• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Science Matters: Poor Policy Arises From Bad Science Plus Politics

Posted on: Thursday, 20 May 2004, 06:00 CDT

It's probably safe to say that most scientists, though certainly not all, don't like playing politics.

At its purest, science is the search for fundamental truths. Politics is about governance and decisions, advocacy and compromise. In an ideal world, good science and politics would converge to create good policy.

Among the three, however, politics is the driver, Rice University professor Neal Lane said during the 20th anniversary celebration of the Santa Fe Institute last week. "Science and policy just sort of get canceled out by political disputes."

As a science adviser to President Clinton and former director of the National Science Foundation, Lane would know. He was also among many prominent signatories -- including Nobel laureates and former science advisers to Republican presidents -- on a statement accusing the bureaucrats in the Bush administration of suppressing and distorting science to advance political agendas.

From this perspective, politics has combined with bad science to create poor, or at least uninformed, policy.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, which spearheaded the effort, cited various abuses, including the suppression of science regarding climate change in a report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a tendency to stack science advisory boards with people who are either unqualified or have conflicts of interest. The statement also cited the administration's dismissal of an assessment by officials at Los Alamos and other DOE sites that a Iraq's purchase of certain aluminum tubes did not constitute evidence that the country was trying to develop uranium-enrichment centrifuges.

For its part, the administration has denied the claims but, given the depth and range of expertise from those who signed the statement, said it will look into the matter further.

Lane has never been affiliated with the Union of Concerned Scientists and said he didn't like the idea of signing the statement.

But there have been "too many examples when science has been misused, misrepresented, falsely given to the public," he said. And when it comes to things like air quality and lead exposure, public health is at stake.

The notion of the "civic scientist," a researcher who not only does his work but tries to ensure it translates properly in the public forum, is nothing new. And it's something George Cowan, the founder of the Santa Fe Institute and former head of research at Los Alamos National Laboratory, has advocated publicly.

For his part, Cowan said later that he wasn't particularly surprised by the Union of Concerned Scientists' accusations. He saw similar behavior when he was more involved in national policy.

"The White House has always had a political agenda," he said. "It may be going on to a greater extent than I am familiar with, but it's not a new situation."

For Lane what is striking is the pattern of abuse. In a subsequent interview, Lane cited "special interests that are in conflict with science" as the driving force behind the administration's actions.

"I do think it represents a culture in which these things can happen," he said.

Lane is an optimist and with a dry sense of humor (he recommends that everyone become science adviser to the president, at least once). The tables will eventually turn back in favor of good science, "but it's going to take awhile."

Jeff Tollefson covers science and technology for The New Mexican. He can be reached at 986-3072 or by

e-mail at jtollefson@sfnew

mexican.com.

More News in this Category