RE: EPA's evolving role - 2-way communication & trust

[Phil Chapman <pchapman@earthlink.net>]

A second reason for the EPA's disrepute is that it has acquiesced in the misuse of science for ideological ends. For many environmentalists, it no longer seems to matter whether a scientific theory is true (i.e., supported by the evidence), but only whether it is effective (i.e., serves to promote the current agenda). This attitude was expressed well by Stephen Schneider, an advocate of draconian responses to global warming, in an interview in "Discover" magazine, Oct 1989: "To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest." 

Public statements that purport to be scientific but are in fact ideological have totally destroyed the credibility of the EPA. Its actions may be based on real science, or they may not. We the people have no way to tell, and so we simply disbelieve everything the agency says. 

The EPA began with a commitment to scientific integrity, but the rot soon started. The triggering event was probably the controversy over DDT. In 1971-72, the agency conducted 7 months of hearings about this pesticide, and the official conclusion said "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man... The use of DDT under the regulations involved here does not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife." However, the EPA Administrator, William Ruckelshaus, was a member of the Environmental Defense Fund, which was a principal opponent of DDT. A week after the findings of his own agency were reported to him, Ruckelshaus banned DDT. Since that time, more than a billion people have been afflicted by malaria, and about 60 million have died unnecessarily. In other words, Bill Ruckelshaus, a decent fellow who wouldn't harm a fly (or a mosquito), is responsible for more human suffering than Genghis Khan, Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung, combined.

The only way the EPA can recover the trust of the American people is to abandon propaganda and commit itself to the highest possible standards of scientific probity. Restoring respect will, at best, take decades. It would probably be easier to shut the agency down and start over with a new organization, dedicated from the start to intellectual honesty.