Federal

In Bush Administration, Policies Drive Science, Scholars’ Group Claims

By Debra Viadero — March 03, 2004 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

right The report, “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking,” is available from the The Union of Concerned Scientists. (Requires Adobe’s Acrobat Reader.)

Thousands were clamoring last week to add their names to a statement accusing the Bush administration of deliberately manipulating, suppressing, and ignoring scientific advice that conflicts with White House policy.

Initially signed by 60 prominent scientists, researchers, and Nobel laureates, the statement calls on Congress and the executive branch to put an end to tactics that they contend are undermining science across a wide range of federal agencies and policy areas. The list of policy areas includes some issues, such as sex education and the regulation of lead levels, that affect the nation’s schoolchildren.

But John H. Marburger III, the director of the White House office of science and technology policy, called the accusations “disappointing.”

“They make sweeping generalizations about the administration based on what appears to be a miscellany of criticisms, many of which have been made in the past by partisan political figures and advocacy organizations,” he said in a statement issued by his office.

‘Big Difference’

The scientists’ petition was released Feb. 18 by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit group based in Cambridge, Mass., that has drawn headlines before for opposing federal policy on global warming and other issues. The group also issued a report the same day that describes the scientists’ accusations in greater detail.

Suzanne Shaw, a spokeswoman for the scientists’ group, said the statement attracted 3,000 supporters in the first three days after its release and temporarily clogged traffic on the organization’s Web site. It was not clear last week, though, how many of the new signatures also belonged to scientists.

Ms. Shaw said the organization began its investigation last summer in response to calls from members and other scientists to take a stand against a pattern of federal intervention they saw as unprecedented.

“In previous administrations, the policymakers asked scientists to provide the best scientific evidence, and then it was up to the policymakers to make their own decisions,” said David M. Michaels, a professor of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University in Washington. He was one of the original signers.

“What’s going on now,” Mr. Michaels continued, “is that the science is being misrepresented and repressed so that it is made to look like it supports the policymakers’ decisions, and that’s a big difference.”

During President Clinton’s administration, Mr. Michaels was an assistant secretary for environment, safety, and health in the U.S. Department of Energy. But he noted that five of his co-signors held similarly high-ranking federal positions during Republican administrations. The list also includes 20 Nobel laureates, 19 National Medal of Science winners, and three researchers presented with the Crawford Prize, an award the Swedish Royal Academy gives in subject areas not covered by the Nobel Prize.

In the area of childhood lead poisoning, for example, Mr. Michaels maintained that federal officials had distorted the scientific decisionmaking process by manipulating the makeup of an advisory panel. The changes to the panel came, he said, just as the group was about to lower the federal threshold for determining acceptable lead levels in children’s blood.

Testing Abstinence

The report also contends that the Bush administration interfered in research designed to test the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs of sex education by mandating the kinds of measures researchers could use. Rather than using conventional techniques to gauge program effectiveness, it says, such as tracking the birthrates among girls who participated, federal researchers now must restrict themselves to documenting participants’ attendance and attitudes.

Both as president and as governor of Texas, Mr. Bush expressed his support for abstinence education.

Related Tags:

Events

School & District Management Webinar Fostering Productive Relationships Between Principals and Teachers
Strong principal-teacher relationships = happier teachers & thriving schools. Join our webinar for practical strategies.
Jobs Virtual Career Fair for Teachers and K-12 Staff
Find teaching jobs and K-12 education jubs at the EdWeek Top School Jobs virtual career fair.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Artificial Intelligence Webinar
Promoting Integrity and AI Readiness in High Schools
Learn how to update school academic integrity guidelines and prepare students for the age of AI.
Content provided by Turnitin

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Federal Ed. Dept. Says SEL Can 'Veil' Discrimination. What Does This Mean for Schools?
A document from the Education Department flags social-emotional learning—a once bipartisan education strategy—as a means of discrimination.
Deeper learning prepares students to work collaboratively and direct their own learning.
There has been an uptick in political pushback against social-emotional learning, with the Education Department recently saying some schools "have sought to veil discriminatory policies" with terms like SEL.
Allison Shelley for All4Ed
Federal Civil Rights, Research, and More: What’s Hit Hardest by Massive Ed. Dept. Cuts
An analysis of the Trump administration's cuts to the agency shows its civil rights enforcement and research arms are hit particularly hard.
Chloe Kienzle of Arlington, Va., holds a sign as she stands outside the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Eduction, which were ordered closed for the day for what officials described as security reasons amid large-scale layoffs, Wednesday, March 12, 2025, in Washington.
Chloe Kienzle of Arlington, Va., holds a sign as she stands outside the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Education on Wednesday, March 12, 2025, in Washington. The department this week said it was cutting nearly half its staff.
Mark Schiefelbein/AP
Federal Opinion The Threat to Federal School Data Is a Threat to Us All
The erosion of this fundamental information will create immediate blind spots for districts and states.
Ronald L. Wasserstein
6 min read
A bar graph melts into a puddle.
iStock/Getty Images
Federal Ed. Dept. Will Shed Nearly Half Its Staff in Massive Reduction Under Trump
The U.S. Department of Education announced Tuesday it was getting rid of nearly half its staff through a variety of measures.
6 min read
The exterior of the Department of Education Building in Washington, DC on Thursday, December 14, 2017.
The exterior of the Department of Education building in Washington on Thursday, December 14, 2017. The department's Washington office and regional offices will be closed on Wednesday for "security reasons," according to an email sent to staff members.
Swikar Patel/Education Week