Environmental Advocacy Group Files Petition Seeking Protections for USDA Scientists
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) has filed a
petition with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) arguing that
the agency does not adhere to the goals of its Scientific Integrity Policy
because the policy “fails to clearly prohibit political suppression and
interference.”
The policy was released in 2013 after President Barack Obama directed
executive department heads to promote scientific integrity within each
department, and PEER argues that USDA’s policy does not protect its
scientists to the extent that other agencies’ policies protect theirs.
USDA’s policy fails its scientists, PEER argues, because it does not
(i) include political suppression and interference in its definition of
misconduct; (ii) establish procedures for handling scientific integrity
complaints; (iii) protect whistleblowers; or (iv) include “any process
or mechanism for preventing politically motivated suppression or for
challenging it once it occurs.” PEER also argues that USDA has failed
to adhere to its policy because it has not posted a website containing
scientific integrity information. Further, the petition argues, the policy
“actively encourages USDA to suppress scientific work for political
reasons. The provision states that scientists ‘should refrain from
making statements that could be construed as being judgments of or
recommendations on USDA or any other federal government policy,
either intentionally or inadvertently.’”
PEER’s petition cites examples of political interference in USDA
scientists’ work, including (i) directives to avoid publishing data on
certain topics; (ii) orders to retract papers or remove sections of articles
already accepted for publication; (iii) a demotion and reprimand for
testifying before Congress; (iv) restrictions on topics for conference
presentations; and (v) threats to damage the careers of scientists whose
work triggers industry complaints. “Your words are changed, your papers
are censored or edited or you are not allowed to submit them at all,” one
scientist anonymously told Reuters.
PEER argues that USDA should adopt various provisions appearing in
other agencies’ scientific integrity policies, including National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, the Departments of State and
Commerce, Environmental Protection Agency, and Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. “There is no reason why USDA scientists should labor
under safeguards far inferior to those extended to their colleagues
working inside other agencies,” PEER Executive Jeff Ruch said in a press
release. “To earn public credibility for its scientific work, USDA needs
to spell out procedures by which political influences can be policed and
scientists protected while allowing outside review of its handling of
allegations and disagreements.” See Reuters, March 28, 2015.
Issue 562
