On the Use and Misuse of On the Use and Misuse of Scientific Evidence in Making Scientific Evidence in Making

Public PolicyPublic Policy

Chris MooneyChris Mooney

12:00 pm, Monday, September 19, 2005 12:00 pm, Monday, September 19, 2005 Woodrow Wilson SchoolWoodrow Wilson School

Science, Technology, and Environmental Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy Seminar SeriesPolicy Seminar Series

Union of Concerned Union of Concerned Scientists Declaration Scientists Declaration

““Although scientific input to Although scientific input to the government is rarely the the government is rarely the only factor in public policy only factor in public policy decisions, this input should decisions, this input should always be weighed from an always be weighed from an objective and impartial objective and impartial perspective to avoid perilous perspective to avoid perilous consequences. Indeed, this consequences. Indeed, this principle has long been principle has long been adhered to by presidents and adhered to by presidents and administrations of both parties administrations of both parties in forming and implementing in forming and implementing policies. The administration of policies. The administration of George W. Bush has, however, George W. Bush has, however, disregarded this principle.”disregarded this principle.”

-- “Restoring Scientific -- “Restoring Scientific Integrity in Integrity in Policymaking,” February 2004Policymaking,” February 2004

TOLES © 2004 The Washington Post. Reprinted with permission of UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE. All rights reserved.

How We’ll Proceed….How We’ll Proceed….

1. How 1. How shouldshould science and politics science and politics interact?interact?

2. What counts as 2. What counts as politicalpolitical science abuse? science abuse?

3. Why are such abuses becoming more 3. Why are such abuses becoming more frequent?frequent?

4. How can we know that George W. 4. How can we know that George W. Bush’s administration has politicized Bush’s administration has politicized science to an unprecedented extent?science to an unprecedented extent?

5. What can be done?5. What can be done?

1. The President on the Distinction 1. The President on the Distinction Between Technocracy and Between Technocracy and

DemocracyDemocracy

““I am not a I am not a geologist, as you geologist, as you know.”know.”

-- George W. Bush, -- George W. Bush,

Dec. 29, 2004Dec. 29, 2004

2. What is 2. What is PoliticalPolitical Science Science Abuse?Abuse?

Def:Def: “Any attempt to inappropriately “Any attempt to inappropriately undermine, alter, or otherwise interfere undermine, alter, or otherwise interfere with the scientific with the scientific processprocess, or scientific , or scientific conclusionsconclusions, for political or ideological , for political or ideological reasons.”reasons.”

((CategoriesCategories: General, Process, : General, Process, Substantive)Substantive)

General Example: Undermining General Example: Undermining Science ItselfScience Itself

An assault on the very nature of science An assault on the very nature of science or the scientific method. Examples:or the scientific method. Examples:

1. 1. Creationist claimCreationist claim: evolution is “just a : evolution is “just a theory” (Cobb County, Georgia).theory” (Cobb County, Georgia).

2. 2. “Intelligent design” creationist claim“Intelligent design” creationist claim: : science, as currently practiced, is science, as currently practiced, is equivalent to materialistic equivalent to materialistic philosophy/atheism (Kansas)philosophy/atheism (Kansas)

Process Example: Suppression Process Example: Suppression & Forced-Editing& Forced-Editing

IncludesIncludes: Quashing scientific reports for : Quashing scientific reports for political reasons; seeking to edit unpublished political reasons; seeking to edit unpublished reports to make their contents more palatable. reports to make their contents more palatable.

ExampleExample: Internal Environmental Protection : Internal Environmental Protection Agency Memo, April 29, 2003 (source: Agency Memo, April 29, 2003 (source: National Wildlife Federation/Revkin & Seelye, National Wildlife Federation/Revkin & Seelye, “Report by E.P.A. Leaves Out Data on Climate “Report by E.P.A. Leaves Out Data on Climate Change,” Change,” The New York TimesThe New York Times, June 19, 2003.), June 19, 2003.)

Substantive Example: Errors and Substantive Example: Errors and MisrepresentationsMisrepresentations

IncludesIncludes: Misstatements of fact; errors of : Misstatements of fact; errors of omission; misrepresentations or distortions of omission; misrepresentations or distortions of scientific work (essentially, the spinning of scientific work (essentially, the spinning of science).science).

ExamplesExamples: 1. George W. Bush’s erroneous : 1. George W. Bush’s erroneous August 9, 2001 claim that “more than 60” August 9, 2001 claim that “more than 60” embryonic stem cell lines were in existence. embryonic stem cell lines were in existence.

