04/16/2018

Scott Pruitt Isn’t Anti-Science

John Tierney, National Review

Imagine if the head of a federal agency announced a new policy for its scientific research: From now on, the agency would no longer allow its studies to be reviewed and challenged by independent scientists, and its researchers would not share the data on which their conclusions were based. The response from scientists and journalists would be outrage. By refusing peer review from outsiders, the agency would be rejecting a fundamental scientific tradition. By not sharing data with other researchers, it would be violating a standard transparency requirement at leading scientific journals. If a Republican official did such a thing, you’d expect to hear denunciations of this latest offensive in the “Republican war on science.”

That’s the accusation being hurled at Scott Pruitt, the Republican who heads the Environmental Protection Agency. But Pruitt hasn’t done anything to discourage peer review. In fact, he’s done the opposite: He has called for the use of more independent experts to review the EPA’s research and has just announced that the agency would rely only on studies for which data are available to be shared. Yet Democratic officials and liberal journalists have denounced these moves as an “attack on science,” and Democrats have cited them (along with accusations of ethical violations) in their campaign to force Pruitt out of his job.

How could “the party of science,” as Democrats like to call themselves, be opposed to transparency and peer review? Because better scientific oversight would make it tougher for the EPA to justify its costly regulations. To environmentalists, rigorous scientific protocols are fine in theory, but not in practice if they interfere with the green political agenda. As usual, the real war on science is the one waged from the left.

Read full article



You May Also Like:

President Trump Is Vindicated. The Witch Hunt Is Over Mike Huckabee, RealClearPolitics

‘Collusion’ Now Exposed As Nothing More Than Trump-Haters’ Opioid Dream Sohrab Ahmari, New York Post

5 Times Attorney General’s Letter About Mueller Report Clears President Trump Joy Pullmann, The Federalist

Next: Trump's Promise On The Fed? New York Sun

The Socialism And The Self-Pity Noah Rothman, Commentary

Enough Is Enough: Google Bias May Have Cost Republicans 3 Seats In Midterms Joe Saunders, Conservative Tribune

Seattle Is Daying [Watch] KOMO News

Climate Change Activist Admits: Being Green "Requires The End Of Capitalism” Ryan McMaken, Mises Institute

Why Government Officials Must Routinely Fudge Basic Arithmetic Gary M. Galles, Foundation for Economic Education

Green Insanity Is Flooding Towns And Destroying Lives Joe Herring , American Thinker

Could Free-Range Kids Become The Norm Again? Joe Jarvis, Daily Bell

For More go to the Home Page >>>

Join Our Email List



section

Bookshelf

FreeMarket Central

Some titles recent, all recommended -

Special Video Feature

FreeMarket Central

Voices From The 2017 International Students For Liberty Conference

section

In Search Of History

The Fed vs. the Middle Class

With interest rates flattened [by the Federal Reserve], government zeroes out the future. Abandoned were 80 percent of private defined-benefit pension plans. Public plans faced a similar evisceration in the future. With no acknowledgement, the U.S. government had casually dispossessed the American middle class of its retirement assets and pushed millions of Americans into acute dependency on government programs. ... Government dependency negated the American dream.

-- George Gilder ,

Shadow Stats Snapshot


FreeMarket Central

ShadowStats alternate economic indicators are based on the methodology of noted economist John Williams, specialist in government economic reporting.

  • Unemployment:
    FreeMarket Central BLS: 4.05%
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 21.5%
  • Inflation:
    FreeMarket Central February Year-to-Year: 2.87% (CPI-U*)
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 9.9%

*[cpi-u is the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation rate for all urban consumers]

section