Thread by @andmbergman

For 2 years of Trump now, science has been under attack: policies ignore science; generation of new scientific studies & data has been dismantled.

With the great @POGOBlog team, I've tracked the types of attacks while fighting back. A tour of the worst that's happened in THREAD:

NEW STUDIES & DATA: Trump has terminated efforts that generate scientific info. Policies that ignore science cause damage, but preventing science & data from even existing can undermine policymaking for years. 2/

@bydarrylfears described a clear example: washingtonpost.com/news/energy-en…

One of Pruitt's first actions at @EPA was scrapping a request for industry to provide info about their methane emissions & controls, one day after state GOP leaders asked. The data could have informed years of regs. 3/

@EENewsUpdates' @ellengilmer wrote: scientificamerican.com/article/epa-dr…

At @Interior, Zinke quickly reassigned dozens of Senior Executive Services members, including climate policy lead Joel Clement (@jclement4maine). His role studying health & safety of Alaska Native communities went unfilled. 4/

His @washingtonpost op-ed: washingtonpost.com/opinions/im-a-…

The pattern has continued at Interior: In Sept 2018, scientists were pressured by @USFWS to rush their study & alter data - they felt the goal was to roll back the endangered status of the beetle in their study. 5/

@washingtonpost's @dino_grandoni wrote: washingtonpost.com/energy-environ…

Attacks on data collection came early at @HHSGov too: sexuality questions were removed from 2 surveys, raising fears that LGBT issues would stop getting recognition or funding. They were restored after outcry from advocates & Congress. 6/

@AP's @Sedensky: apnews.com/8443749ce29947…

Also at HHS: Unprecedented political interference at its policy research shop, @HHS_ASPE, resulted in reports about refugee costs & health insurance, used by Congress, that were widely questioned by experts. 7/

Great reporting by @politico's @ddiamond: politico.com/story/2018/07/…

As often occurs, these attacks on new research were coupled with diminishment of old studies that could indicate inconsistency. In the ASPE case, Obama-era reports were moved & their descriptions were removed. 8/

@j0ncampbell on @SunWebIntegrity's report: sunlightfoundation.com/2018/07/28/hhs…

SCIENCE ADVICE: Trump has also overseen a gov-wide effort to dismantle institutions that provide science advice. These attacks quiet voices of scientists & make it easier to dismantle science-based policy. 9/

Review by friends at @UCSUSA after year one: ucsusa.org/center-science…

In June 2017, Pruitt didn't renew the terms of dozens of EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors, instead appointing replacements. BOSC advises on EPA's research agenda, so this too undermined future science. 10/

@chriscmooney & @eilperin reported: washingtonpost.com/news/energy-en…

In Oct 2017, Pruitt went further: He put in place a policy barring scientists with EPA grants from serving on its Science Advisory Board, EPA's main source of scientific regulatory advice. 11/

@UCSUSA's @halpsci explains why the policy makes no sense: blog.ucsusa.org/michael-halper…

Pruitt's successor, Wheeler, hasn't been better. In Oct 2018 he disbanded EPA's Particulate Matter Review Panel & an ozone panel, leaving advice on air quality regs to a 7-person group without proper resources or personnel. 12/

@nytclimate's @LFFriedman: nytimes.com/2018/10/11/cli…

In Sept 2017, EPA told staff it was overhauling its office organization. Among the changes, EPA planned to dissolve its Office of the Science Advisor & diminish the science adviser's role. 13/

@EENewsUpdates' great @rbravender & @KevinBogardus broke: eenews.net/stories/106009…

In May 2017, Interior suspended over 200 advisory panels to review their "charter and charge," resulting in cancelled meetings for important panels considering land conservation & a variety of regulatory issues. 14/

@EENewsUpdates' Scott Streater wrote: eenews.net/stories/106005…

In Jan 2018, 10 out of 12 National Park System Advisory Board members resigned, citing Zinke's refusal to meet with them or convene a meeting in all of 2017. They were tired of waiting for the "review" to end. 15/

@washingtonpost's @eilperin reported: washingtonpost.com/national/healt…

When charters for 21 Bureau of Land Management resource advisory councils were finally renewed in March 2018, members realized their role was limited to implementing Trump's dereg agenda, not providing sound advice. 16/

@EENewsUpdates' Streater again: eenews.net/stories/106007…

It can be worse if advisory committees aren't killed: They can, instead, be filled with unqualified reps for industry/lobbyists. That's what happened to @USDA's panel studying health impacts of sodium. 17/

@POGOBlog's great @LPetersonDC broke the story: pogo.org/investigation/…

Can't forget @WHOSTP, whose head is supposed to be POTUS' gov-wide adviser for all things science. OSTP has seen huge staff reductions & doubled its past record length of time with no lead, finally getting one this year. 18/

@bbguari spoke w/ @KumarAGarg: washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-…

