TEXAS, EPA, TCEQ, RICK PERRY, Lamar Smith, GOP and the dumbing down of
sound science for profit $ i.e. The High Quality Stupid Act
Environmental groups sue EPA over refinery emissions
4 environmental groups say agency is 'dragging its feet' on air pollution
By Matthew Tresaugue | May 2, 2013 | Updated: May 2, 2013 11:13pm
Environmentalists have filed a lawsuit to force federal regulators to
review the way they calculate emissions from petrochemical plants, oil
refineries and other large industrial facilities.
In the suit filed on Thursday, Air Alliance Houston and three other groups
accuse the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of using outdated and inaccurate
formulas to estimate levels of air pollution.
The groups say studies show that actual smog-forming emissions can be 132
times greater than EPA estimates, which are based on data provided by the
industry. The agency, as a result, does not possess reliable data to protect
public health, according to the suit filed in U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia.
"The EPA has a history of dragging its feet on this issue," said Jennifer
Duggan, an attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project, a legal group
representing Air Alliance Houston and the other organizations in the case. "It
has been aware of these inaccuracies for some time."
An EPA spokeswoman said the agency is reviewing the suit but would not
provide additional comment.
The lawsuit comes five years after the city of Houston raised similar
issues with the federal agency, which uses the emissions data to develop
pollution controls, establish limits and guide enforcement.
Lamar Smith, GOP Push Politicization Of Scientific Research
Posted: 04/29/2013 10:29 am EDT | Updated: 04/30/2013 1:25 am EDT
WASHINGTON -- Republicans on the House science committee are making an
unprecedented move to require oversight of the scientific research process,
pushing a bill that would in effect politicize decisions made by the National
Science Foundation, according to a draft of the legislation acquired by The
Huffington Post. As part of the same effort, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas),
chairman of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, sent a letter to the
NSF Thursday demanding that it provide supporting materials to justify research
that its panels of independent scientists have approved.
The bill, titled the High Quality Research Act and authored by Smith, would
require the director of the NSF to certify in writing that every grant handed
out by the federal agency is for work that is "the finest quality, is ground
breaking, and answers questions or solves problems that are of utmost importance
to society at large; and ... is not duplicative of other research project being
funded by the Foundation or other Federal science agencies." The bill has not
been officially introduced, but HuffPost acquired a draft copy that Smith
circulated among colleagues.
The measure would also require federal officials to report back to Congress
on how the NSF was implementing the new regulations. Additionally, the bill
solicits recommendations for how to place similar restrictions on other federal
science agencies.
The requirements laid out in the bill are problematic on several levels.
The basic scientific method itself is by its nature duplicative, and is often
carried out purely for investigative purposes.
But Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Texas), the top Democrat on the committee,
found the proposal especially alarming after Smith demanded in his letter that
the NSF submit to the committee the technical peer review discussions conducted
among NSF scientists who decide on grant awards.
"Members of the Committee would benefit from access to the
scientific/technical reviews," Smith wrote in his letter last week to acting NSF
Director Cora Marrett. Smith highlighted a number of social science studies that
he had "concerns" about, including a study called "Picturing Animals in National
Geographic, 1888 - 2008," and "The International Criminal Court and the Pursuit
of Justice."
Johnson fired back Friday with a letter to Smith saying that his request --
coupled with the legislation -- was a dangerous politicization of one of the
most successful scientific research promoters in history.
"Your letter marks the beginning of an investigative effort, the
implications of which are profound," Johnson wrote. "This is the first step on a
path that would destroy the merit-based review process at NSF and intrudes
political pressure into what is widely regarded as the most effective and
creative process for awarding research funds in the world."
She goes on to argue that politicians have no business considering
themselves on par with scientists when it comes to evaluating scientific merit,
noting that no previous chairman of the committee has ever put himself forward
as an expert in science.
"Interventions in grant awards by political figures with agenda, biases,
and no expertise is the antithesis of the peer review processes," Johnson
continued. "By making this request, you are sending a chilling message to the
scientific community that peer review will always be trumped by political
review."
Smith said in a statement to The Huffington Post that the NSF projects for
which he has requested more information do not meet the foundation's
standards.
“The NSF has great potential to promote American innovation and expand our
economy," Smith said. "When the NSF only has enough money to fund one in seven
research proposals, they must ensure that each one is of the highest quality.
The proposals about which I have requested further information do not seem to
meet the high standards of most NSF-funded projects. Congress has a
responsibility to review questionable research paid for by hard-working American
taxpayers. If academic or other institutions want to conduct such research on
these kinds of subjects they can pay for them with their own private funds.
