Re: Bush Administration to Close EPA Research Libraries, Despite Outcry

[Guest guest]

You need to get your information from a better source. THis PEER is

against it because the information system is changing. I read portions

of the Library Plan as put forward by the EPA Office of Informational

Services, NOT the BUsh administration. THis process for digitizing all

the information let's the PUBLIC have more access than ever before.

Please get the facts and the whole story befor you start on a posting

that starts off with " I hate Bush " . That is a stupid and not factual

position.

Here is the Library document:

http://www.peer.org/docs/epa/06_21_8_library_plan.pdf#search='EPA%20FY%2\

02007%20Library%20Plan'

<http://www.peer.org/docs/epa/06_21_8_library_plan.pdf#search='EPA%20FY%\

202007%20Library%20Plan'>

[Guest guest]

Maybe in your mind. But explain this to me: IF what you say is

true how come there are a greater number of enforcement actions on

asbestos and lead based paint, with record setting fines assessed

under the Bush Administration. This pace far outstrips what the EPA

Browner administration did, even with help form Al baby! As you

remember, Ms. Browner was the one that said " Asbestos is a problem

of the Past. " , which it clearly isn't.

The facts dollars and court cases say otherwise. I am not here to

defend the Bush admin., as I disagree with a great deal of what they

do. That being said, I'll not let political predjuice my science or

facts.

--- In , LiveSimply <quackadillian@...>

wrote:

>

> There is no doubt that the Bush administration is politicizing

science

> in the same way that historically, totalitarian regimes have done

so.

> Why, is anybody's guess.

>

> See (these and many, many more pieces of evidence on this flagrant

> abuse of the public trust, on a scale unmatched by any previous

> American administration)

>

> Scientific Integrity in Policy Making

> Investigation of the Bush administration's abuse of science

> (Union of Concerned Scientists)

> http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/reports-

scientific-integrity-in-policy-making.html

>

> (You can read an article about the report at Common Dreams)

> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0219-02.htm

>

> For an example thats more relevant to this group, read this

article on

> their 'influence' on the CDC:

> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4020/is_200301/ai_n9228549

>

> Excerpt:

>

> " Politicizing science: The case of the Bush administration's

influence

> on the lead advisory panel at the centers for disease control

> Journal of Public Health Policy, 2003 by Markowitz, Gerald,

Rosner,

>

> SINCE the 1970s, the CDC has depended upon independent scientists

and

> policy consultants, who are experts in the field to gather

information

> and provide advice to the CDC regarding policy initiatives for a

> variety of toxic materials. Their role as advisors has been to

> ...utilize the most up-to-date information in providing guidance

and

> expert opinion. As the technologies improve and as more information

> becomes publicly available, policy itself is reformed and reshaped

> accordingly. Hence, the gathering of information itself is often

the

> spur that promotes change in the thinking of the scientific

community.

>

> One of the most important safeguards of the scientific integrity of

> governmental policy and research has been the 258 scientific

advisory

> committees to the various branches of the CDC that presently help

> policymakers decide on the appropriate means of addressing serious

> scientific issues. These advisory committees, while not possessing

the

> actual power to reshape policy, are important in their role as the

> font of expert opinion available to various CDC chiefs. During the

> past two years, the Bush administration has changed the traditional

> manner in which appointments to the committees have been made and

> substituted a process that by and large has reflected its own

> well-known anti-regulatory and anti-environmental agenda. In this

> paper we will look at this process, focusing on one important

> committee that has been responsible for protecting the nation's

> children from the devastating effects of lead on their neurological

> well-being.

>

> A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING

> ...end of excerpt, see the URL above for the entire article.. "

>