2. Repeated misrepresentations of 2001 2. Repeated misrepresentations of 2001 National Academy of Sciences Report, National Academy of Sciences Report, Climate Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions.Questions.

NAS 2001 “Climate Change NAS 2001 “Climate Change Science” ReportScience” Report

““The IPCC’s conclusion that most of the The IPCC’s conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on current thinking of the scientific community on this issue.”this issue.”

““Because of the large and still uncertain level of Because of the large and still uncertain level of natural variability inherent in the climate record natural variability inherent in the climate record and the uncertainties in the time histories of the and the uncertainties in the time histories of the various forcing agents (and particularly various forcing agents (and particularly aerosols), a causal linkage between the buildup aerosols), a causal linkage between the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the observed climate changes during the 20th observed climate changes during the 20th century cannot be unequivocally established.”century cannot be unequivocally established.”

Substantive Example B: Relying Substantive Example B: Relying on the Outlierson the Outliers

IncludesIncludes: Politicians handpicking experts willing to : Politicians handpicking experts willing to say what they want to hear, even when the vast say what they want to hear, even when the vast majority of scientists believe something else. The majority of scientists believe something else. The “cherry-picking” of expertise.“cherry-picking” of expertise.

Bottom LineBottom Line: While dissent has an important place : While dissent has an important place in science, the notion that policymakers should in science, the notion that policymakers should hold up scientific outliers to justify their decisions hold up scientific outliers to justify their decisions is preposterous. The best available consensus is preposterous. The best available consensus science should guide policy, not the most science should guide policy, not the most convenient science politicians can find in a pinch. convenient science politicians can find in a pinch.

Senator James Inhofe (Extremely Senator James Inhofe (Extremely Reliant on the Outliers)Reliant on the Outliers)

““With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? It sure sounds like it.”the American people? It sure sounds like it.”-- James Inhofe, Senate floor speech, July 28, 2003-- James Inhofe, Senate floor speech, July 28, 2003

The Value of Consensus The Value of Consensus Science to PolicymakingScience to Policymaking

““Scientific knowledge Scientific knowledge isis the intellectual and the intellectual and social consensus of affiliated experts based on social consensus of affiliated experts based on the weight of available empirical evidence, and the weight of available empirical evidence, and evaluated according to accepted evaluated according to accepted methodologies. If we feel that a policy question methodologies. If we feel that a policy question deserves to be informed by scientific deserves to be informed by scientific knowledge, then we have no choice but to ask, knowledge, then we have no choice but to ask, what is the consensus of experts on this what is the consensus of experts on this matter?”matter?”

-- Naomi Oreskes, “Science and public policy: -- Naomi Oreskes, “Science and public policy: What’s proof got to do with it,” What’s proof got to do with it,” Environmental Environmental Science & PolicyScience & Policy 7 [2004], 369-383. 7 [2004], 369-383.

Part III: Why is it Getting Part III: Why is it Getting Worse?Worse?

Some* Trends Fueling Increased Science Some* Trends Fueling Increased Science Politicization:Politicization:

1. Growth of think tanks. (Offering 1. Growth of think tanks. (Offering alternative expertise.)alternative expertise.)

2. Trend on the part of industry to target the 2. Trend on the part of industry to target the role of science in the regulatory process, role of science in the regulatory process, rather than fighting exclusively over rather than fighting exclusively over regulations (“paralysis by analysis”).regulations (“paralysis by analysis”).

3. Move by religious conservatives to have 3. Move by religious conservatives to have their own “scientists” on virtually every their own “scientists” on virtually every moral issue of concern to them.moral issue of concern to them.

(* Not all.)(* Not all.)

A. Growth of Politicized Think A. Growth of Politicized Think TanksTanks

““Corporate Corporate philanthropy should philanthropy should not be, and cannot not be, and cannot be, disinterested.”be, disinterested.”

-- Irving Kristol, -- Irving Kristol, 19721972

Think Tanks, Cont.Think Tanks, Cont.

““At the end of World War II, only a handful At the end of World War II, only a handful of private policy think tanks were at work in of private policy think tanks were at work in Washington; at the end of the Cold War Washington; at the end of the Cold War there were over one hundred, the largest there were over one hundred, the largest ones spending tens of millions of dollars ones spending tens of millions of dollars annually on the analysis of policy problems.”annually on the analysis of policy problems.”

-- Bruce Bimber, -- Bruce Bimber, The Politics of The Politics of Expertise in CongressExpertise in Congress, , 19961996

(American Enterprise Institute founded in (American Enterprise Institute founded in 1943; Heritage Foundation founded in 1943; Heritage Foundation founded in 1973.)1973.)

