Yes, it is as if the Agency's responsibility is to protect their corporate cronies from the meddlesome public.

I haven't had a chance to read all of the linked correspondence. This revelation reminded me of some controversy here last fall concerning atrazine. Prof. Tyrone Hayes, an expert on effects of atrazine on amphibians, had been invited to be the keynote speaker at a Pollution Control Agency conference. He was uninvited due to industry pressure. I think the issue received more publicity - public awareness, because of industry's attempt to silence him. OCA picked up the lead story that was in my local paper which is linked below.

This clip highlights the rank of industry data in final decision making.

"Scientific understanding about atrazine's potential effects on frogs is a
work in progress. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials reviewed 17
studies on the topic in 2003, including two by Hayes and 12 funded by the
pesticide industry. They found insufficient data "to indicate that atrazine
will or will not cause adverse developmental effects in amphibians."

Here is a link that might be useful: oca

perhaps this is one reason why Carol....

President Bush Stifles Science, Researchers Say
By Paul Recer
Associated Press
posted: 21 February 2005
08:05 am ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The voice of science is being stifled in the Bush administration, with fewer scientists heard in policy discussions and money for research and advanced training being cut, according to panelists at a national science meeting.

Speakers at the national meeting of the American Association for Advancement of Science expressed concern Sunday that some scientists in key federal agencies are being ignored or even pressured to change study conclusions that don't support policy positions.

The speakers also said that Bush's proposed 2005 federal budget is slashing spending for basic research and reducing investments in education designed to produce the nation's future scientists.

And there also was concern that increased restrictions and requirements for obtaining visas is diminishing the flow to the U.S. of foreign-born science students who have long been a major part of the American research community.

Rosina Bierbaum, dean of the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment, said the Bush administration has cut scientists out of some of the policy-making processes, particularly on environmental issues.

"In previous administrations, scientists were always at the table when regulations were being developed,'' she said. "Science never had the last voice, but it had a voice.''

Issues on global warming, for instance, that achieved a firm scientific consensus in earlier years are now being questioned by Bush policy makers. Proven, widely accepted research is being ignored or disputed, she said.

Government policy papers issued prior to the Bush years moved beyond questioning the validity of global warming science and addressed ways of confronting or dealing with climate change.

Under Bush, said Bierbaum, the questioning of the proven science has become more important than finding ways to cope with climate change.

One result of such actions, said Neal Lane of Rice University, a former director of the National Science Foundation, is that "we don't really have a policy right now to deal with what everybody agrees is a serious problem.''

Among scientists, said Lane, "there is quite a consensus in place that the Earth is warming and that humans are responsible for a considerable part of that'' through the burning of fossil fuels.

And the science is clear, he said, that without action to control fossil fuel use, the warming will get worse and there will be climate events that "our species has not experienced before.''

Asked for comment, White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said, "The president makes policy decisions based on what the best policies for the country are, not politics. People who suggest otherwise are ill-informed.''

Kurt Gottfried of Cornell University and the Union of Concerned Scientists said a survey of scientists in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that about 42 percent said they felt pressured to not report publicly any findings that do not agree with Bush policies on endangered species. He said almost a third of the Fish and Wildlife researchers said they were even pressured not to express within the agency any views in conflict with the Bush policies.

"This administration has distanced itself from scientific information,'' said Gottfried. He said this is part of a larger effort to let politics dominate pure science.

He said scientists in the Environmental Protection Agency have been pressured to change their research to keep it consistent with the Bush political position on environmental issues.

Because of such actions, he said, it has become more difficult for federal agencies to attract and retain top scientific talent. This becomes a critical issue, said Gottfried, because about 35 percent of EPA scientists will retire soon and the Bush administration can "mold the staff'' of the agency through the hiring process.

Federal spending for research and development is significantly reduced under the proposed 2005 Bush budget, the speakers said.

"Overall the R&D budget is bad news,'' said Bierbaum.

She said the National Science Foundation funds for graduate students and for kindergarten through high school education has been slashed.

NASA has gotten a budget boost, but most of the new money will be going to the space shuttle, space station and Bush's plan to explore the Moon and Mars. What is suffering is the space agency's scientific research efforts, she said.

"Moon and Mars is basically going to eat everybody's lunch,'' she said.

Lane said Bush's moon and Mars exploration effort has not excited the public and has no clear goals or plans.

He said Bush's Moon-Mars initiative "was poorly carried out and the budget is not there to do the job so science (at NASA) will really get hurt.''