RULES FOR SCIENCE'S USE: The Trump administration has also sought to restrict the way that science and evidence can be used to craft protections for public health. By controlling the rules governing the use of science, Trump officials want to rule out science they don't like. 19/

EPA leadership is looking for this kind of control: One way is by proposing limits to how certain benefits, deemed non-central to a rule, are considered in cost-benefit analyses during rulemaking. 20/

@CPRBlog's @J_A_Goodwin has a fantastic explanation: progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?id…

EPA also proposed a rule that would prohibit scientific studies that aren't deemed fully "transparent" from being used in crafting regs, which serves only to rule out crucial science. 21/

@POGOBlog's @SarcasmSean explains why the standard makes no sense: pogo.org/analysis/2018/…

ACCESS TO SCIENTIFIC INFO: Trump's agency heads have also worked to make scientific evidence, and even raw data, inaccessible. While raw data has rarely been removed from gov websites, educational & regulatory information has regularly been censored or had its access limited. 22/

Climate change info has been one of the main targets for limiting access to scientific info & outright censorship of public information. 23/

Read @tolyrinberg's excellent thread on our @EnviroDGI work together (see all of EDGI's work for more attacks):

https://twitter.com/tolyrinberg/status/1086378477526368262

But attacks on info access have been gov-wide too, from LGBT & women's health info, to animal welfare data, to fact sheets about how to access clean water in urban areas. 24/

For more, see our @SunWebIntegrity work. A great example from @rachelkbergman: sunlightfoundation.com/2018/03/21/fed…

SCIENCE-BASED POLICIES: Most of Trump's science attacks, many of which already have consequences, are the rollbacks of regs & programs and their replacement with those that have no scientific basis. 25/

@GuardianUS' @emilyhholden has a fantastic analysis: theguardian.com/us-news/2019/j…

I won't even try a full list, but here are some of the worst:

Early on Pruitt rejected findings of EPA career scientists & chose not to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos despite studies showing harms to farm workers & children. 26/

@nytimes' @EricLiptonNYT: nytimes.com/2017/03/29/us/…

On GHG emissions, Trump has deregulated or proposed weak regulations that ignore the well-established science behind climate change. An example: the proposed rewrite of car emissions rules by the oil industry. 27/

@nytimes' @HirokoTabuchi for @nytclimate: nytimes.com/2018/12/13/cli…

The Trump admin has even gotten in its own crosshairs when attacking science: Pruitt lobbied the White House to suppress an HHS study on toxic PFAS chemicals, which has contaminated water near military bases. 28/

@politico's @AnnElizabeth18 had the scoop: politico.com/story/2018/05/…

The @nytimes' @EricLiptonNYT, @SteveEder, @JohnBranchNYT, & @gdemczuk did an incredible review of harms caused by Trump's environmental deregulation. You should absolutely read all of it. They detail every piece of scientific evidence that was ignored: 29/ nytimes.com/interactive/20…

In addition to a short summary piece (nytimes.com/2018/12/26/us/…), @EricLiptonNYT also shared detailed threads about the NYT review's four parts. 30/

Each is worth a read:
1:

https://twitter.com/EricLiptonNYT/status/1078347535859834880

2:

https://twitter.com/EricLiptonNYT/status/1078390009907081217

3:

https://twitter.com/EricLiptonNYT/status/1078497267261288448

4:

https://twitter.com/EricLiptonNYT/status/1078696131939500033

OTHER ATTACKS: Beyond the many other attacks on science-based policymaking & info censorship, I've left out entire types of attacks: unqualified nominees, understaffing, censoring staff comms, cutting budgets, & more.

It's hard to get everything in one little Twitter thread. 31/

Luckily, there are great public resources for learning about Trump's attacks on science.

My hard-working friends at @ClimSciDefense, with @ColumbiaClimate, are tracking hundreds of examples that you should check out in the "Silencing Science Tracker": columbiaclimatelaw.com/resources/sile… 32/

You can also see @UCSUSA's running list of "Attacks on Science," built out by @GretchenTG, @UCSJacob, & the rest of the CSD team: ucsusa.org/center-science…

And you should have a close look at @HarvardEELP's "Regulatory Rollback Tracker" too: 33/ eelp.law.harvard.edu/regulatory-rol…

Before wrapping up, I want to remind anyone still reading that, as bad as things have been, the #GovernmentShutdown has genuinely made things worse. 34/

See @LizBorkowski's great thread on harms to science during the shutdown:

https://twitter.com/LizBorkowski/status/1084916420666896385

Believing the government should rely on science shouldn't have anything to do with partisanship. It just turns out it's necessary to enable a fair, effective gov that protects public health & our world.

It's not about being a fancy scientist, it's about human well-being. 35/

Thanks again to everyone at @POGOBlog, & the great folks I've worked with over the last 2 years at @UCSUSA, @ClimSciDefense, @EnviroDGI, & elsewhere. I may not be in DC anymore, but I'm still looking out for Trump's attacks on science.

And thanks for reading! 36/

END … for now