As Written By Joe Herring.
For much of the last 20 years, the EPA (under both Republican and Democrat Administrations) has promulgated regulations based on data unavailable to the public – or more accurately, unavailable to anyone outside of the EPA itself.
It is no accident that the promiscuity of job-killing regulation has closely paralleled the increasing use of such “hidden” data arrangements.
Of course, the EPA counters that all their scientific data is peer-reviewed, making public release of the data redundant. What the EPA apparatchiks do not tell you is that the peers who do the reviewing are themselves quite often working almost exclusively under grants given by the EPA, making dissent a difficult, if not impossible endeavor for a scientist hoping to keep the tax dollars flowing in his direction.
After all, if your benefactor has staked billions on pursuing a narrative (such as anthropogenic climate change) would they really find themselves amused at contrarian hijinks by a scientist who is dependent upon them for his very career? If the boss says the sky is falling, you better agree or find alternate employment.
Given that the federal government funds a great majority of all scientific research in this country, a dissenter’s prospects for future employment are dim indeed.
The resultant echo chamber of “peer review” has cemented the fictions of climate change, peak oil, and numerous other junk science darlings in the minds of the casually-informed citizen.
From the beginning of the EPA until this very moment, independent scientists have clamored for the agency to release the raw data from which their conclusions are drawn. As of the time of this writing, the EPA is still giving the same “middle-finger-in the-air” response, but that is about to change…
The Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act, or HONEST Act, that just passed the House will force the EPA to release ALL data used in the crafting of regulations, permitting unfettered independent verification.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the Science Committee, (and author of the bill) said
“The days of ‘trust-me’ science are over. In our modern information age, federal regulations should be based only on data that is available for every American to see and that can be subjected to independent review.”
Of course, the Left has responded with their usual outsized fear-mongering, with predictions of mass death and disease due to the implementation of this long overdue requirement.
Who knew that forcing EPA scientists to actually use the “scientific method,” rather than just applying the rubber stamp of “consensus,” would prevent the EPA from “using the most relevant scientific data.”
One can only presume that “relevant” in this case would be synonymous with “unverifiable.” Why else would secrecy be such a vital concern?
The bill will now go to the Senate where the Republican majority should prevail; a good first step in returning honesty to the process of government regulation.
The author writes from Omaha, Nebraska and welcomes visitors to his website www.dailyherring.com