What a depressing subject for a rainy Tuesday morning. We have bemoaned for years cronyism among government regulators and those being regulated. Now we have an Administration promoting privatization of all things including education and science while promoting corporate "capitalism" as an alternative system to manage public services. The a priori view is that government is too big, too tax-demanding, and too inefficient except when big government services and infrastructures meet the interests of corporate socialists among us.

Meanwhile, the Justice Dept. is showing efficiency in prosecuting environmental wrong doers. The nerve of this guy, huh?

=====
Refugee Manager Charged for Saving Threatened Frogs; First Case of Refuge Manager Facing Criminal Charges for Wildlife Offense

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Feb.21--The U.S. Department of Justice has filed criminal charges against a National Wildlife Refuge Manager for rescuing a threatened species, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The charges involve actions the now-former manager took to save 400 tadpoles of the rare Chiricahua leopard frog from certain destruction.

Last week, DOJ cited Wayne Shifflett, the long-time manager of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona, with moving the tadpoles in 2003 without proper authorization. Not only was Shifflett the manager of the refuge where the frogs were re-introduced, after the species had been eradicated, but he also had an Endangered Species permit issued by U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (the Chiricahua leopard frog is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act). DOJ contends that Shifflett did not, however, have permission of the state agency, Arizona Game & Fish, to take the tadpoles from private lands onto the refuge. The citation DOJ issued on February 14th imposes a $3,500 fine.

This is the only prosecution on record of a wildlife refuge manager for a conservation-related offense.

(clip)

"This case is the perfect illustration of how federal wildlife policy is now being set by pencil pushers and political schemers rather than by experienced, dedicated professionals," Ruch added. "Regardless of the costs, Wayne Shiffletts decisiveness will pay dividends to the restoration of the Sonoran Desert ecosystem for generations to come."
=====

Aaaaaaagggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! (To ALL the above posts...)

Sorry, folks....I feel (a little) better after that....but still helpless.

Regards,

Shax

Are we to become a people unable to articulate our deep disgust of the Administration, reduced to monosyllabic utterances?

Shax is Australian and has an international duty to

AAARRRGGHHHH!!!!!! (although showing some restraint by uttering
Aaaaaaagggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!)

I'll see that Aaaaaaagggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!) Shax and raise you 2 Groans and a Holy Crap! Like I said on another thread I'm sure glad we had the smarts back in the 60's to establish the EPA cause we surely lack those same smarts today. Kinda like the tug of war over the Food Pyramid (nutritionalists vs food conglomerates). It seems to boil down to $$$ in the end.

Well, I guess the answer to my question so far is "Yes!". Although, vkgk, Holy Crap!, unless pronounced with the proper gutturaliztion can easily be confused for two full words. And Marshall, the addition of R! almost sounds like two syllables.

Shax's restraint is admirable.

:~)

"LAWSUIT CHARGES"
heck, I could find someone to FILE on.

"Freedom of Information Act lawsuit,---- EPA officials met secretly more than 40 times" contradiction?

someones just pixxed because they did not get a call to come
sit in on a meeting.

I just know this is the first EVERY administration to make back room deals......

Loral+chi coms
Nuke+NorthKorea

because the EPA is headed by industry lobbists for the nations largest polluters - the EPA is no longer protecting the common good of the public but is only protecting the current profits of corporations. the current EPA is a joke... and articles like this just confirm it ...

Don't expect to get any results when employees of federal agencies like EPA report such abuses. Note especially the last line of the article.

More Than A Thousand Whistleblower Cases Dumped; Special Counsel Dismisses Hundreds of Disclosures and Complaints in Past Year

WASHINGTON -- February 23 -- The U.S. Special Counsel has dismissed more than 1,000 whistleblower cases in the past year, according to a letter from the Bush-appointed Special Counsel released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The Special Counsel appears to have taken action in very few, if any, of these cases and has yet to represent a single whistleblower in an employment case.

In a letter dated February 14, 2005 and addressed to U.S. Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA), Special Counsel Scott Bloch defends his stormy 13 months in office by pointing to a sharp drop in backlogged whistleblower cases.

"Everyone agrees that backlogs and delays are bad but they are not as bad as simply dumping the cases altogether," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that this letter is the first account that Bloch has released of his tenure and that his offices report for FY 2004, which ended in October, is overdue. "If the Office of Special Counsel under Scott Bloch is not helping whistleblowers then there is no reason for the office to continue to exist."

