Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiIt is a race against the eraser. By the end of the Bush administration, we could all be rubbed out.
Utterly unashamed, the White House heavily deleted yet another major document on global warming. It blanched out the Senate testimony of Julie Gerberding, director for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In the report that she delivered last week, she said climate change "is anticipated to have a broad range of impacts on the health of Americans and the nation's public health infrastructure."
Gerberding said that the CDC "can serve as a credible source of information on health risks and actions that individuals can take to reduce their risk."
What was missing, according to a draft testimony made available to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's website by the Physicians for Social Responsibility, were these far more direct conclusions:
"The public health effects of climate change remain largely unaddressed. CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern."
(Obviously, that had to go because that raised the question of why the White House left such a serious concern unaddressed.)
"The United States is expected to see an increase in the severity, duration, and frequency of extreme heat waves. This, coupled with an aging population, increases the likelihood of higher mortality as the elderly are more vulnerable to dying from exposure to excessive heat."
(Obviously, that had to go because the Republicans sure do not want the fear of global warming replacing the fear of terrorism with older voters who tend to vote more Republican.)
"Climate change is anticipated to alter the frequency, timing, intensity, and duration of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes and floods. The health effects of these extreme weather effects range from loss of life and acute trauma to . . . post-traumatic stress and related problems, as was seen after Hurricane Katrina."
(Obviously, that had to go because the Bush administration wants no reminders of either Katrina or how it has failed miserably in addressing the physical traumas and post-traumatic stress of our soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan.)
"As with other environmental hazards, members of certain ethnic and racial minority groups will likely be disproportionately affected. . . . Given the differential burden of climate change's health effects on certain populations, public health preparedness for climate change must include vulnerability assessments that identify the most vulnerable populations with the most significant health disparities."
(Obviously, that had to go because a priority of the Bush White House has been to delete disproportionate effects of anything to African-Americans. In the first term, it blacked out half of a report on racism against black attorneys within the Justice Department and deleted the words "disparities" and "inequality" from a draft of a Health and Human Services national report on healthcare gaps.)
If deletion equals personal insult, then every American was spit on by the White House. With the most serious parts of her presentation gutted and defanged of the ability to say that global warming is a "serious public health concern," all Gerberding could do was talk in government garble. Her final statement, "While we still need more focus and emphasis on public health preparedness for climate change, many of our existing programs and scientific expertise provide a solid foundation to move forward."
Sure. This is the same administration that has run backward from scientific expertise, deleting reports from the Environmental Protection Agency and running administrator Christine Todd Whitman out of her job and allegedly harassing outspoken specialists such as NASA's James Hansen.
The whole purpose of the White House is to have no focus and no emphasis on climate change so that there is no need to fund any programs.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino defended the deletions, saying, "when you take a very complicated issue like climate change science . . . there were broad characterizations about climate change science that didn't align with the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) . . . There are public health benefits to climate change, as well."
The Washington Post quoted a lead author of several IPCC reports as saying that such a claim was "nonsense."
Gerberding herself is falling on her shield. 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." She has chosen to suffocate in a White House where candor always results in a visit from the censor.
© Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company
12 Comments so far
Show AllThose who still debunk the consensus of the non political & dedicated international scientific community join Bush right wing's war on science, & our planet.
Rather than pursuing even modest effort to understand the effects and consequences of mans activities they follow the deceptive data issued by the right wing and energy cartel.
Evidence linking carbon pollution to warming has long been as close to certain as science can be. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
The dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data used by Bush's team to conceal and derail corrective measures for this threat and other vital environmental reforms has always been apparent--and all indicators show no change in their direction.
Often overlooked is the fact that the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were not an issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.
Contrary to right wing assertions, greenhouse gas reduction measures could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependance on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect resulting from our opposition Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionally to carbon pollution.
The immeasurable environmental and social destruction from our indifference to carbon pollution and related environmental measures can only worsen if we allow this reckless and unlearned president, guided by special interests to continue their war on our planet.
The gravity of thedeception & abuses used by this administration eclipses the Lewenski scandel which led to an impeachment, and is more significant than Watergate which brought down a presidency.
My preferred term is Ecological Shock or, in soundbite-ready packaging, EcoShock.
It's quite accurate in it's depiction of the problem, flows well enough phonetically to reach common usage, and carries enough emotional weight to poke through people's 'membrane of mundane' that keeps people (especially Americans) from caring about ANYTHING.
Climate and Ecosystem Collapse should be fought, as it is a direct threat to the American Way of Life. Droughts, fires, floods and ocean rises will take away productive and habitable land. Climate change threatens all of us in a much clearer, truthful and calamitous way, than all the non-existent nuclear weapons industry in Iraq, and anti-USI terror threats multiplied a million fold. Only we cannot face it, as it involves coming to terms with not only personal death, but death as species. It takes away conventional religious meaning to human existence. Its a void, a hole in the political brains. A concept that needs hard work to see in positive terms. So power and money forgets its out there, cannot talk about it, cannot take it into its world view. The way of life by greenhouse gas production and death by massive strike capacity of the USI is a long term threat to all alternative ways of life. It is a sick joke that the USI suffers from paranoid hallucinations, and sees terrorists and nuclear threats everywhere. Every one else is either threated by this most powerful and deluded government of all organized human societies, or seeks to obtain for the short term, their delusions of everlasting wealth, power and glory. Human continuation depends on how quickly this carbon culture can crash, followed by a collapse in world finance, trade and agriculture. End the human plague, pull down curse of economic growth now, do not prop it up. Let the apocalyptic horsemen ride now, or in the short delay of time, as the sickness of Gaia gets worse, they will need to harvest everything.
Words have power.
'Change' "warming' 'Greenhouse Effect" Don't sound too bad or dire - even though we know different.
Climate Collapse
Gas Chamber Effect
Too stark?
"I just sent CDC asking how Gerberding got her job. Was she appointed by the Bush adminstration?"
I believe her position is filled from the non-partisan Civil Service System - usually by promotion from below. She has worked for the CDC since 1998 and in academia before that.
In short, like her position is like Dr. Hansen's at NASA, or any of the other many scientists and engineers who work for the federal government.
Face it - we're on our own. Waiting for any government to act is nothing more than a cop-out, an easy way for "us" not to take responsibility for our planet. Think New Orleans: it's not our fault for choosing to live below sea level in spite of dire warnings of imminent catastrophe - it's the government's fault for not building the right levees. Now rebuild so we can move back and drown again!!!
We're own our own. Plan accordingly, or suffer the consequences.
While all of the semantic battles continue, the disaster capitalists are raking it in . Its the best profit center they have found since the eternal war on terror.
Tired, yet, of Republican censorship of all the liberals' issues? Tired enough to stop griping and help elect a Democratic president? The guy above thinks Gore. Okay. (Or any other Democrat who can get there.)
Gore now more than ever.
I just sent CDC asking how Gerberding got her job. Was she appointed by the Bush adminstration?
"Climate Change" is itself the censored version of "Global Warming."
"Climate Change" is itself the censored version of "Global Warming."
Actually, it's a much better term than global warming, since the effects of change will be complex and regionally variable. An even better term is simply "global change" since land cover change is also a major consideration (more important in some ways than changes in atmospheric composition).