House Science Committee holds hearing on “Making EPA Great Again”
Continued accusations against NOAA climate scientists were also on the agenda.
Fuck.the.GOP. A Congressional hearing held Tuesday titled, “Making EPA Great Again,” condemned the Environmental Protection Agency before it even began. This is such a fucking joke.
Among those slated testify on “how EPA can pursue environmental protection and protect public health by relying on sound science” was a coal lawyer, a chemical industry lobbyist and a libertarian scholar who once accused the agency of “regulatory terrorism.” The witness list included just one EPA-advocate, Rush Holt Jr., a physicist, head of the nonprofit American Association for the Advancement of Science, and one-time Democratic congressman from New Jersey.
When asked his opinion on the topic at hand, Rush Holt responded, “That is a science advisory board—it will not function better by having fewer scientists on it. It is supposed to look at science. But in the name of balance and diversity, there’s an effort to make it, well… less scientific.” I think he was being nice… this isn't in the name of "balance and diversity".
This all comes back to building support for a bill Rep. Smith has proposed, dubbed the “Secret Science Reform Act.” It would restrict the scientific evidence the EPA would be allowed to consider by requiring the agency to make all the underlying data publicly available. It would also be limited to studies that can be directly replicated.
This asshats are the ones who argue the "theory" of evolution is just a theory… when in reality they either know that's not what theory means in the scientific context and are just pursuing immediate financial gains, or are so stupid they don't comprehend what the term means.
We do not need to make the EPA great again (sure there can ALWAYS be ways to better ANY organization but that's what's happening) and Beyer’s counter-argument was simple: “The EPA has led to clearer skies, cleaner water and vast improvements to public health."
Leave a Reply