What do you think On a broader question do you think scienti

What do you think? On a broader question, do you think scientific data generated with taxpayer money should be subject to review by the current president\'s administrators or is this vetting interference in the process of science?

Please remember that all views, regardless of your own political stance, are welcome and should be written in a respectful manner. Posts that earn full credit are well-written, contain at least 2 paragraphs and are fully supported with specific information or examples. You are welcome to use one paragraph to address the opposing viewpoint if you would like.

Solution

The policy to review is definitely an interference with science. This kind of review policy threatens the scientific integrity of agency as science which does not align with current political ideology will be suppressed. This means that there may not be timely release of scientific finds as well as conclusions.

Only a scientist understands the importance and value of a particular research. An administrator cannot soundly decide whether the research or data generated is important enough or not optimal. Scott Pruitt who has been appointed by the current president is known to be against many of the agencies’ regulations previously. Given this kind of history it may not be possible for the administrator to keep aside previous prejudices in the matter and look at the research in an unbiased way. The research is taxpayer funded so it is unfair to prevent results from being shared with the rest of the scientific community. This will be nothing but a complete waste of taxpayer money.