ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society

by Rena Steinzor, a Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) member scholar, Wendy Wagner, a CPR member scholar, and Matthew Shudtz, a policy analyst at CPR.

A new Center for Progressive Reform white paper proposes nine legal reforms to help eliminate political meddling in regulatory science. Many environmental, health and safety statutes depend on scientific research to inform federal policymakers tasked with their implementation. The Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Consumer Product Safety Act, and Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act are examples. Federal agency staff has the difficult responsibility of collecting and analyzing all of the scientific information relevant to their work. All subsequent actions must be supported by the best available science. But good science isn’t always available, and the available science isn’t always good.

The Bush administration’s efforts to deny global warming and then suppress scientific research to the contrary have been the subject of much media attention. But the problem runs much deeper, particularly where regulation is concerned. Private sponsors recruit prominent scientists to sign ghost written articles based on skewed research or try to censor research results that they do not like. Researchers face spurious charges of scientific misconduct. Government peer review panels lack balance or include members with blatant financial conflicts of interest. Special interests seeking to influence the policymaking debate submit studies without the underlying data critical to evaluating the studies’ validity, or claims that information crucial to understanding a chemical’s toxicity is a trade secret. 

Even when companies suspect that exposures to their products may cause harm, they fail to file “adverse effects reports” so the problems can be investigated. These assaults on regulatory science have already cost us dearly, delaying the battle to control climate change and prolonging government efforts to protect people and the environment.

CPR’s white paper, Saving Science from Politics: Nine Reforms of the Legal System, outlines concrete, workable reforms to federal law and regulation that could help eliminate some of the worst abuses of regulatory science. Among other things, we suggest that:

• Agencies should only use studies that are accompanied by a statement disclosing the amount of control sponsors had over the design and publication of the research;
• Agencies should require upfront substantiation of any claim that chemical safety data is “confidential business information” or a “trade secret;”
• Congress should strengthen adverse effects reporting requirements in existing laws;
• Congress should improve whistleblower protections for employees who disclose evidence of interference or suppression that compromise the conduct and reporting of science used in the regulatory process; and
• Congress should amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act to eliminate significant financial conflicts of interest in members and improve the transparency of the committee selection process.

While the solutions to the pervasive and debilitating politicization of science ultimately must involve even more dramatic action, these proposals are an important first step to prevent the misuse of science in the legal system until more comprehensive responses are developed.