Customer Reviews

Undermining Science: Suppression and Distortion in the Bush Administration, Updated with a New Preface

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In 2001, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) contacted Shulman to investigate purposeful mishandling of scientific information by the Bush administration. His report, "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policy Making," served as the basis for UCS's assessment that Bush and his group were relegating science to the broom closet whenever it disagreed with the Republican agenda. The statement was eventually signed by over 8,000 reputable US scientists, many of international stature. This book expands upon that report, documenting Bush's systematic and widespread censorship and distortion of science throughout the government.

Key agenda items (among scores of others) for Bush have been squelching stem cell research, denying condom use in AIDS prevention, protecting industry from the EPA, protecting the anti-abortion movement, protecting industry from global warming advocates, and selectively promoting his own religious faith. To accomplish its purposes, the Bush administration has:

*used political litmus tests in selecting administrators for science-based agencies, federal advisory committees, and appointees throughout the government, many subsequent appointees being unqualified.

*routinely tried to shelve, censor, or change scientific gov't reports that conflict with administrative policy.

*allowed private industry to participate in and even dictate outcomes of gov't policy-making.

Shulman provides dozens of examples with careful documentation. In order to achieve these goals without legislation, here are a few of Bush's administrative rule changes for the handling of scientific and technical information by the federal government:

*They limit what questions gov't staff or scientists are allowed to ask.

*They put constraints on methods available for seeking answers.

*They restrict selection of who is allowed to ask questions, seek answers, or give advice in gov't agencies.

*They suppress findings strictly because they conflict with administrative policy.

*They sanction misleading and unjustified claims simply because they bolster claims that are "approved of" by the administration.

*They routinely place ideological, rigid, non-scientist supervisors in charge of gov't scientific research programs.

*They have a chilling effect on the scientific community by exacting retribution, including dismissal, against scientists who ask unapproved questions or produce unapproved results.

The trend to misuse or avoid input from science appears to have started about thirty years ago when political lobbies began to gain a foothold in Washington. Gradually, [lobbyist-lubricated] legislative changes have taken the teeth out of the ability of some of our controlling agencies to even operate. With these safeguards removed, perhaps another administration of either party would have realized their opportunity and taken advantage - however previous administrations have never had as many agenda items so unfriendly to the findings of mainstream science. The Bush administration has developed the politization and debasing of science into an art form.

Science is a special way of communicating - its methods and knowledge base are the same throughout the world, regardless of culture or politics. Even without a common language, if you put scientists together from the same discipline, they will enthusiastically find a way to communicate. Bertrand Russell said, "Almost everything that distinguishes the modern world from earlier centuries is attributable to science." The scientific method with its reliance on evidence and experimentation is not perfect but compared to other methods of gaining knowledge, it is the one most likely to be right.

The politization of science is a severe challenge to government. We can't allow science to rule us directly, but neither can we ignore that we desperately need its best input. A working knowledge of science can at times require graduate level expertise - the learning curve is steep. To expect politicians to make good decisions without high quality unbiased scientific input is simply ridiculous.

"Undermining Science" is a burning indictment of this anti-science administration. I have been reading snippets about the situation in scientific magazines for about five years now, and it is timely that this competent journalist has compiled the data for us in such a clear manner. History tells that this is not a new fight and that science will win out in the long run. This book is a "must read" along with Chris Mooney's excellent "Republican War On Science."

The author starts the book with an analysis of the difference between science and political policy. Of course, science creates facts that are proven through testing and then reviewed for accuracy through peer review. And, political policy is what you do after you know what the science of the issue is. You can adjust public policy based on fact, but you cannot change fact to fit with public policy...or can you?

In the book, the author demonstrates the Bush administrations total disdain for science and its results. From global warming to Pacific salmon to coal mining and many others examples, the author shows how this administration makes its public policy first and then figures a way to make the science fit the facts. This may mean firing scientists who will not produce the result you want, or placing mid level political appointees in office to bury reports in desks so they will never see the light of day. The author shows, time and again, how this is done and why.

It appears there are many reasons for Bush's hatred for the scientific community, but the most prevalent seems to be that they might interfere with the profit making potential of big donors. In addition, Bush seems to use his "Christianity" to make policy and discredit the science that doesn't fit neatly into his view of the world.

If this book were written by a hard left writer, it could be dismissed as the ranting of someone with a hatred for Bush. Sadly, the book is heavily endnoted and each item is backed up by numerous sources.

Do not let the name "Science" in the book turn you off. It is extremely well written and is a generally easy read. The science portion is written for anyone to understand and the arguments presented are clear and straightforward. This book is a must read for anyone who cares about what is happening in Washington and should be a primer in what not to do with science in college courses.

