As Jesuit schoolboys studying world history we learned that Copernicus and Galileo
self-censored for many decades their proofs that the earth revolved around the
sun and that a less restrained heliocentrist, Giordano Bruno, was burned alive
in 1600 for the crime of sound science. With the encouragement of our professor,
Father Joyce, we marveled at the capacity of human leaders to corrupt noble institutions.
Lust for power had caused the Catholic hierarchy to subvert the church's most
central purpose--the search for existential truths.
Today, flat-earthers within the Bush Administration--aided by right-wing allies
who have produced assorted hired guns and conservative think tanks to further
their goals--are engaged in a campaign to suppress science that is arguably
unmatched in the Western world since the Inquisition. Sometimes, rather than
suppress good science, they simply order up their own. Meanwhile, the Bush White
House is purging, censoring and blacklisting scientists and engineers whose
work threatens the profits of the Administration's corporate paymasters or challenges
the ideological underpinnings of their radical anti-environmental agenda. Indeed,
so extreme is this campaign that more than sixty scientists, including Nobel
laureates and medical experts, released a statement on February 18 that accuses
the Bush Administration of deliberately distorting scientific fact "for
partisan political ends."
I've had my own experiences with Torquemada's modern successors, both personal
and related to my work as an environmental lawyer and advocate working for the
Natural Resources Defense Council and the Waterkeeper Alliance.
At the time of the World Trade Center catastrophe on September 11, 2001, I
had just opened an office at 115 Broadway, cater-corner from the World Trade
Center and within the official security zone to which access was, afterward,
restricted for several months. Upon returning to the office in October my partner,
Kevin Madonna, suffered a burning throat, nausea and a headache that was still
pounding twenty-four hours after he left the building. Despite the Environmental
Protection Agency's claims that air quality was safe, Kevin refused to return
and we closed the office. Many workers did not have that option; their employers
relied on the EPA's nine press releases between September and December of 2001
reassuring the public about the wholesome air quality downtown. We have since
learned that the government was lying to us. An Inspector General's report released
last August revealed that the EPA's data did not support those assurances and
that its press releases were being drafted or doctored by White House officials
intent on reopening Wall Street.
On September 13, just two days after the terror attack, the EPA announced that
asbestos dust in the area was "very low" or entirely absent. On September
18 the agency said the air was "safe to breathe." In fact, more than
25 percent of the samples collected by the EPA before September 18 showed presence
of asbestos above the 1 percent safety benchmark. Among outside studies, one
performed by scientists at the University of California, Davis, found particulates
at levels never before seen in more than 7,000 similar tests worldwide. A study
being performed by Mt. Sinai School of Medicine has found that 78 percent of
rescue workers suffered lung ailments and 88 percent had ear, nose and throat
problems in the months following the attack and that about half still had persistent
lung and respiratory illnesses nine months to a year later.
Dan Tishman, whose company was involved in the reconstruction at 140 West Street,
required his crews to wear respirators but recalls seeing many rescue and construction
workers laboring unprotected--no doubt relying on the government's assurances.
"The frustrating thing is that everyone just counts on the EPA to be the
watchdog of public health," he says. "When that role is compromised,
people can get hurt."
I also recall the case of Dr. James Zahn, a nationally respected microbiologist
with the Agriculture Department's research service, who accepted my invitation
to speak to an April 2002 conference of more than 1,000 family farm advocates
and environmental and civic leaders in Clear Lake, Iowa. In a rigorous taxpayer-funded
study, Zahn had identified bacteria that can make people sick--and that are
resistant to antibiotics--in the air surrounding industrial-style hog farms.
His studies proved that billions of these "superbugs" were traveling
across property lines daily, endangering the health of neighbors and their herds.
I was shocked when Zahn canceled his appearance on the day of the conference
under orders from the Agriculture Department in Washington. I later uncovered
a fax trail proving the order was prompted by lobbyists from the National Pork
Producers Council. Zahn told me that his supervisor at the USDA, under pressure
from the hog industry, had ordered him not to publish his study and that he
had been forced to cancel more than a dozen public appearances at local planning
boards and county health commissions seeking information about health impacts
of industry mega-farms. Soon after my conference, Zahn resigned from the government
Ignoring Bad News
The Bush Administration's first instinct when it comes to science has been
to suppress, discredit or alter facts it doesn't like. Probably the best-known
case is global warming. Over the past two years the Administration has done
this to a dozen major government studies on global warming, as well as to a
report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in its own efforts
to stall action to control industrial emissions. The list also includes major
long-term studies by the federal government's National Research Council and
National Academy of Sciences, and by scientific teams at the EPA, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA, and a 2002 collaborative report
by scientists at all three of those agencies.
