Thread replies: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
EPA science advisers resign 'in protest' 2017-05-14 02:45:42 Post No. 139716
[Report] Image search: [Google]
EPA science advisers resign 'in protest' 2017-05-14 02:45:42 Post No. 139716
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: C_oKtwJXoAEMUrY.jpg-large.jpg (493KB, 1583x2048px) Image search:
[Google]
493KB, 1583x2048px
Two scientists resigned from a key Environmental Protection Agency science advisory board on Friday in an act of protest against a decision this week removing the board's co-chairmen, according to a resignation letter sent by one of the scientists.
>"It is with certain regret and concern — and in protest — that we submit our resignations as members of the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Subcommittee of the Board of Scientific Counselors" for the EPA, says the letter from scientists Peter Meyer and Carlos Martin.
>Martin tweeted the letter, saying, "Just resigned from EPA subcommittee to protest removal of [Robert Richardson] @ecotrope & Courtney Flint," who headed the board. "Painful professional decision," Martin added.
>The Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group representing environmental scientists, said the resignations were "largely due to the administration's efforts to water down credible science and the recent removal of the subcommittee's co-chairs," according to spokesman Seth Michaels.
>EPA officials have been adamant that the departure of the co-chairmen and several others earlier this week was not a dismissal or firing. The agency simply did not seek to renew a number of scientists' terms on the board and allowed them to expire, the EPA said.
>The board is comprised of outside advisers from business and academia who make scientific recommendations on proposed EPA research and regulations.
>"Advisory panels like [the Board of Scientific Counselors] play a critical role reviewing the agency's work," EPA spokesman J.P. Freire told the Washington Examiner in an email. "EPA received hundreds of nominations to serve on the board, and we want to ensure fair consideration of all the nominees – including those nominated who may have previously served on the panel – and carry out a competitive nomination process."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/epa-science-advisers-resign-in-protest/article/2622950
>>
I don't understand why the EPA needs to be more industry friendly. That's like saying the legislature or the judiciary needs to be more executive branch friendly. They purposely exist to provide a balance of perspectives.
Maybe we have too much EPA. Maybe we need to let the industry have more say in statutory and legal regulation. But why not just recognize that in our laws with the sorts of regulations the EPA is allowed to set out, rather than saying the EPA shouldn't do certain kinds of research or come up with certain conclusions because knowledge of that hurts industry interests? What's the point of calling it the EPA if it's supposed to moderate itself in environmental protection?
>>
>YOU HATE US THEREFORE WE'LL LEAVE, THAT'LL SHOW YOU!
>>
>>139725
Ture, there's no easy answer. Either stay on and try to push for honesty from the inside, or refuse to participate in a sham organization that increasingly betrays its mission statement by its existence.
>>
>>139722
>too much EPA
The EPA already had limited say in national policy long before this administration in the face of powerful lobbies. Industry doesn't want an 'equal voice', they want to shut the Agency up altogether by filling it with yes-men. They want to create an environment where every researcher with integrity has either sold out, opted out (as in this case), or been kicked out.
Thread posts: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1