White House Admits Redactions On Testimony: Some Senators Want Answers
Bush administration officials acknowledged yesterday that they heavily edited testimony on global warming, delivered to Congress on Tuesday by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, after the president’s top science adviser and other officials questioned its scientific basis.Senate Democrats say they want to investigate the circumstances involved in the editing of CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding’s written testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on “climate change and public health.” 
Gerberding testimony shrank from 12 pages to six after it was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
The OMB removed several sections of the testimony that detailed how global warming would affect Americans, according to White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, because John H. Marburger III, who directs the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and his staff questioned whether Gerberding’s statements matched those released this year by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
“As I understand it, in the draft there was broad characterizations about climate change science that didn’t align with the IPCC,” Perino told reporters yesterday. “When you try to summarize what is a very complicated issue and you have many different experts who have a lot of opinions, and you get testimony less than 24 hours before it’s going to be given, you — scientists across the administration were taking a look at it, and there were a decision that she would focus where she is an expert, which is on CDC.”
White House officials eliminated several successive pages of Gerberding’s testimony, beginning with a section in which she planned to say that many organizations are working to address climate change but that, “despite this extensive activity, the public health effects of climate change remain largely unaddressed,” and that the “CDC considers climate change a serious public concern.”
In another deleted part of her original testimony, the CDC director predicted that areas in the northern United States “will likely bear the brunt of increases in ground-level ozone and associated airborne pollutants. Populations in mid-western and northeastern cities are expected to experience more heat-related illnesses as heat waves increase in frequency, severity and duration.”
The Associated Press, citing anonymous sources, first reported that Gerberding’s testimony had been edited.
In an e-mail yesterday, OSTP spokeswoman Kristin Scuderi wrote that the president’s science adviser and his aides were trying to “strengthen the testimony, not to remove the weak sections entirely.” After Marburger questioned “inconsistencies in the use of language between the [IPCC] report and the testimony . . . the OMB editor decided to transmit a version that simply struck the first eight pages” because there was not time to reconcile the concerns raised by Marburger’s office and Gerberding’s original statement.
But several experts on the public health impact of climate change, having reviewed Gerberding’s testimony, said there were no inconsistencies between the original testimony and the IPCC’s recent reports.
“That’s nonsense,” said University of Wisconsin at Madison public health professor Jonathan Patz, who served as an IPCC lead author for its 2007, 2001 and 1995 reports. “Dr. Gerberding’s testimony was scientifically accurate and absolutely in line with the findings of the IPCC.”
Just as the CDC director predicted climate change could exacerbate air-pollution-related diseases, the IPCC 2001 report predicted that dangerous summer ozone levels may increase across 50 cities in the eastern U.S., and said, “The large potential population exposed to outdoor air pollution, translates this seemingly small relative risk into a substantial attributable health risk.”
Michael McCally, executive director of the advocacy group Physicians for Social Responsibility, said the editing means that the “White House has denied a congressional committee’s access to scientific information about health and global warming,” adding: “This misuse of science and abuse of the legislative process is deplorable.”
Gerberding, however, said in a statement yesterday that the editing did not alter the underlying message of her testimony.
“It is important to note that the edits made to the written testimony document did not alter or affect my messages to the Senate committee,” she said. “I was perfectly happy with the testimony I gave to the committee, and was very pleased for the opportunity to have a frank and candid discussion with the Senate committee on the public health issues associated with climate change.”
But Gerberding’s statement did not satisfy Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the committee’s chairman, who wrote Bush yesterday to demand that he turn over “a copy of all drafts of the CDC director’s testimony sent to the Office of Management and Budget or other offices within the Executive Office of the President or other agencies,” along with any comments administration officials made on the draft testimony.
© 2007 The Washington Post








Shades of Ron Ziegler, April 1973…
“Yesterday’s statement was inoperative.”
Nixon-speak lives!!!
Boxer can demand all day and it doesn’t mean a thing.
What will she do when they refuse to comply?
File a complaint?
To who?
SCIENTIFIC BETRAYAL
Never before have Americans experienced such dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data, as used by this administration to derail vital environmental reforms, conservation, family planning– and the list goes on. The resulting long term environmental and social damage are beyond measure, and can only worsen if not curtailed.
Despite their clandestine cloak, or environmental friendly disguise, these sellouts have been evident since Bush first was handed the presidency. They have been exposed by defectors from the EPA, health & human services, etc; and have been documented and chronicled by numerous dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
The gravity of these unprecedented betrayals eclipses the Monica Lewinski scandal which led to an impeachment, and pose greater dangers than Watergate which terminated a presidency. Blame falls mainly on the populace and our legislators for tolerating this reckless and arrogant occupant of the White House.
I guess this means that now the Congress will have to put the Bush administration on Double Secret Probation.
Perino takes her kool-aide intravenously. It shows.
More class warfare. The causes of global warming are beneficial to all the right people. That means it is a health benefit to those that matter. Next.
Dana, you’re losing your beauty.
On Buzzflash is an article quoting her as saying that global warming actually benefits the health of some people. When asked in what way, she said that it would prevent deaths from the cold.
These people are absolutely fruitcake nuts. Unfortunately, it is against the law to say what many people actually think, with regards to what to do about these people. Christ, it’s becoming against the law to even disagree with their mad lies.
I think I’ll change my name to Richard Kimball. Maybe we all should.
In truth the twelve page testimony vanished, never to be seen again. Six bright and shiny new pages appeared from the room nest door. Once again the bush shows how to be an expert with inconvenient truth. The end.
I don’t know how many of you commentators view Ms. Perino’s White House press conferences, but in my humble opinion, she ranks right up there with Ann Coulter as one of the most despicable women in the whole wide world!
jchotch: Agreed. What’s with these decent looking blonde women being so damn evil?