Union of Concerned Scientists
Defending science during the Trump Administration
Join the Concerned Scientists @ IU for a visit from Liz Schmitt of the Union of Concerned Scientists (Washington, DC) to find out how we’re working together to defend science, and scientists, from the latest attempts to sideline science in Washington. Get the latest update from Congress and the White House, and find out how you can get involved.
Thursday, September 14, 7:00 PM
State Room East, Indiana Memorial Union
Please join us for refreshments after the talk
For additional information about Concerned Scientists @ IU, please contact Michael Hamburger (email@example.com)
· The President’s FY2018 budget proposes draconian funding cuts for science research, for example:
o -29% for Environmental Protection Agency and -16% for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – eliminates most climate change research and data collection
o -22% for National Institutes of Health – cuts deeply into biomedical research
o -17% for Department of Energy Office of Science – cuts deeply into R&D on renewable energy sources and energy storage, surrenders U.S. leadership in basic research
o -13% for National Science Foundation – surrenders U.S. leadership in basic research
This Week’s Primary Science Issue: The President’s Fiscal Year 2018 budget chokes off nearly all climate research in the U.S. and seriously endangers U.S. leadership in other areas of research. For example, support for Regional Climate Centers that collect and archive climate data and model projections is cut by 82%, and many climate research programs are eliminated. EPA Director Scott Pruitt says that climate science is “unsettled.” Why, then, does he support cutting off funding for research to settle the science?
Template for Telephoning Your Legislator (you will normally speak with a staffer who will take your information without challenging you):
Hi, My name is [NAME], and I’m a constituent from [CITY, ZIP CODE],
I am calling to express strong opposition to the draconian budget cuts for climate science research across several federal agencies in the President’s FY2018 budget. I don’t understand how it makes sense to claim that the science is presently unsettled, but then to choke off any research that might settle the science on an issue of such fundamental importance to the future of our planet. The Administration’s actions suggest wishful thinking that the problem will just disappear, but the Earth and human activities may not care what the Administration wishes. I expect [REP NAME] to support an FY2018 budget that provides robust funding for climate change research across several federal agencies and for scientific research more generally. The strong return on investment in scientific research has been an economic driver for decades.
[IF LEAVING A VOICEMAIL: Please leave your full street address to ensure your call is tallied]
Contact information for Indiana’s Federal Legislators and Governor
Senator Joe Donnelly: Senator Todd Young:
720 Hart Senate Office Building B33 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, D.C. 20510
Rep. Trey Hollingsworth (9th district): Rep. Larry Bucshon (8th district):
1641 Longworth House Office Building 1005 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20515
Rep. Todd Rokita (4th district): Governor Eric Holcomb:
2439 Rayburn House Office Building Office of the Governor
Washington, D.C. 20515 Statehouse
Office phone: (202)225-5037 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2797
(Guest Column submitted to Herald-Times by Steve Vigdor, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University, on March 30, 2017 – published April 6, 2017)
Effective governments foresee problems that threaten the quality of citizens’ lives and develop acceptable solutions to mitigate their effects. The mitigation is challenging even with the best available information, as complex problems usually defy simple solutions. Healthy democratic debate over priorities should be fueled by evidence gained from scientific research, economic forecasting, intelligence gathering and credible investigative journalism – all avenues the present U.S. administration seeks to discredit.
When some politicians fear facing problems and choosing among possibly distasteful solutions, they deny or suppress evidence, labeling it a “hoax” or “fake news.” They eliminate funding for research that underpins it. They substitute “alternative facts,” based on their own ideology, greed, donor demands, or resentment of “elites.” History teaches us, repeatedly, that citizens pay the hefty price for their politicians’ willful ignorance.
An egregious example occurred when Joseph Stalin deemed genetics a “bourgeois pseudoscience” incompatible with Communist ideology. He promoted a scientist of peasant stock, Trofim Lysenko, who shared Stalin’s disdain, while firing and imprisoning a generation of Soviet geneticists, sending Lysenko’s former mentor Nikolai Vavilov to the gulag. Lysenko promised dramatic, “truly communist,” agricultural advances, based on irreproducible claims that southern plants could be trained to grow in the north, grains could be transformed into other species, and other unsubstantiated ideas. Lysenko’s unscientific methods produced chronic crop failures and innumerable starvation deaths, including Vavilov’s. The political elite survived.
Many U.S. politicians seem poised to augment this sorry history by unilaterally dismissing climate science. Reproducible measurements have established irrefutably that global temperatures, atmospheric carbon dioxide and sea levels have all risen at unusually high rates over recent decades. Ice core samples reveal a strong correlation between carbon dioxide levels and surface temperatures, going back nearly a million years.