According to the figures released by Bloch, in the past year the Office of Special Counsel
Dismissed or otherwise disposed of 600 whistleblower disclosures where civil servants have reported waste, fraud, threats to public safety and violations of law. Bloch has yet to announce a single case where he has ordered an investigation into the employees charges. Bloch says that 100 disclosures are still pending; and Made 470 claims of retaliation disappear. In not one of these cases did Blochs office affirmatively represent a whistleblower to obtain relief before the civil service court system, called the Merit Systems Protection Board. Bloch says that another 30 retaliation cases remain in the backlog. In order to speed dismissals, Bloch instituted a rule forbidding his staff from contacting a whistleblower if their disclosure was deemed incomplete or ambiguous. Instead, OSC would simply dismiss the matter. As a result, hundreds of whistleblowers never had a chance to justify why their cases had merit.

"According to Scott Bloch there is no waste, fraud or abuse in the federal government that deserves investigation," stated Ruch, noting that there may be even more dismissals than Bloch reported because the numbers cited above are limited to what was defined as a backlog and do not include new cases.

Don't you guys have any respected and authoritative journalists who can write award-winning exposes of these govt atrocities? No aspiring Woodward/Bernsteins?
What happened to the Washington Post? Don't tell me that Murdoch owns it!
Maybe someone needs to make a movie...Arnie could star in it....

Reading these posts reminds me of the USSR during the Cold War...suppression of truth for the good of the people...I'm getting seiously worried here..

Loved the line in KT's post...

"...Scott Bloch defends his stormy 13 months in office by pointing to a sharp drop in backlogged whistleblower cases.

"Everyone agrees that backlogs and delays are bad but they are not as bad as simply dumping the cases altogether," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch..."

Good grief.....

Yours in sympathy,

Shax

Shax, there seems to be little interest in the big US media to do hard investigative journalism anymore. The media have been spanked repeatedly for getting out of line and their corporate bosses don't want the money boat rocked or to disturb Americans from their god and country-lovin, too-much TV watchin, in-debt consumerism fueled stupor. We also enjoy Gov't sponsored news "plants" posing as journalists or White House Briefing Room reporters to report glowingly on our dear leader and his policies and under-the-table funded hacks to smear opponents and sow confusion. Despite this, there is still the popular impression that our media are liberal and biased against the administration so that outlets like Fox News - the lapdog, leg-humping propoganda arm of the administration set the low standard for fairness. You have to search out obscure internet sites or read the international papers or TV news from BBC to find out what's really going on or hear about it from a bulletin board like this!

Applause!!!

KT, loved your lapdog metaphor but would amend by adding "dry" in appropriate position. Dat dawg dunna have bawlls.

Shax, I've pretty much ignored major media for information; I cannot even rely of them to supply "facts". I use that time formerly wasted by searching more primary sites, even those with known ideological biases. I don't need a "talking head Pundit" to tell me what to think. Finally, I accept the corruption of our political system as something I cannot change nor even seem to influence toward reform. As KT points out, there is a whole "service industry" out there to counter the perceived enemies of entrenched interests. The AARP, a powerful and conservative Seniors' advocacy group, is under fire as hating the troops and promoting gay marriage. Why? Because the organization is not behind the President's insistent calls of privatization of Social Security.

Hi Shax! Just be glad you live in a demockrazy ;o). I wish that I could post a pic for you now, you know the one with the 3 monkeys (see, speak, hear no evil). Well sadly, that's what happens to a nation's media when that nation gets involved in a war. They do speak of evil but naturally it's the other guy of course. vgkg

There is one journalist I thought of who can fit the bill. In the Sept. 2004 issue of Harper's, Lewis Lapham wrote this brief history of the right wing propogandists. It is long, but not dry reading. Here is a clip.

"About the workings of the right-wing propaganda mills in Washington and New York I knew enough to know that the numbing of America's political senses didn't happen by mistake, but it wasn't until I met Rob Stein, formerly a senior adviser to the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, that I came to fully appreciate the nature and the extent of the re-education program undertaken in the early 1970s by a cadre of ultraconservative and self-mythologizing millionaires bent on rescuing the country from the hideous grasp of Satanic liberalism. To a small group of Democratic activists meeting in New York City in late February, Stein had brought thirty-eight charts diagramming the organizational structure of the Republican "Message Machine," an octopus-like network of open and hidden microphones that he described as "perhaps the most potent, independent institutionalized apparatus ever assembled in a democracy to promote one belief system."

It was an impressive presentation, in large part because Stein didn't refer to anybody as a villain, never mentioned the word "conspiracy." A lawyer who also managed a private equity investment fundi.e., a man unintimidated by spread sheets and indifferent to the seductions of the pious leftStein didn't begrudge the manufacturers of corporatist agitprop the successful distribution of their product in the national markets for the portentous catch-phrase and the camera-ready slogan. Having devoted several months to his search through the available documents, he was content to let the facts speak for themselvesfifty funding agencies of different dimensions and varying degrees of ideological fervor, nominally philanthropic but zealous in their common hatred of the liberal enemy, disbursing the collective sum of roughly $3 billion over a period of thirty years for the fabrication of "irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas.""

