- Field Day |
- Buildings Alive |
- Visions |
- CLGBT |
- Green Community |
- Fun & Free S#!T |
- Crossword |
- CL Space |
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
The Cranky Copy Editor — Small government toxicity
Posted by Anthony Salveggi on Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 1:39 PM
What’s the value of a single human life? Under the Bush administration, writes Rebecca Clarren, about a million dollars less than it used to be worth.
Call it the dark side of “small government” that conservatives champion, an anti-regulatory stance designed to save dollars at the expense of lives.
Clarren, writing for Salon.com, details how little-known governmental offices led by Bush appointees have undermined the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to protect our nation’s citizens by giving non-health industries and agencies input on which chemicals are assessed and the ability to comment on scientific findings (comments that, oh by the way, are not for public view).
If that sounds to you like a process that cynically trades in doubt, you’re not the only one. As Clarren reports, Lynn Goldman, an EPA administrator under Bill Clinton, testified much to that effect before the Senate:
"The new process is an open invitation for interested parties to meddle with IRIS [a database of scientific studies] in secret. … Their involvement in the IRIS interagency process gives the appearance — if not the reality — of providing a back door through which industry groups can exert pressure to modify EPA's conclusions or to subject the process to endless delays."
And it’s not just former government officials who are critical of the shift to analyses driven by the almighty dollar. One staff scientist for the EPA had this to say:
They're [the Office of Management and Budget] trying to take our assessments and change the science so that a chemical looks much less risky."
While the Government Accountability Office offered a terse critique:
It concluded that the secretive procedures compromise scientific credibility and sacrifice the public's trust in government. Despite such hefty criticism, public officials fear that because the new procedures have been instituted at the EPA so far below the public radar, their harmful impact will survive long after Bush leaves office.
Clarren writes that she did not get a return call or e-mail from Barack Obama’s transition team on whether it would reverse that damage done by the Bush administration. But it’s clear the onus is on them to do so.
Comments (2)
Showing 1-2 of 2
I admit that the Bush administration made many mistakes but,they value life more than Obama ever will.Obama played a role in passing legislation that gives health care facilities permission to "discard" a baby that survives an abortion.They either kill it or more likely, leave it on a table alone until it dies then throws it away.Obama will accelerate this country's moral decline.
like
dislike
Because trying to *save* an aborted fetus is really a good thing? I mean come on...they are either aborted before 12 weeks, in which case they are going to die no matter what, or in the 2nd trimester due to birth defects, and usually before 21 weeks, when ANY baby would be viable, let alone one with birth defects giving parents the right to abort that late in the game. Honestly they should have some sort of gas or something to kill the aborted fetuses quicker, not be trying to save them. Its less cruel.
Latest in Daily Loaf
-
V.M. Ybor neighbood to City Council: We don't want Trinity Cafe to relocate here
Dozens came out to protest the facility coming into their neighborhood.
-
USF held hostage by legislative terrorism
What's JD Alexander want? Simple. A new, taxpayer-funded university in Lakeland that he can take credit for and potentially lead.
-
Mitch Perry Report 2.16.12 - Iorio calls out J.D. Alexander
- More »
Author Archives
-
Nuts to Chipwrecked
Alvin and friends deserve better.
-
Enjoying The Silence! Kitefliers backs a winner
The local producers savor the success of an Off-Broadway Silence of the Lambs parody.
- More »
Top Commenters