ExxonMobil 2004 ExxonMobil 2004 DonationsDonations

American Enterprise Institute, $ 230,000American Enterprise Institute, $ 230,000 American Legislative Exchange Council: $ American Legislative Exchange Council: $

222,000222,000 Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, $ Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, $

130,000130,000 Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, $ Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, $

125,000125,000 Competitive Enterprise Institute, $ 270,000Competitive Enterprise Institute, $ 270,000 Congress of Racial Equality, $ 135,000Congress of Racial Equality, $ 135,000 Frontiers of Freedom, $ 250,000Frontiers of Freedom, $ 250,000 George C. Marshall Institute, $ 170,000George C. Marshall Institute, $ 170,000

Total: $ 1,532,000 Total: $ 1,532,000 (Source: ExxonMobil) (Source: ExxonMobil)

B. Growing Fights Over Regulatory B. Growing Fights Over Regulatory ScienceScience

1970s: New environmental and public safety 1970s: New environmental and public safety regulations and agencies to implement them: regulations and agencies to implement them: EPA, OSHA, etc.EPA, OSHA, etc.

1981: Reagan Executive Order 12291, 1981: Reagan Executive Order 12291, centralized review of government regulations centralized review of government regulations at Office of Management & Budget (OIRA).at Office of Management & Budget (OIRA).

1995: Gingrich Congress seeks “regulatory 1995: Gingrich Congress seeks “regulatory reform”: Unprecedented strictures on how reform”: Unprecedented strictures on how government agencies do science. (Slogan = government agencies do science. (Slogan = “sound science”; likely effect = “paralysis by “sound science”; likely effect = “paralysis by analysis”).analysis”).

1998: Shelby Amendment (“get the data”)1998: Shelby Amendment (“get the data”)…………

Jim J. Tozzi, former Phillip Morris lobbyist, Jim J. Tozzi, former Phillip Morris lobbyist, unofficial creator of the “Data Quality Act.” Most unofficial creator of the “Data Quality Act.” Most famous quotation: “I don’t want to leave famous quotation: “I don’t want to leave fingerprints.” Remark on getting the DQA fingerprints.” Remark on getting the DQA through Congress: “Sometimes you get the through Congress: “Sometimes you get the monkey, and sometimes the monkey gets you.” monkey, and sometimes the monkey gets you.”

More Paralysis By Analysis….More Paralysis By Analysis….

2001: Data Quality Act.2001: Data Quality Act.

2004: proposed “Endangered Species Act 2004: proposed “Endangered Species Act Data Quality Act”Data Quality Act”

2003-2005: OMB “peer review” 2003-2005: OMB “peer review” superstructure (justified by “Data Quality superstructure (justified by “Data Quality Act”)Act”)

Bottom LineBottom Line: Arguing over science helps : Arguing over science helps special interests slow down the process of special interests slow down the process of regulation. It works like a charm. regulation. It works like a charm.

C. The Religious Right Gets C. The Religious Right Gets Science Science

““You don’t have to wave You don’t have to wave your bible to have an effect your bible to have an effect as a Christian in the public as a Christian in the public arena. We serve the arena. We serve the greatest Scientist. We serve greatest Scientist. We serve the Author of all Truth. All the Author of all Truth. All we’re required to do is we’re required to do is proclaim that Truth.”proclaim that Truth.”

-- W. David Hager, -- W. David Hager, October October 29, 2004 speech 29, 2004 speech at Asbury at Asbury College, College, KentuckyKentucky

Anti-Evolutionists Get Anti-Evolutionists Get “Science”“Science”

1924: William Jennings Bryan 1924: William Jennings Bryan joins the American joins the American Association for the Association for the Advancement of Science.Advancement of Science.

1961: Whitcomb and Morris, 1961: Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis FloodThe Genesis Flood

1974: Henry Morris publishes 1974: Henry Morris publishes Scientific CreationismScientific Creationism (in (in biblical and non-biblical biblical and non-biblical versions).versions).

1980: A campaigning Ronald 1980: A campaigning Ronald Reagan pronounces “great Reagan pronounces “great flaws” in evolutionary flaws” in evolutionary theory.theory.

…………....

Anti-Evolutionists Get *Even Anti-Evolutionists Get *Even More* “Science”More* “Science”

1987: 1987: Edwards v. AguillardEdwards v. Aguillard, “creation science” , “creation science” loses at Supreme Court.loses at Supreme Court.

