

Congress passes bill forbidding scientists from advising the EPA - juanplusjuan
http://www.salon.com/2014/11/19/house_republicans_just_passed_a_bill_forbidding_scientists_from_advising_the_epa_on_their_own_research/

======
xrange
Here's the section of the text of the bill in question...

[https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-
bill/1422...](https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-
bill/1422/text)

(a) Independent Advice.--Section 8(a) of the Environmental Research,
Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365(a))
is amended by inserting ``independently'' after ``Advisory Board which
shall''.

(b) Membership.--Section 8(b) of the Environmental Research, Development, and
Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365(b)) is amended to read
as follows:

``(b)(1) The Board shall be composed of at least nine members, one of whom
shall be designated Chairman, and shall meet at such times and places as may
be designated by the Chairman.

``(2) Each member of the Board shall be qualified by education, training, and
experience to evaluate scientific and technical information on matters
referred to the Board under this section. The Administrator shall ensure
that--

``(A) the scientific and technical points of view represented on and the
functions to be performed by the Board are fairly balanced among the members
of the Board;

``(B) at least ten percent of the membership of the Board are from State,
local, or tribal governments;

``(C) persons with substantial and relevant expertise are not excluded from
the Board due to affiliation with or representation of entities that may have
a potential interest in the Board's advisory activities, so long as that
interest is fully disclosed to the Administrator and the public and
appointment to the Board complies with section 208 of title 18, United States
Code;

``(D) in the case of a Board advisory activity on a particular matter
involving a specific party, no Board member having an interest in the specific
party shall participate in that activity;

``(E) Board members may not participate in advisory activities that directly
or indirectly involve review or evaluation of their own work;

``(F) Board members shall be designated as special Government employees; and

``(G) no federally registered lobbyist is appointed to the Board.

~~~
enigmango
Based on this, it seems like a more accurate title would be " _House_ passes
bill forbidding scientists from advising the EPA _on their own research_ ",
similar to the article's actual title.

That said, I found _Science_ 's article[0] to be a better (or at least less
sour-toned) review of the situation, stating that the bill bars "panelists
from discussing their own research".

[0][http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2014/11/environmental...](http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2014/11/environmentalists-
scientists-fret-over-republican-bills-targeting-epa-science)

------
cryoshon
Just those House Republicans being crazy and making us Americans look bad,
again.

It won't pass the Senate. If by some cataclysm it passes the Senate, Obama
will veto it.

~~~
MrZongle2
To be fair, the Republicans are getting plenty of help from the Democrats when
it comes to making America look bad.

