The America of the hawks manipulates research by reinterpreting or suppressing scientific findings so that the industry can optimize its profit
"U.S. burgers depend on government institutions to enact science-based policies for the health and welfare of the nation. Meanwhile, leading academic journals have begun to question whether the integrity of state institutions is being sacrificed to political and ideological ends."
With this statement, Member of Parliament Henry A. Waxman in his capacity as a member of the Democrats in the "Government Reform Committee" the 40-page report Politics and Science in the Bush Administration ( s.a. Politics Science). Henry A. Waxman sees two patterns in which scientific findings are bent:
There are ies such as abortion, abstinence, and stem cell research that influence the president through active right-wing constituencies, and ies such as global warming and workplace safety that have had enormous economic consequences for industry.
According to Waxman, the government’s strategy is based on three elements.
1. The appointment of advisors to scientific committees is no longer based on qualifications, but on ideological background and the view of industry.
2. Information conveyed to the people is filtered to be in line with the government’s ideological and economic goals.
3. The allocation of $100 billion in government aid for research and development only serves programs that are pro-government.
Henry A. Waxman illustrates this pattern with several examples. For example, the result favorable to anti-abortionists, that abortion causes breast cancer, is accepted, even though doubts about its accuracy have arisen in the meantime. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has taken the article on the protective effect of condoms off the Internet because the supporters of sexual abstinence reject the use of condoms on principle and because of their known unsafe effect.
Influences on the drinking water, for example by perchlorate or lead, were played down in order not to burden the causing industry with additional costs. On the ie of global warming, the U.S. government is opposed on many levels. ExxonMobil’s 2001 request that climate scientist Robert Watson be removed from the "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change" (IPCC) was fulfilled a year later (A small coup in energy policy). Michael Oppenheimer wrote at the time in Science: "It is scandalous. The interference of narrow-minded political considerations in a scientific process."
The report lists many more aspects, from AIDS to reproductive medicine, from the military missile defense system to the Yellostone National Park. Much of this, such as the intensive television advertising of the pharmaceutical industry for its products, is also often the subject of emotional debate in Germany. It’s easy for the White House spokesman to retort at this range:
We need time to analyze the report in detail so. However, I very much doubt whether Representative Waxman is an objective representative of scientific facts.
Henry A. Waxman is uncomfortable. The Democratic congressman, born in 1939, who was elected to 30. District in California speaks, is proud of his nickname Bulldog. Unlike the ruling Republicans, the campaign contributions he raises are small. Instead, he never misses an opportunity to attack the weakest members of George W. Bush’s party. Bush and his lieutenants to expose. It was he who dragged U.S. Vice President Cheney’s Halliburton deal into the spotlight (But a little ol for blood?), and since June he has been asking penetratingly for proof of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (Democracy is in Danger), until he finally elicited the U.S. government’s admission that the alleged uranium shipments were based on the CIA’s allegedly erroneous interpretations.
Less would have been more
The name Henry A. Waxman previously stood for the fight against the tobacco industry. He played a key role in the growing opposition to smoking. He insisted relentlessly on the opinion that smoking is harmful to health and that scientific findings to the contrary are artificially fabricated and paid for by the rich tobacco industry. Since April, he has repeatedly urged the U.S. Congressional ban against the spread of tobacco. He accuses the U.S. government of making it illegal to give free cigarettes to U.S. soldiers. Furthermore, the state-run Foreign Agricultural Service is illegally conducting market analyses for the tobacco industry.
As exciting as the current report reads: Less would have been more. Accusations of influence peddling by pro-government representatives are old hat, accompanying every change of government in Washington and Bonn-Berlin. Likewise, the reevaluation of government demand, which in times of recession usually cuts science first where it shows no immediate benefit. Thus, the spectrum with situations worthy of discussion offers ample opportunity for the U.S. government to strike back, especially since the congressman, with the platform he founded, L.A.Pac no less than Georges W. Bush is thinking about the next election: "L.A.Pac is a political action committee to establish a Democratic majority in Congress."
In this respect, Henry A. Waxman no longer young enough to see through the real games of the U.S. government. If it had not been a matter of money, the swashbuckler John Poindexter would not have had to resign because of that auction for the future in the Middle East (Who will be the next to be attacked by the Bush administration)?), which has been threaded by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (Future-Borse for terrorist attacks). "Regrettable," is the title of the latest editorial in Nature, the science journal published in London. "The scientists, who participated in this unique access and profited from it, should make clear to the politicians and the public what they have lost (in knowledge)."
Bread Games. This is still the stuff of (political and scientific) dreams.