Phew! One could describe this process of co-option as creeping oligarchism now being itself co-opted by corporate capitalism and globalization. There is no room for traditional values and 19th century social and economic myths.

i recently heard the modern press referred to as "stenographers" the press prints what people say (ie. the white house) but no reporters investigate the validity of their statements. only traitors would consider printing facts that might contradict the word of the government.

There was recently a TV show here (I think it was produced in the US), exposing Murdoch/FOX's affiliation with the present govt. Sensational interviews with journalists who'd either resigned in protest or been sacked for not toeing the company line....copies of daily memoes they received from "up high", telling them which direction to take with Polly Tickle stories, blatant censorship of their investigative efforts and on and on...

We in Australia never had such a transparent democratic system until you lucky lot inherited our Rupert!
(He still owns massive media interests here, Asia, UK, but seems more concerned with his US outlets....guess he figures it's easier to control the world from a bigger power base...)

If you don't hear from me for some time, it's because I'm likely to be visiting Mickey Mouse if I continue this rant!

What to do?

Regards,

Shax

Fear and Loathing. HST why have you forsaken us now when we need you most!

I never read Fear & Loathing, either one. A former roommate had an ararchist boyfriend who practically kept "in Las Vegas" in his back pocket at all times, for immediate reference. By the end of the summer, that guy had permanently turned me off to anarchy and HST. Of the little I have read, I didn't find HST's political analysis especially insightful. I thought his style more attractive to post-adolescent boys. No insult intended to him or his fans. RIP HST.

Not a Thompson reader here either - I think I read a more about him. This, tho, from Greg Palast struck me as more insightful than much of the eulogising that's been going around....

***.....What impressed me about "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" is that it was written as a coda, a needed break, from Thompson's grueling investigative report on the death of Chicano activist Ruben Salazar. And this I also know: all that cool fear-and-loathing patter was not written on acid in a Ghia doing 140; it was typed alone in a quiet room.

Alone in a quiet room. No school gyms of adulating audiences on their feet to cheer the genius, no comic book figures dropping bon mots could press those keys.

And then came the satanic sucker-punch, celebrity. Poor Mr. Thompson.

When I think of how my one goofy week of offshore stardom twisted my head (I'm still neurotically plucking hairs off my nose), I can only imagine what Thompson's daily dose of fame cocaine did to him.....***

& I disagree w/KT's assertion that there aren't any news outlets/reporters doing the kind of work we need - but it tells me that there are far too many folks here in the US who are being denied full information......IOW, if a tree falls in the forest & nobody on TV tells you about it.....?

Here're a few good sources - they all broadcast on radio - & 'web'cast as well:

AAR
FSRN
Ring of Fire

& Buzzflash has a great collection of articles updated daily & many, many links to news sources & blogs.

BTW, did anyone catch NOW on PBS last night?There was a report on how the big cable providers are trying to squash any competition in the broadband market.

I was being alittle facecious about Thompson. The Las Vegas book was not my favorite. My first HST read was the Hells Angel book of which the immersed, first person point of view was really interesting and new to me at that impressionable age. In the context of this discussion about neutered reporters, I find his Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail reporting to have more bite about the kind of political shenanigans that we take for granted now than we may ever see again.

Carol, those are all good sources, but my criticism was aimed at the "Big" media where 90% of regular folks get their news. Most of here have found better outlets than Fox or CNN, but alas, these sources will not likely be seen by the citizens who vote these idiots into office again and again.

Here is another epithet from another sharp observer, Fred Reed, a contemporary of Thompson.

Not to turn this into a Thompson wake, but here is a passage I encountered in the obits a few days ago lifted from his 70's Nixon election coverage that might speak to the angst and deja vu he might have felt lately.

"How many more of these gxddxm elections are we going to have to write off as lame but 'regrettably necessary' holding actions? And how many more of these stinking double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and at the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils? I understand, along with a lot of other people, that the big thing, this year, is Beating Nixon. But that was also the big thing, as I recall, twelve years ago in 1960--and as far as I can tell, we've gone from bad to worse to rotten since then, and the outlook is for more of the same."

Fred almost does make his death sound like political martyrdom.

The clip, opening with the expletive du jour, illustrates by contrast why I prefer the thoughtful grace of wit from Lapham and others capable of turning a phrase sublime.

