Government Bill Bars Science from EPA

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for overseeing the environment in the United States and implementing necessary initiatives to maintain and improve the current environmental conditions.

The EPA is responsible for:

– Air quality control

– Water quality monitoring

– Sustainability of ecosystems

– Public information released on environmental factors

– Understand relationships between earth processes, environmental health, and human health

– Assess environmental conditions

Now, correct me if I’m wrong… but these elements have a LOT to do with science.

Now that we’ve stated the obvious, I have some frightening information to share. Recently, a bill was introduced in the US that bans qualified scientists from providing advise for the EPA. Replacing these world-renowned scientists will be none other than industry affiliated individuals.

These individuals may or may not have a science background, however unlike the independent scientists that used to provide valuable information, these industry affiliated folks can benefit directly from telling the EPA exactly what their employers want them to.

Why would we have unbiased people that know what they’re talking about help the EPA anyway, right? It’s only our environment! It’s only the health and stability of our earth!

The US government has taken one step closer to valuing the financial interests of corporation, over the well being of our earth and citizens. One representative in particular, Chris Stewart stated that the EPA “thwarts energy development” and has in the past deemed 98% of scientific advice “irrelevant”.

Hmm… so the research scientists who have studied the environmental issues at hand more than anyone else in the country and who are more aware of environmental concerns and consequences are irrelevant?

Why is this bill so alarming?

This bill sets a new precedent for the US government and it creates a conflict of interest. When there is a conflict of interest, the authenticity of decision making and legitimacy of the science backing decisions is undermined.

When the people advising the EPA have obvious ulterior motives, how can we trust that the initiatives being implemented are good for the environment? How can we trust the information that is released to the public?

The answer is, we can’t.

Luckily, the White House seems to have sensed the insidiousness of this bill and have stated that if the bill is passed they may veto it entirely.

Their statement included this quote; “I get it, you don’t like science. And you don’t like science that interferes with the interests of your corporate clients. But we need science to protect public health and the environment.”

sigh of relief

Hopefully, the US government will be able to nip this bill in the bud and maintain our country’s integrity and concern for environmental matters! Hopefully this is the first step toward a more environmentally sustainable American and a more transparent government!