C&EN logo The Newsmagazine of the Chemical World
Home Current Issue ChemJobs Join ACS
Support
Latest News
Business
Government & Policy
Science/Technology
Careers and Employment
ACS News
topics
   
Support
 
Support
How to log in
Contact Us
Site Map
   
About C&EN
About the Magazine
How to Subscribe
How to Advertise
Chemcyclopedia

Latest News RSS Feed

latest news RSS feedWhat is this?

   
Join ACS
Join ACS
  Latest News  
  April 7, 2004  

SCIENCE POLICY

  MARBURGER RESPONDS TO ALLEGATIONS THAT WHITE HOUSE POLITICIZES SCIENCE  

  BETTE HILEMAN  
   

 
  Allegations by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) that the White House has been politicizing science are "preposterous," says President George W. Bush's science adviser John H. Marburger III. In a 20-page response, as requested by Congress, he delivers a pointed criticism of the UCS report that was issued in February (C&EN, Feb. 23, page 5).

8208notw2_marburger
Marburger
PHOTO BY PETER CUTTS
For example, a UCS accusation that a political litmus test is applied before someone can serve on an federal science advisory panel is untrue, Marburger says. "This Administration believes in tapping the best scientific minds both inside and outside the government."

He adds, "President Bush sought me out to be his science advisor ... and I am a lifelong Democrat." In addition, many other Democrats serve on advisory panels, Marburger says.

In another instance, UCS claims that the White House pressured EPA to remove information on global climate change from its draft "Report on the Environment 2003." But Marburger responds that EPA "appropriately" referred readers to a long discussion in the Climate Change Science Strategic Plan issued in July instead of including information on global change in its draft.

The UCS report also claims that an OMB bulletin on proposed peer review of science used for federal regulations would exclude scientists who receive government funding from serving on those peer review panels.

Not true, says Marburger. Government funding is "only one factor that agencies should consider when determining which scientists should be selected."

The Administration's critics are not swayed by Marburger's responses. Lewis M. Branscomb, an emeritus professor of science policy at Harvard University, and other scientists involved with the UCS report write, "We would point out that the cases that trouble us have been reported before in respected scientific journals and newspapers and corroborated by the scientists who were directly involved."

The critics urge Marburger to set up a process to deal with allegations of the politicization of science.
 
     
  Chemical & Engineering News
ISSN 0009-2347
Copyright © 2004
 


Related Story
Concerned Scientists
[C&EN, Feb. 23, 2004]
 
 
E-mail this article
to a friend
Print this article
E-mail the editor