The Administration has taken special pains to shield Vice President Dick Cheney's
old company, Halliburton, which is part of an industry that has contributed
$58 million to Republicans since 2000. Halliburton is the leading practitioner
of a process used in extracting oil and gas known as hydraulic fracturing, in
which benzene is injected into underground formations. EPA scientists studying
the process in 2002 found that it could contaminate ground-water supplies in
excess of federal drinking water standards. A week after reporting their findings
to Congressional staff members, however, they revised the data to indicate that
benzene levels would not exceed government standards. In a letter to Representative
Henry Waxman, EPA officials said the change was made based on "industry
As a favor to utility and coal industries, America's largest mercury dischargers,
the EPA sat for nine months on a report exposing the catastrophic impact on
children's health of mercury, finally releasing it in February 2003. Among the
findings of the report: The bloodstream of one in twelve US women is saturated
with enough mercury to cause neurological damage, permanent IQ loss and a grim
inventory of other diseases in their unborn children.
The list goes on. In October 2001 Interior Secretary Gale Norton, responding
to a Senate committee inquiry on the effects of oil drilling on caribou in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, falsely claimed that the caribou would not
be affected, because they calve outside the area targeted for drilling. She
later explained that she somehow substituted "outside" for "inside."
She also substituted findings from a study financed by an oil company for some
of the ones that the Fish and Wildlife Service had prepared for her. In another
case, according to the Wall Street Journal, Norton and White House political
adviser Karl Rove pressed for changes that would allow diversion of substantial
amounts of water from the Klamath River to benefit local supporters and agribusiness
contributors. Some 34,000 endangered salmon were killed after National Marine
Fisheries scientists altered their findings on the amount of water the salmon
required. Environmentalists describe it as the largest fish kill in the history
of the West. Mike Kelly, the fisheries biologist on the Klamath who drafted
the biological opinion, told me that under the current plan coho salmon are
probably headed for extinction. According to Kelly, "The morale is very
low among scientists here. We are under pressure to get the right results. This
Administration is putting the species at risk for political gain. And not just
in the Klamath."
Roger Kennedy, former director of the National Park Service, told me that the
alteration and deletion of scientific information is now standard procedure
at Interior. "It's hard to decide what is more demoralizing about the Administration's
politicization of the scientific process," he said, "its disdain for
professional scientists working for our government or its willingness to deceive
the American public."
Getting the Right Answer
But suppressing or altering science can be a tricky business; the Bush Administration
has found it easier at times simply to arrange to get the results it wants.
A case in point is the decision in July by the EPA's regional office overseeing
the western Everglades to accept a study financed predominantly by developers,
which concludes that wetlands discharge more pollutants than they absorb. There
was no peer review or public comment. With its approval, the EPA is giving developers
credit for improving water quality by replacing natural wetlands with golf courses
and other developments.
The study was financed by the Water Enhancement and Restoration Committee,
which was formed primarily by local developers and chaired by Rick Barber, the
consultant for a golf course development for which the EPA had denied a permit
because it would pollute surrounding waters and destroy wetlands. The study
contradicts everything known about wetlands functioning, including a determination
by more than twenty-five scientists and managers at the Tampa Bay Estuary Program
that, on balance, wetlands do not generate nitrogen pollution. Bruce Boler,
a biologist and water-quality specialist working for the EPA office, resigned
in protest. Boler says the developers massaged the data to support their theory
by evaluating samples collected near roads and bridges, where developments discharge
pollutants. "It was like the politics trumped the science," he told
In a similar case, last November the EPA cut a private deal with a pesticide
manufacturer to take over federal studies of a pesticide it manufactures. Atrazine
is the most heavily utilized weedkiller in America. First approved in 1958,
by the 1980s it had been identified as a potential carcinogen associated with
high incidences of prostate cancer among workers at manufacturing facilities.
Testing by the US Geological Survey regularly finds alarming concentrations
of Atrazine in drinking water across the corn belt. Even worse, last year scientists
at the University of California, Berkeley, found that Atrazine at one-thirtieth
the government's "safe" 3 parts per billion level causes grotesque
deformities in frogs, including multiple sets of organs. And this year epidemiologists
from the University of Missouri found reproductive consequences in humans associated
with Atrazine, including male semen counts in farm communities that are 50 percent
below normal. Iowa scientists are finding similar results in a current study.
The Bush Administration reacted to the frightening findings not by banning
this dangerous chemical, as the European Union has, but by taking the studies
away from EPA scientists and, in an unprecedented move, giving the chemical's
manufacturer, Switzerland-based Syngenta, control over federal research. In
an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Sherry Ford, a spokesperson for Syngenta,
praised without irony the advantages of having the company monitor its own product.
"This is one way we can ensure it's not presenting any risk to the environment."
In a dramatic expansion of this disturbing strategy, the Bush Administration
now plans to systematically turn government science over to private industry
by contracting out thousands of science jobs to compliant consultants already
in the habit of massaging data to support corporate profits. The National Park
Service is preparing a first phase of contracting reviews, involving about 1,800
positions, including biologists, archeologists and environmental specialists.