This book covers the many instances in which the current administration has appointed a non-scientist (or scientist with questionable credentials) into a position of power to skew and alter scientific data. The author was approached by the Union of Concerned Scientists to document the problem, and this book is a collection of his data.

At first glimpse, I remember the original articles and complaints. Part of me wished that this problem would correct itself. As the book demonstrates, and as I see in the news, this problem is still with us. One good example is the problem of global warming.

As I read, I thought at times that this seemed one-sided. After looking at the copious amount of citations and documents to back up the claims, I was appalled that this sort of falsification of scientific data, which is relied on by all citizens, would continue without remorse.

I believe that everyone should read this book. We need to be aware of what is happening and speak up to prevent this from damaging our scientific integrity.

This book looks at the ways that the Bush Administration has systematically misled the American public on policy matters by ignoring, suppressing or distorting scientific research. Politics has always been a part of science on the federal level, and a healthy debate on science is welcomed, but, according to many current and former government scientists, the climate has never been as bad as during the Bush Administration.

Abstinence and the use of contraceptives have been shown to be very effective in reducing national rates of teen pregnancy and HIV infection. But, abstinence alone (the Bush Administration policy) is close to worthless as an anti-HIV and anti-pregnancy policy. As Chief of Staff of the Council on Environmental Quality, Philip Cooney rewrote many government reports to make it sound like there was great disagreement about global warming in the scientific community, when such disagreement did not exist. His qualifications included being a lawyer for the American Petroleum Institute.

Other Bush Administration strategies include appointing partisans, who consider ideology more important than science, to second- and third-level positions (where the real work is done) and using political litmus tests. If a scientist is not sufficiently loyal to the Administration, or was part of a full-page newspaper ad critical of the Administration, they could forget about being appointed to any federal advisory board or commission, regardless of their professional qualifications.

This first-rate book also looks at the manipulation and cherry picking of Iraqi intelligence, Bush's "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests" policies, stem cells and "intelligent design." This easy-to-read expose is not partisan, and is a worthy addition to what seems to be the growing list of books critical of the Bush Administration.

This reviewer has worked for the Navy Dept. in Washington, and for businesses, big and small. I am a "conservative liberal" Democrat, so that will color my comments. With that background, I must say that anyone who wishes to get a real understanding of what the Bush administration has done to distort the proper process of government at all levels must read this book. For example, in May of 2008, it was in the news that the administration directed the EPA to take into account the cost to businesses of the regulations which it proposes. This is a clear conflict of interests; it is the job of such agencies to propose a regulation, give the supporting facts to justify it, circulate it to the public for comments, and leave it to the politicians to resolve the conflicts. Seth Shulman's book documents this kind of action throughout government, how political considerations have been brought to bear on every agency. It reminds one of the stories we have heard about the ubiquitous presence of political officers in the days of the communist Soviet Union. The book is a detailed documentary of the damage done to the proper workings of government by this Republican administration, causing the resignations of innumerable highly qualified people. It should be a revelation to moderate Republicans as to how true conservative principles have been compromised by the Bush administration.

In her December 2 New York Times column, "Back to Reality," Olivia Judson praises the importance of this book:

"The most notable characteristic of the Bush administration's science policy has been the repeated distortion and suppression of scientific evidence in order to fit ideological preferences about how the world should be, rather than how it is. In his disturbing book "Undermining Science: Suppression and Distortion in the Bush Administration," the journalist Seth Shulman describes case after case of intimidation of scientists in government posts, the suppression of scientific evidence and the perpetuation of misinformation. The fields affected range from climate change to public health. Although some incidents are small in and of themselves, the cumulative effect is horrifying. Shulman also catalogs a long list of established government scientists who, during the course of the Bush administration, resigned their posts in despair.

"The distortion and suppression of science is dangerous, and not just because it means that public money gets wasted on programs, like abstinence-only sex "education" schemes, that do not work. It is dangerous because it is an assault on science itself, a method of thought and inquiry on which our modern civilization is based and which has been hugely successful as a way of acquiring knowledge that lets us transform our lives and the world around us.... The rubbishing of science is far more serious than any particular decision over whether to fund research into stem cells, the sexual behavior of fruit flies or the quarks and quirks of particle physics. Undoing the damage of the past eight years may take another eight. But it must be done. We are probably one of the last generations that will be able to use our knowledge and methods to guide human civilization to a sustainable future. This is our time."

I, too, highly recommend this book. It offers insights not simply into the past, but also into the battles sure to come as religious fanatics continue their attempts to steer public policy and undermine science.

