After issuing a supplemental proposal that dramatically expands the scope of its science-restriction rule, EPA limited public opportunities to comment. The Union of Concerned Scientists held a virtual public hearing, which featured a long list of comments on the rule’s problems.
Environmental Health
How the Trump administration silences science, to the detriment of public health
A new three-part series from Robin Young and Serena McMahon for WBUR’s Here & Now delves into ways the Trump administration is silencing science. It basically comes down to ignoring scientists’ input when it demonstrates the need for regulation, and making scientific work for the federal government miserable.
An important new piece by Sharon Lerner at the The Intercept describes how the Trump administration is gutting toxics regulations, and what that means in terms of increased cancer rates.
Environmental Health
“The disregard for expertise in the federal government is worse than it’s ever been”
Two year-end pieces from the New York Times capture the Trump administration’s awful toll on public health.
Last year, many of us spoke out forcefully against a horrible EPA proposal that would allow the agency to ignore important studies when regulating, on the pretext of increasing transparency. Rather than using the extensive criticism to engage in a more thorough and appropriate process — or, as many of us recommended, scrap the proposal altogether — EPA has apparently made it more far-reaching and disastrous for public health.
Environmental Health
Trump’s EPA disbanded pollution advisory panel, so they’re reconvening on their own
Last year, the Trump administration EPA dismissed the Particulate Matter Review Panel, leaving the agency and its primary group of clean air advisors without the expertise they need to thoroughly update air pollution standards. The review panel’s scientists are so committed to their work that they’ve decided to meet and provide their crucial advice even without the federal government’s blessing.
Examples of federal agencies ignoring and suppressing science are alarmingly common these days, but Adam Federman’s investigation into the Department of the Interior’s actions regarding the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is especially breathtaking.
Hours before the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing on the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act of 2019 (HR 1603), the New York Times reported that EPA ignored its scientists’ advice in proposing a new asbestos rule.
Environmental Health
Commenters Slam EPA’s Attempts to Ignore Benefits of Regulating Mercury and Other Air Pollutants
Of the more than 300,000 public comments submitted to EPA regarding a proposed undermining of air pollution rules, several criticized the agency for something that’s become a disturbing trend under the Trump administration: Ignoring evidence that demonstrates a need for regulation.
What connects the opioid crisis, football players’ concussion risks, and climate change? A playbook created by the tobacco industry that relies on denying evidence of harms to public health.