Later phases may entail replacement of 11,000 employees, more than two-thirds
of the service's permanent work force.
At least federal employees enjoy civil service and whistleblower protection
intended to allow them to operate professionally and independently. Private
contractors don't enjoy the same level of protection. "You can shop for
the right contractor to give you the kind of result you want," says Frank
Buono, a retired Park Service veteran who now serves on the board of a nonprofit
whistleblower protection organization.
As a Last Resort, Fire the Messenger
Most federal employees have gone along with the Bush Administration's wishes,
but a few have tried to stand up for sound science. The results are predictable.
When a team of government biologists indicated that the Army Corps of Engineers
was violating the Endangered Species Act in managing the flow of the Missouri
River, the group was quickly replaced by an industry-friendly panel. (In an
unexpected--and fortunate--development, the new panel ultimately declined to
adopt the White House's pro-barge-industry position and upheld the decision
to manage the river to protect imperiled species.) Similarly, last April the
EPA suddenly dismantled an advisory panel that had spent nearly twenty-one months
developing rules for stringent regulation of industrial emissions of mercury
[see Alterman and Green, page 14].
Or consider the case of Tony Oppegard and Jack Spadaro, members of a team of
federal geodesic engineers selected to investigate the collapse of barriers
that held back a coal slurry pond in Kentucky containing toxic wastes from mountaintop
strip-mining. The 300-million-gallon spill was the largest in American history
and, according to the EPA, the greatest environmental catastrophe in the history
of the Eastern United States. Black lava-like toxic sludge containing sixty
poisonous chemicals choked and sterilized up to 100 miles of rivers and creeks
and poisoned the drinking water in seventeen communities. Unlike in other slurry
disasters, no one died, but hundreds of residents were sickened by contact with
The investigation had broad implications for the viability of mountaintop mining,
which involves literally lopping off mountaintops to get access to the underlying
coal. It is a process beloved by coal barons because it practically dispenses
with the need for human labor and thus increases industry profits. Spadaro,
the nation's leading expert on slurry spills, recalls, "We were geotechnical
engineers determined to find the truth. We simply wanted to get to the heart
of the matter--find out what happened and why, and to prevent it from happening
again. But all that was thwarted at the top of the agency by Bush appointees
who obstructed professionals trying to do their jobs."
The Bush Administration appointees all had coal industry pedigrees. Labor Secretary
Elaine Chao (the wife of Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate's biggest
recipient of industry largesse) appointed Dave Lauriski, a former executive
with Energy West Mining, as the new director of the Mine Safety and Health Administration,
which oversaw the investigation. His deputy assistant secretary was John Caylor,
an Anamax Mining alumnus. His other deputy assistant, John Correll, had worked
for both Amax and Peabody Coal.
Oppegard, the leader of the federal team, was fired on the day Bush was inaugurated
in 2001. All eight members of the team except Spadaro signed off on a whitewashed
investigation report. Spadaro, like the others, was harassed but flat-out refused
to sign. In April of 2001 Spadaro resigned from the team and filed a complaint
with the Inspector General of the Labor Department. Last June 4 he was placed
on administrative leave--a prelude to getting fired.
Bush Administration officials accuse Spadaro of "abusing his authority"
for allowing a handicapped instructor to have free room and board at a training
academy he oversees, an arrangement approved by his superiors. An internal report
vindicated Spadaro's criticisms of the investigation, but the Administration
is still going after his job. "I've been regulating mining since 1966,"
Spadaro told me. "This is the most lawless administration I've encountered.
They have no regard for protecting miners or the people in mining communities.
They are without scruples."
Science, like theology, reveals transcendent truths about a changing world.
At their best, scientists are moral individuals whose business is to seek the
truth. Over the past two decades industry and conservative think tanks have
invested millions of dollars to corrupt science. They distort the truth about
tobacco, pesticides, ozone depletion, dioxin, acid rain and global warming.
In their attempt to undermine the credible basis for public action (by positing
that all opinions are politically driven and therefore any one is as true as
any other), they also undermine belief in the integrity of the scientific process.
Now Congress and this White House have used federal power for the same purpose.
Led by the President, the Republicans have gutted scientific research budgets
and politicized science within the federal agencies. The very leaders who so
often condemn the trend toward moral relativism are fostering and encouraging
the trend toward scientific relativism. The very ideologues who derided Bill
Clinton as a liar have now institutionalized dishonesty and made it the reigning
culture of America's federal agencies.
The Bush Administration has so violated and corrupted the institutional culture
of government agencies charged with scientific research that it could take a
generation for them to recover their integrity even if Bush is defeated this
fall. Says Princeton University scientist Michael Oppenheimer, "If you
believe in a rational universe, in enlightenment, in knowledge and in a search
for the truth, this White House is an absolute disaster."