This is the TV program to which I referred earlier...seems you have to buy the DVD, but it was broadcast on free-to-air TV (govt owned station, of course!) here a coupla weeks ago...

Eye-opening stuff...

Where's Monte? He's long been an advocate of personal freedom and non-interference of govts...would be interested in his take on all this...

Regards,

Shax

Haha Shax - I seriously doubt any major US TV outlets will be airing ANY of those documentaries any time soon >= J

However, they've been doing quite well commercially - as have many others. Perhaps because TV seems to've dropped the ball in the information game, internet, radio, print media & films are filling the niche?

& yeah KT, I'm aware of the sad fact that many people rely on TV to inform them & I kinda guessed that's what you meant (tho not necessarily what you said).
I'm hopeful tho - things change slowly & we don't always notice shifts while they're in progress.

(hey - is this too much OT???)

Center for American Progress(1 of the sponsors mentioned @ the bottom of that page) has a terrific site as well.....

With half the electorate "blue", Clear Channel would soon enough have to meet demand for more progressive programming. Of course, 20 or 30 stations out of 1200 stations comprise barely a drop, particularly if those stations represented a tiny share of audience in their markets already. Clear Channel would not put Rush on every station concurrently.

I imagine Murdoch/FOX is right pleased with all the free advertising it receives from its strident critics. Let's see those rating fall before celebrating the demise of Rupert.

As you may have heard the Bush administration is cutting back the EPA's budget for 05, but that is only the half of it! What the EPA directors are doing now is outsourcing EPA inspection duties to private companies that do not have the necessary EPA trained inspectors and experts to ensure compliance, not to mention the public nor environments best interest at heart. Its a non-expert for profit business now being the watchdog over for profit companies!!!

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than
dishonesty.
--Plato

I suppose turning the responsibilities over to private companies is part of what it means to be an ownership society.

Thanks in part to criticism by Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show", CNN cancelled "Crossfire", their version of a debate show. Stewart accurately referred to Crossfire as theatrics instead of debate and said the show is hurting us by not providing the public with real discussion and information.

In a recent report on Democracy Now, CNN's new president, Jonathan Klein was reported as saying CNN wants to seperate themsevles from the sideshow style news popularized by Fox. I thought this was a major step towards dismantling shock jock programming.

Reviewing the dn! link (after posting??), I see it doesn't include a link to the full transcript of Crossfire, as I thought. So, here is the transcript from media matters.

Is this true that Stewart's appearance led to the demise of Crossfire? I stopped watching the program years ago for much the same reasons as Stewart gave. I especially "enjoyed" cross-talking. That practice is a wonderful way to eliminate meaningful exchanges recorded on transcripts.

The USDA has been moving toward "privatization" of the meat inspecting process by promoting self-inspecting and reducing the number and quality of official inspections. That worked very well for the meat-packing and -processing industries. Of course, the incidents of mass poisoning seem to have increased, but that's probably just my imagination.

So, who is going to pay for private inspections on behalf of the EPA?

Omigawd nagamaki!

Just when you think you've heard everything!

Thanks for mentioning Media Matters, Althea - I could not remember its name when I was posting those earlier links.

(I actually have the video of JS's appearance on CF - somewhere.....it was right after TDS had won several Emmy awards & I'm guessing he felt his job was safe enough for him to be outspoken......?The other part that's quite amusing is JS's comments on TDS RE: his experience & the cancellation of CF.)

Thanks to TDS, many people are getting info they wouldn't otherwise.

Speaking of the EPA & the admin.'s dismissal of whistleblower cases - yesterday on AAR's Laura Flanders Show, I heard the guest (from PEER) cite 1 example of employees exposed to berillium(sp?) w/o their knowledge - it was heinous >= (

(& altho it's a separate subject, I'd like to mention that yesterday on Ring of Fire, there was a report on mercury, children & neurological damage & figures cited were quite disturbing :something like 1/6 children w/ some sort of neuro damage/disability???!!! & the pieces of the puzzle are starting to fit - namely, discussion of the likely reason why there has been a legislative push to protect pharma companies from legal reprisals for damages from vaccines - & the recent passage of that bill RE: class action lawsuits.)

There is a site, BTW that archives AAR programming......

Marshall, I saw that episode of John Stewart on Crossfire (live) in all it's uncensored glory, Stewart did a good number on them. Crossfire was already on the outs since CNN had previously downsized it to 1/2 hour and removed it from an evening time slot to afternoon. Too bad Stewart isn't asked to appear on InSanity & Colms too, that would be a real Hoot.

Fox wouldn't dare. The Mr Blowhard and Dr. Milktoast Show.