Now that sounds like a silly assertion. There has been some silliness circulating. Sometimes I find myself on top of a mountain, and on other days I'm at the bottom of a canyon. Sometimes I am riding in an airplane, and other days I riding an elevator. Whether I am high or low does not depend on who is causing it. It does not depend on who is President of the United States. The gravity that holds me to Earth does not vary from day to day, even if it seems to have grown stronger lately. Gravity is as certain and unchanging as time itself.

Gravity isn't silly. Gravity is physical truth. Scientists seek to find these physical truths because they are helpful in making extremely important determinations, such as whether the soil will remain on the ground, or whether the soil will blow in the sky. Nasty black rollers have been known to blot out the sun and cause dust pneumonia. Climate change could cause more soil to blow if soil becomes drier.

Another physical truth involves greenhouse gases. We have known for over one-hundred years that more greenhouse gases will always cause more heat to be retained in the atmosphere. Scientists have shown this in theory, laboratory experiment, climate models and ecological simulators such as Biosphere 2. Astronomers have successfully learned to predict the surface temperatures of other planets based on the distance from the sun and the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. On Earth, we could only hope we would find a source of negative feedback to regulate Earth's temperature. Climatologists found positive feedback which magnifies temperature increases. Just like throwing more weight onto a truck will make it more heavy, more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will always make the atmosphere hotter.

I have never known scientists to purposely create research conclusions that defy truth. Science is highly reviewed and screened. Scientific peers conduct tests to determine adherence to scientific theory. Science must be repeatable and dependable as background to further research. Poor research is tossed aside. Science is built on a strong foundation to prevent having to throw out more research later.

Seth Shulman describes why facts do matter. The public does rely upon the accuracy of data, and upon the integrity of researches who acquire and analyze data. There is no scientific conspiracy cult trying to make your favorite politician look bad. There are no greedy scientific deceivers who will sell you theory that gravity is about to change. There are no scientists that bend theory in order to make it less convenient for executives to make money. Most importantly, nothing has changed among scientists who put on their clothes and go to work in the morning just like everyone else.

Seth Shulman's "Undermining Science: Supression and Distortion in the BushAdministration" undertakes a critical review of the approach that the George W. Bush administration took toward dealing with policy issues raised in the world of science. In essence, he argues that Bush's science policy was predicated on what was good for big business, his base for campaign donations, or reflected in his evangelical Christian religious beliefs. Accordingly, Shulman's core areas of investigation involve many of the hot button issues where science and religion met during the Bush administration: severely restricting stem cell research, professing abstinence only sexual education, reducing EPA regulations to relax pressure on corporations, relentlessly championing an anti-abortion stance, denying global warming to defeat the need for carbon reduction regulations, the age of the Earth and evolution, and a host of other issues.

As a journalist, Seth Shulman offers lucid prose and a great sense of storytelling. He build a progressing sense of tension as a succession of events take place in the Bush administration's concerted effort to subjugate the quest for scientific truth to the political agenda of business and the evangelical right. In the process Shulman argues that this threat to scientific integrity also represents a threat to America's democratic institutions. The stories are not unknown, to be sure, but all of them spring from a set of priorities that aimed toward specific ideological objectives. While there are endnotes in this book, "Undermining Science" is largely a work of journalism rather than a work of scholarship.

This is a disquieting book, and written as it was at the end of the Bush administration does not offer much sense of hope. Shulman sees the situation as inextricably partisan and not at all easily resolved.

An interesting and informative book--and a handy guide to the appalling Lysenkoism of the Bush administration.

But, despite its scholarly trappings (endnotes and an index), this book shows no signs of editing whatsoever, except for several instances of the en-dash trick (a publisher's ruse intended to create the illusion of editorial control). The author is a journalist, and this book should never have been published by a scholarly press without extensive revision. The unrelenting barrage of journalistic bad usage makes the book difficult to read and is a constant source of irritation to the literate reader. For example: "based on," used exclusively as a dangling modifier, appears at least fifty times in fewer than 200 pages. And, while the "editor" was scutinizing the manuscript for en-dash opportunities, he or she completely overlooked the hundreds of unhyphenated adjective phrases that needed hyphenating or rewriting. In sum, this is a shabby performance by the University of California Press, and it perpetuates the current low standards of academic publishing in the United States

The other reviews in this section of Shulman's book are quite correct, except I detect more partisan bias. The book is well documented, but there is little counter-balancing content. Motivations of the Bush administration are not fully explored such as the underlying philosophy of the Straussians that science and religion should be fashioned to effect political ends. I expect that anti-Bushies will enjoy this work, and Bush supporters will trivialize it. I think Chris Mooney's 'The Republican War on Science' is probably more even handed, but with all works of this nature one should 'trust but verify'.