1990: Discovery Institute founded.1990: Discovery Institute founded.

1999: Wedge document (publicly exposed--1999: Wedge document (publicly exposed--oops).oops).

Today:Today: New wave of evolution fights sweeping New wave of evolution fights sweeping across the country.across the country.

And It’s Not Just Anti-And It’s Not Just Anti-Evolutionists…Evolutionists…

““Adult” stem cell research versus embryonic.Adult” stem cell research versus embryonic.

Alleged health “risks” from abortion.Alleged health “risks” from abortion.

Abstinence education “works,” condoms Abstinence education “works,” condoms “don’t.”“don’t.”

Not enough “data” on how Plan B Not enough “data” on how Plan B contraception will be used by young contraception will be used by young adolescents (down to age 11!).adolescents (down to age 11!).

Collapse of Old Paradigm Collapse of Old Paradigm for for

Science/Religion/GovernmeScience/Religion/Government nt C. Everett KoopC. Everett Koop on abortion on abortion

and women’s health, 1989: and women’s health, 1989:

““If I had put out the kind of If I had put out the kind of reportreport that was not that was not scientific, that did not scientific, that did not recognize the lack of recognize the lack of physical evidence of what physical evidence of what they wanted to know, it they wanted to know, it would have been attacked would have been attacked and destroyed by scientists and destroyed by scientists and statisticians.”and statisticians.”

Part IV: Science and the Part IV: Science and the Bush AdministrationBush Administration

““I am not a I am not a geologist, as you geologist, as you know.”know.”

-- President George -- President George W. Bush, Dec. 29, W. Bush, Dec. 29, 20042004

Scientists Concerned From the Scientists Concerned From the Start…Start…

Early 2001: Early 2001:

Climate change (dumping Kyoto, using NAS to Climate change (dumping Kyoto, using NAS to review IPCC).review IPCC).

Stem cell research (“more than 60” lines).Stem cell research (“more than 60” lines).

Holes in the “science net”: Surgeon General, Holes in the “science net”: Surgeon General, FDA Commissioner, and NIH Director FDA Commissioner, and NIH Director positions go unfilled.positions go unfilled.

Early Troubles Over OSTPEarly Troubles Over OSTP

Dr. John Marburger: Dr. John Marburger: * Not confirmed by the Senate until October 23, * Not confirmed by the Senate until October 23, 2001. 2001. * Demoted from rank of “Assistant to the * Demoted from rank of “Assistant to the President” before he ever assumed his position President” before he ever assumed his position (“that title was never offered to me”).(“that title was never offered to me”).

2002-2003: Charges of 2002-2003: Charges of Advisory Committee Advisory Committee

PoliticizationPoliticizationSeptember 2002, September 2002, Washington Post Washington Post expose expose reveals “broad restructuring” of scientific reveals “broad restructuring” of scientific advisory committees within the Bush advisory committees within the Bush Department of Health and Human Services Department of Health and Human Services so as to align them ideologically with the so as to align them ideologically with the White House.White House.

Subsequent reports/Famous cases: W. Subsequent reports/Famous cases: W. David Hager, William Miller.David Hager, William Miller.

Fun with websites: Changing condom Fun with websites: Changing condom effectiveness information at CDC; breast effectiveness information at CDC; breast cancer/abortion information at NCI.cancer/abortion information at NCI.

““An Epidemic of Politics”An Epidemic of Politics”

““What’s unusual about the What’s unusual about the current epidemic is not current epidemic is not that the Bush that the Bush administration examines administration examines candidates for candidates for compatibility with its compatibility with its ‘values.’ It’s how deep the ‘values.’ It’s how deep the practice cuts; in particular, practice cuts; in particular, the way it now invades the way it now invades areas once immune to this areas once immune to this kind of manipulation.”kind of manipulation.”

-- Donald Kennedy, -- Donald Kennedy, executive editor-in-chief, executive editor-in-chief,

Science,Science, January 31, January 31, 20032003

2002-2004: Reports on Science 2002-2004: Reports on Science Politicization EmergePoliticization Emerge

December 2002: “Weird Science,” report on December 2002: “Weird Science,” report on Department of the Interior by Democratic Rep. Department of the Interior by Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall.Nick Rahall.

August 2003: “Politics and Science in the Bush August 2003: “Politics and Science in the Bush Administration,” Rep. Henry Waxman report.Administration,” Rep. Henry Waxman report.

