U.S. senators—13 Democrats and U.S. Sen. Jim Jeffords, a former Republican who is the Senate’s only Independent—in a letter sent to the two inspectors general on September 29, 2006.
Photo courtesy of Susan Marton
The inspectors general, who operate independently, are looking into repeated allegations that political appointees have stopped climate researchers at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) from making their findings public.
Scientists Claim White House Interference
Over the past year, several U.S. government climate scientists, including James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and Tom Knutson, a NOAA scientist whose research shows a connection between global warming and hurricane intensity—have accused the Bush administration of silencing them and censoring their work. The White House has consistently denied those charges.
U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and author of the letter he and his Senate colleagues sent to the two inspectors general, told The Washington Post that he was pleased the investigation was taking place. "It's extremely important, because the evidence is so obvious that they've tried to block the presentation of information on this in an unbiased fashion," Lautenberg said.
Lautenberg said the investigations "will uncover internal documents and agency correspondence that may expose widespread misconduct. Taxpayers do not fund scientific research so the Bush White House can alter it,” he said.
White House Denies Trying to Silence Scientists
Kristen Hellmer, a spokeswoman for the White House Council for Environmental Quality, denied the Bush administration has tried to silence climate scientists.
"We have in place the most transparent system of science reporting, and claims that the administration interfered with scientists are false," Hellmer told The Associated Press. "Our focus is on taking action and making real progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The nearly $2 billion worth of climate science we publish annually leads the world and speaks for itself."
Also Read:
Comments
To hell with the environment. Big business and oil profits are the only thing that really matters. There is no such thing as global warming. Who cares if there are no polar bears. What good are they anyway?
General Motors got rid of those stupid street cars years ago. Profits are the only thing in this world that matter.
More money beats a clean world any day.
Ever tried to buy your next meal without any money?
I agree with you George, to an extent. Money does make the world go round. The people who don’t realize that are just plain ignorant to the ways of the world. But I also think that by preserving our environment and making it better, we can increase our profits in the long run.
I also think it will help to stabalize our economy. It may not happen over night, but then what does? Sure it will take some time, but in the end I think it will be very profitable.
1. George, people like you make me vary sad for the next generations to come. Our children will have to deal with our greed for money to the extent that we destroy the world we live in. Were do you think you can live if you have lots of money and no air to breath because we have clear cut all the trees. Yeah too hell with the environment. Wipe out all the animals, cut down all the trees, and then we will all die because there will be no eco system to sustain us either. You know what’s funny; people don’t really know what’s going on. We just think with our emotions. “I want a bigger house so I will look good in front of my neighbors and so I can have rooms that I don’t even use.” “I want a bigger car like an SUV because I feel safe in it.” You know that people die way more in crashes in SUV’s than regular sized cars. SUV’s are less agile and can’t maneuver around things causing more accidents and the people in them die more often. But you see all these people going out and buying SUV’s and the number one reason is, “they are safer.” Where do they get this idea? Maybe you could tell me George, they seem to have the same rational as you.