Barnini Chakraborty writes for the Washington Examiner about preparations in Washington, D.C., for a potential Donald Trump victory in November.
President Joe Biden isn’t on the November ballot but his administration has been working overtime to “Trump-proof” science before his exit, putting protections in place to shield government scientists from political interference should former President Donald Trump win another White House term.
“The Trump administration regularly suppressed, downplayed, or simply ignored scientific research demonstrating the need for regulation to protect public health and the environment,” Romany Webb, deputy director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, wrote.
She added that the Trump administration “routinely prioritized economic interests” over health and science and encouraged a public distrust of science.
The Trump administration’s efforts to “undermine science” has been documented in the Silencing Science Tracker, an online database with more than 300 entries that records anti-science actions taken by local, state, and federal governments. It has been tracking complaints since November 2016. Trump was sworn into office on Jan. 20, 2017.
Jennifer Jones, director for the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told the Washington Examiner that while “there is always an urgent need to defend science” there was an uptick in dissatisfied scientists during the previous administration.
“I just can’t stress enough how our daily lives depend on good, independent science, free of political interference,” she said.
Scientists and those who want to protect evidence-based policymaking have several options in play. They include establishing a scientific integrity council, codifying laws prohibiting political interference with the scientific research and federal data used to protect the public, and using collective bargaining agreements negotiated by unions to protect scientists and their work.
Lyric Jorgenson, the associate director for science policy at the National Institutes of Health, said the plan to safeguard the agency’s independence is critical to its mission.