February 2004: Union of Concerned Scientists February 2004: Union of Concerned Scientists report and statement, “Restoring Scientific report and statement, “Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking,” signed by 20 Nobel Integrity in Policymaking,” signed by 20 Nobel Laureates. (Massive press coverage.)Laureates. (Massive press coverage.)

BUT: Reports lacking comparative historical BUT: Reports lacking comparative historical analysis!!!!analysis!!!!

Were Bush Administration Were Bush Administration Abuses Unprecedented?Abuses Unprecedented?

ProbablyProbably so. Based on: so. Based on:

Volume of complaints by scientists and Volume of complaints by scientists and distinguished policymakers—including distinguished policymakers—including Republicans.Republicans.

Marburger’s inability to rebut virtually Marburger’s inability to rebut virtually any of the charges.any of the charges.

Historical analysis: Problem existent Historical analysis: Problem existent before, but never so extensive in previous before, but never so extensive in previous administrations.administrations.

Previously discussed trends—all of which Previously discussed trends—all of which merged in the Bush administration.merged in the Bush administration.

Part IV: What Can Be Done?Part IV: What Can Be Done?““The integrity of the science advisory The integrity of the science advisory process cannot withstand overt process cannot withstand overt actions to censor or suppress actions to censor or suppress unwanted advice, to mischaracterize unwanted advice, to mischaracterize it, or to construct it by use of political it, or to construct it by use of political litmus tests in the selection of litmus tests in the selection of individuals to serve on committees….If individuals to serve on committees….If we fail in the attempt to preserve the we fail in the attempt to preserve the integrity of science in democratic integrity of science in democratic governance, a strong source of unity governance, a strong source of unity in the electorate, based on common in the electorate, based on common interest in the actual performance of interest in the actual performance of government, will be eroded. government, will be eroded. Policymaking by ideology requires Policymaking by ideology requires that reality be set aside; it can be that reality be set aside; it can be maintained only by moving towards maintained only by moving towards ever more authoritarian forms of ever more authoritarian forms of governance.” governance.”

Lewis BranscombLewis Branscomb, “Science, , “Science, Politics, and U.S. Politics, and U.S. Democracy,” Democracy,” Issues in Issues in Science and TechnologyScience and Technology, , Fall 2004.Fall 2004.

Legislative Steps That Must Be Legislative Steps That Must Be Taken…Taken…

Legal reforms: OTA, OSTP, safeguarding Legal reforms: OTA, OSTP, safeguarding advisory committees, protecting advisory committees, protecting whistleblowers.whistleblowers.

Roll back “Data Quality,” “peer review” Roll back “Data Quality,” “peer review” proposal.proposal.

Prevent passage of “Endangered Species Prevent passage of “Endangered Species Act Data Quality Act” and other similar Act Data Quality Act” and other similar legislation.legislation.

November 2004 November 2004 Columbia Columbia Journalism ReviewJournalism Review Article on Article on

“Balance” in Science Reporting“Balance” in Science Reporting Argues that the Argues that the

journalistic norm of journalistic norm of “balance” has no “balance” has no parallel in the scientific parallel in the scientific world and can lead world and can lead reporters to distort or reporters to distort or misrepresent what's misrepresent what's actually known.actually known.

Suggests science Suggests science journalists should journalists should avoid the trap of “he avoid the trap of “he said/she said/we’re said/she said/we’re clueless” coverage and clueless” coverage and actually help their actually help their readers evaluate the readers evaluate the credibility of different credibility of different claims. claims.

September 2005 September 2005 Columbia Columbia Journalism ReviewJournalism Review Article on Article on

Evolution CoverageEvolution Coverage Argues that political Argues that political

reporters, TV news, and reporters, TV news, and editorial pages create a editorial pages create a false “debate” over the false “debate” over the science of evolution in science of evolution in their coverage.their coverage.

Suggests better Suggests better journalist training so journalist training so that, again, they can that, again, they can learn to avoid the trap learn to avoid the trap of “he said/she of “he said/she said/we’re clueless” said/we’re clueless” coverage. coverage.

Deterrence and Future Deterrence and Future StrugglesStruggles

Scientist and university-based Scientist and university-based activism.activism.

Continue to fight anti-evolutionists Continue to fight anti-evolutionists and other attempts to distort what and other attempts to distort what children learn. children learn.

And finally: Get political.And finally: Get political.

For Further InformationFor Further Information

Chris MooneyChris Mooney is is Washington Washington

correspondent for correspondent for Seed Seed magazine.magazine.

Book website: Book website: www.waronscience.cowww.waronscience.comm

E-mail: E-mail: moonecc@yahoo.commoonecc@yahoo.com