SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"Today, I Was Trumped": Pruitt's EPA Axes Half of Key Scientific Review Panel
'The EPA is slowly turning its back on everything it was set up to protect'
May 08, 2017
Scott Pruitt's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has abruptly dismissed as many as half the members of a key scientific review board, and is seeking to replace them with representatives of the very industries the agency is tasked with policing.
"Today, I was Trumped," wrote Robert Richardson, an environmental economist at Michigan State University and former member of the EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors, on Friday afternoon.
The New York Times, which spoke to other people who were dismissed, reported Sunday that the terminations came as a surprise to the scientists, who were told by the agency prior to President Donald Trump's inauguration that their terms would be renewed.
"I believe this is political," said Dr. Courtney Flint, a professor of natural resource sociology at Utah State University, whose research focuses on how communities respond to environmental disruptions such as exposure to toxic pollution, forest fires, and climate change. "It's unexpected. It's a red flag."
"This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
--Ken Kimmell, Union of Concerned Scientists
Richardson further told the Washington Post: "I've never heard of any circumstance where someone didn't serve two consecutive terms." He said the dismissals gave him "great concern that objective science is being marginalized in this administration."
The Board of Scientific Counselors, according to E & E News, "is tasked with reviewing the work of EPA scientists and provides feedback that can be a powerful voice in shaping the agency's future research." E & E News said 12 people had been dismissed of the 18-member board.
A spokesman for Pruitt told the Times that "[t]he administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community."
In other words, Union of Concerned Scientists president Ken Kimmell told the paper: "This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
Another win for that agenda came in late March, when the U.S. House passed a bill to overhaul the EPA's larger Scientific Advisory Board, which is considered the agency's other major scientific review panel. As The Hill reported at the time, the legislation "would change membership requirements for the [board] to include more industry voices, expanding financial and conflict of interest disclosure requirements and giving the public the chance to more readily comment on the board's actions."
One member of that panel, University of Michigan environmental scientist Joseph Arvai, told the Times that he considers the most recent dismissals from the Board of Scientific Counselors as "a test balloon"--and his board is next in the crosshairs. "This is clearly very political, and we should be very concerned if it goes further," he said.
"The EPA," Arvai wrote Monday online, "is slowly turning its back on everything it was set up to protect."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
Scott Pruitt's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has abruptly dismissed as many as half the members of a key scientific review board, and is seeking to replace them with representatives of the very industries the agency is tasked with policing.
"Today, I was Trumped," wrote Robert Richardson, an environmental economist at Michigan State University and former member of the EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors, on Friday afternoon.
The New York Times, which spoke to other people who were dismissed, reported Sunday that the terminations came as a surprise to the scientists, who were told by the agency prior to President Donald Trump's inauguration that their terms would be renewed.
"I believe this is political," said Dr. Courtney Flint, a professor of natural resource sociology at Utah State University, whose research focuses on how communities respond to environmental disruptions such as exposure to toxic pollution, forest fires, and climate change. "It's unexpected. It's a red flag."
"This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
--Ken Kimmell, Union of Concerned Scientists
Richardson further told the Washington Post: "I've never heard of any circumstance where someone didn't serve two consecutive terms." He said the dismissals gave him "great concern that objective science is being marginalized in this administration."
The Board of Scientific Counselors, according to E & E News, "is tasked with reviewing the work of EPA scientists and provides feedback that can be a powerful voice in shaping the agency's future research." E & E News said 12 people had been dismissed of the 18-member board.
A spokesman for Pruitt told the Times that "[t]he administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community."
In other words, Union of Concerned Scientists president Ken Kimmell told the paper: "This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
Another win for that agenda came in late March, when the U.S. House passed a bill to overhaul the EPA's larger Scientific Advisory Board, which is considered the agency's other major scientific review panel. As The Hill reported at the time, the legislation "would change membership requirements for the [board] to include more industry voices, expanding financial and conflict of interest disclosure requirements and giving the public the chance to more readily comment on the board's actions."
One member of that panel, University of Michigan environmental scientist Joseph Arvai, told the Times that he considers the most recent dismissals from the Board of Scientific Counselors as "a test balloon"--and his board is next in the crosshairs. "This is clearly very political, and we should be very concerned if it goes further," he said.
"The EPA," Arvai wrote Monday online, "is slowly turning its back on everything it was set up to protect."
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
Scott Pruitt's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has abruptly dismissed as many as half the members of a key scientific review board, and is seeking to replace them with representatives of the very industries the agency is tasked with policing.
"Today, I was Trumped," wrote Robert Richardson, an environmental economist at Michigan State University and former member of the EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors, on Friday afternoon.
The New York Times, which spoke to other people who were dismissed, reported Sunday that the terminations came as a surprise to the scientists, who were told by the agency prior to President Donald Trump's inauguration that their terms would be renewed.
"I believe this is political," said Dr. Courtney Flint, a professor of natural resource sociology at Utah State University, whose research focuses on how communities respond to environmental disruptions such as exposure to toxic pollution, forest fires, and climate change. "It's unexpected. It's a red flag."
"This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
--Ken Kimmell, Union of Concerned Scientists
Richardson further told the Washington Post: "I've never heard of any circumstance where someone didn't serve two consecutive terms." He said the dismissals gave him "great concern that objective science is being marginalized in this administration."
The Board of Scientific Counselors, according to E & E News, "is tasked with reviewing the work of EPA scientists and provides feedback that can be a powerful voice in shaping the agency's future research." E & E News said 12 people had been dismissed of the 18-member board.
A spokesman for Pruitt told the Times that "[t]he administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community."
In other words, Union of Concerned Scientists president Ken Kimmell told the paper: "This is completely part of a multifaceted effort to get science out of the way of a deregulation agenda."
Another win for that agenda came in late March, when the U.S. House passed a bill to overhaul the EPA's larger Scientific Advisory Board, which is considered the agency's other major scientific review panel. As The Hill reported at the time, the legislation "would change membership requirements for the [board] to include more industry voices, expanding financial and conflict of interest disclosure requirements and giving the public the chance to more readily comment on the board's actions."
One member of that panel, University of Michigan environmental scientist Joseph Arvai, told the Times that he considers the most recent dismissals from the Board of Scientific Counselors as "a test balloon"--and his board is next in the crosshairs. "This is clearly very political, and we should be very concerned if it goes further," he said.
"The EPA," Arvai wrote Monday online, "is slowly turning its back on everything it was set up to protect."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.