GOP-backed measures seek to rein in science used at EPA (Update)

February 8, 2017 by Michael Biesecker

Pondering new restrictions on how the Environmental Protection Agency can use scientific data, congressional Republicans are seeking advice from the chemical and fossil fuel industries.

House Science, Space and Technology committee chairman Lamar Smith this week accused the Obama administration of relying on faulty and falsified data to justify new regulations, such as limiting carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants. The Texas Republican has been a frequent critic of climate science showing the world is warming and that man-made carbon emissions are to blame.

"With the transition to a new administration, there is now an opportunity to right the ship at the EPA and steer the agency in the right direction," Smith said Tuesday. "The EPA should be open and accountable to the American people and use legit science."

At a hearing Tuesday called "Making EPA Great Again," Smith's committee sought to build support for several industry-backed measures by calling on a panel of experts that included a chemical industry representative, a corporate consultant and a coal-company lobbyist.

Though similar bills failed in the past under the threat of vetoes by President Barack Obama, Republicans hope they could have new life under President Donald Trump as part of a broader effort to roll back EPA regulations.

Trump's nominee to lead the EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, has filed at least 14 lawsuits challenging EPA regulations, including Obama's Clean Power Plan. Democrats and environmentalists are opposing Pruitt's confirmation, citing his close political ties to the oil and gas industry in his home state.

Billed at the hearing as a bid to increase transparency and make EPA more accountable to the public, the Secret Science Reform Act would require that data used to support new regulations to protect human health and the environment be released to the public.

"Only when such information is made public can other interested and qualified parties conduct independent analysis and seek to reproduce research results," said Jeff Holmstead, a former EPA official and lawyer who has registered as a lobbyist for Arch Coal, Duke Energy and other clients that profit from burning fossil fuels. "Transparency not only breeds accountability but also a healthy respect for dialogue and honest debate."

Democrats said the real impact would be to hamstring EPA's ability to finalize new regulations until legal challenges about the legitimate withholding of certain scientific and technical information are resolved, such as confidential medical records of test subjects included in a human health study.

A separate measure would revamp the makeup EPA's Science Advisory Board. Republicans say the board has been historically stocked with scientists who receive federal research grants, which they allege presents an improper conflict of interest.

"In recent years SAB experts have become nothing more than rubberstamps who approve all of the EPA's regulations," Smith said. "Simple changes, such as eliminating conflicts of interests, adding more balanced perspectives and being more transparent can go a long way to restoring the agency's credibility."

Democrats suggested the Republicans are seeking to stock the board with scientists paid by industries regulated by EPA.

Former Democratic Congressman Rush Holt, a physicist who is CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, warned that politicians should refrain from meddling.

"Scientists—whether in industry, academia, or the government—must have confidence that they can conduct their work in an atmosphere free of intimidation or undue influence," said Holt, who testified at the invitation of the committee's Democrats. "Policymakers should never dictate the conclusions of a scientific study, and they should base policy on a review of relevant research."

Explore further: GOP senior statesmen making push for a carbon tax

Related Stories

Obama presses Trump not to back away from clean energy

January 9, 2017

President Barack Obama cast the adoption of clean energy in the U.S. as "irreversible," putting pressure Monday on President-elect Donald Trump not to back away from a core strategy to fight climate change.

Recommended for you

Mysterious deep-Earth seismic signature explained

November 22, 2017

New research on oxygen and iron chemistry under the extreme conditions found deep inside the Earth could explain a longstanding seismic mystery called ultralow velocity zones. Published in Nature, the findings could have ...

Scientists dispute missing dryland forests

November 21, 2017

Scientists are disputing the possibility that a significant portion of the world's forests have been missed in an earlier accounting of ecological diversity.

4 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

howhot3
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 15, 2017
When it comes to science, Lamar Smith is nothing but a big ass bozo. He will try to surround himself with other big ass bozos and put into place little ass bozos in the EPA. Got any snowballs lately there Lamar? Facts are truth discovered. Truth has a way of making liars look foolish.
Liquid1474
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 15, 2017
So the U.S and the Republicans want the EPA to be 'super transparent' but want to shroud the USADA in secrecy to hide animal abuse and cruelty for the sake of unregulated business--I hope people are not as stupid as Republicans think citizens are.
Bart_A
1 / 5 (1) Feb 15, 2017
The Texas Republican has been a frequent critic of climate science....

This is not accurate. He has been a critic of non-legit climate "science".

His quote further down in the article clarifies it:

"The EPA should be open and accountable to the American people and use legit science."

Read more at: https://phys.org/...html#jCp
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 16, 2017
The Texas Republican has been a frequent critic of climate science....

This is not accurate. He has been a critic of non-legit climate "science".

His quote further down in the article clarifies it:

"The EPA should be open and accountable to the American people and use legit science."

Read more at: https://phys.org/...html#jCp


Then it shouldn't be difficult to compare the science of the EPA with that of equivalent bodies in say, France, Germany, UK, etc, etc. If it matches pretty well, then the obvious conclusion to draw is that this guy is simply in the back pockets of the oil and gas industry.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.