These data are cause for serious concern. Earth’s climate is a complex system with many natural, as well as human-induced, drivers. But the natural drivers have quite different characteristic time scales, much shorter or very much longer than the recently observed changes. Climate change skeptics often ignore or confuse these time scale differences.
Worrisome projections of Earth’s future climate evolution admittedly have modeling uncertainties, as do predictions of the future paths of severe hurricanes. Scientists seek to reduce these uncertainties by improving the models and constraining them better with new measurements, so they form an even more robust basis for policy discussions.
In contrast, the President’s budget proposal eliminates funding for most of this research, with the apparent rationale: “The science is unsettled. Therefore, the last thing we need is further evidence to settle the science.” This is rather like advising people within a hurricane’s projected path to stay put because, after all, the projection has some uncertainty. Among other losses, the denial by the administration makes it likely that other countries will reap most of the rapid job gains anticipated in the renewable energy sector. The government sets misguided policy, but citizens are left with the risks.
Research establishing climate change, but essentially none of the skeptics’ erroneous claims, has passed rigorous peer review. Lamar Smith, House Science Committee Chair, offers a chilling response to this embarrassing fact. He promises legislation to establish “government standards for peer review” and punish scientific journals for publishing research that the government doesn’t approve. When politicians with no science background aim to intervene in standard-setting for research reviews, the scientific method, evidence-based decision-making and citizens’ well-being are in serious jeopardy.
We invite you to join Concerned Scientists @ IU, our community of scholars and citizens committed to defending the integrity of the scientific process. Send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
A CSIU legislative action team meeting with Brandon Herget, Deputy State Director in the office of Senator Joe Donnelly to discuss concerns over executive and congressional actions that threaten the health and independence of scientific research in the United States. The broad-ranging discussion explored issues of administrative appointments related to science, failure to consider scientific research in critical policy decisions, interference in the conduct of independent research, and threats to science funding. The team used the opportunity to introduce the Senator's staff to the CSIU organization and explored specific areas of potential collaboration.
“Women’s March on Washington Indiana (WMWIN) is pleased to announce that Kimberly McCoy is the winner of the Melba Phillips Award for Women in Science! WMWIN will cover the cost for Kimberly to attend the March for Science this weekend in Washington, DC.
Kimberly is a graduate student in the Chemistry Department at Indiana University and a regular contributor to the science blog ScIU: Conversations in Science at Indiana University. We were impressed by her proposal to bring her experience of the march back to us in Indiana. She plans to participate in the Week of Science Action following the march, to write a blog post about her experience, and to speak with WMWIN members when she returns.
Please join us in congratulating Kimberly! Thank you for representing Indiana women at the March for Science!”
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- Leading up to the national March for Science, a newly formed group of Indiana University faculty, staff and students -- Concerned Scientists @ IU -- is organizing a campus-community forum, Stand Up for Science.
The event will take place from 5:30 to 7 p.m. April 20 in Hodge Hall Room 2075 on the IU Bloomington campus.
Hosted by Bloomington Mayor John Hamilton and IU Vice Provost for Research Rick Van Kooten, the forum will feature presentations by IU faculty and students and a keynote talk by Michael Halpern, associate director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington.
The center was organized as a policy think tank focused on defending science, ensuring scientific integrity, strengthening science-based health, safety and environmental laws, and defending scientists who are targeted by political attacks. It also undertakes educational efforts to highlight the role of science in solving critical societal problems.
With increasing national attention on the status of scientific research in the U.S., IU faculty, students and staff are organizing to advocate for "the essential role of science and evidence-based decision making." The mission statement of Concerned Scientists @ IU says they will:
- Promote the accurate representation of science in the media, in education and in the design of legislation.
- Engage with the public to communicate science, especially as it relates to core issues influenced by public policy.
- Promote the participation of scientists in policy-making processes.
- Support continued federal funding for independent scientific research and defending research from politically motivated attacks.
Organized over the past two months, the group has grown from an informal discussion of faculty to an active community of nearly 400 participants from the IU and Bloomington communities. Planning for the March for Science and organization of the April 20 forum have been its key efforts. Additional upcoming events include workshops for scientists on improved communication with the media, community educational efforts, and meetings with state and federal legislators.
"American science, including research done on our campus, is essential for the prosperity and health of the nation, and it is important that we actively celebrate the positive impact that science has on our everyday lives," Van Kooten said.
The April 20 forum will highlight the goals of the group, offer opportunities for members of the campus and community to become involved in science advocacy efforts and organize for participation in the April 22 marches in Washington and Indianapolis.
- Bloomington Mayor John Hamilton
- Vice Provost for Research Rick van Kooten
- Michael Halpern of the Union of Concerned Scientists
- Bernice Pescosolido, of IU Sociology
- Linus Platzer of IU GPSG/SPEA
- Karen Jepson-Innes of Wonderlab
- Stanley Njuguna of Indiana University