Public funds should be used to benefit the American people."
Smith listed five NSF projects about which he has requested further
information.
1. Award Abstract #1247824: “Picturing Animals in National Geographic,
1888-2008,” March 15, 2013, ($227,437);
2. Award Abstract #1230911: “Comparative Histories of Scientific
Conservation: Nature, Science, and Society in Patagonian and Amazonian South
America,” September 1, 2012 ($195,761);
3. Award Abstract #1230365: “The International Criminal Court and the
Pursuit of Justice,” August 15, 2012 ($260,001);
4. Award Abstract #1226483, “Comparative Network Analysis: Mapping Global
Social Interactions,” August 15, 2012, ($435,000); and
5. Award Abstract #1157551: “Regulating Accountability and Transparency in
China’s Dairy Industry,” June 1, 2012 ($152,464).
Smith, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee last session, led the House
legislative effort behind its version of SOPA -- the Stop Online Piracy Act.
That effort became highly controversial as opponents saw it as an attempt to
inject government into an area where it could stifle innovation. It was
ultimately dropped and the legislation rejected.
On Monday, President Obama will speak at the National Academy of Sciences
to mark its 150th anniversary.
CORRECTION: The original article misstated the name of the Stop Online
Piracy Act as the "Stop Online Privacy Act." It has been corrected.
[DISCUSSION DRAFT]
APRIL 18, 2013
113TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H. R. ll
To to be supplied
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Ml. llllll introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on llllllllllllll
A BILL
To to be supplied
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘High Quality Research Act’’.
SEC. 2. HIGH QUALITY RESEARCH.
(a) CERTIFICATION.—Prior to making an award of any contract or grant
funding for a scientific research project, the Director of the National Science
Foundation shall publish a statement on the public website of the Foundation
that certifies that the research project—
(1) is in the interests of the United States to advance the national
health, prosperity, or welfare, and to secure the national defense by promoting
the progress of science;
(2) is the finest quality, is ground breaking, and answers questions or
solves problems that are of utmost importance to society at large; and
(3) is not duplicative of other research projects being funded by the
Foundation or other Federal science agencies.
(b) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.—Any unobligated funds for projects not meeting the
requirements of subsection
(a) may be awarded to other scientific research projects that do meet such
requirements.
(c) INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT.—Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director shall report to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology of the House of Representatives on how the requirements set forth
in subsection (a) are being implemented.
(d) NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD IMPLEMENTATION
REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
National Science Board shall report to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
of the House of Representatives its findings and recommendations on how the
requirements of subsection (a) are being implemented.
(e) IMPLEMENTATION BY OTHER AGENCIES.—Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy, in collaboration with the National Science and Technology Council, shall
report to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate
and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of
Representatives on how the requirements of subsection (a) may be implemented in
other Federal science agencies.
f:\VHLC\041813\041813.033.xml (547049|2)
April 18, 2013 (11:11 a.m.)
West, Texas
The plant had 1,350 times the legally allowed amount of highly explosive
ammonium nitrate, yet hadn’t informed the Department of Homeland Security of the
danger. Likewise, the fertilizer plant did not have sprinklers, shut-off valves,
fire alarms or legally required blast walls, all of which could have prevented
the catastrophic damage done. And there was little chance regulators would learn
about the problems without the company reporting them: Not only had the
Occupation Safety and Health Administration not inspected the plant since 1985,
but also, due to underfunding, OSHA can only inspect plants like the one in West
on average once every 129 years.
re-Perry defends state oversight in West Texas April 23, 2013
Governor of Texas Rick Perry claims there is no need for more regulations,
he is fine with the regulations in place in West Texas, and is confident in
that, the fertilizer plant that blew up in West, had not been inspected since
1985. This in a state where industrial regulations are a joke. Governor Perry
says, come to Texas, bring your pollution, bring your radioactive nuclear waste,
bring your run down chemical plants, Texas does not care, come on down, the
water is fine, you can’t swim in it anymore, fish die in it, and don’t eat the
fish from Galveston Bay is what the TCEQ states, but come on down anyway, bring
us your dollars, your pollution, and we will not even tax you much, come on down
to Texas and spew your benzene in the air, we don’t care, we will just not
monitor it anymore (bill 791), come to Texas where the flounder fish float
upside down, white side up, in Galveston Bay, the water is fine. ...
Monday, March 25, 2013
TCEQ Proposes Removal of Two Pollutants from the Texas City APWL
Area--Benzene and Hydrogen Sulfide
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Radioactive Senate waste bill 791 Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo and Governor
Rick Perry, Totalitarian rule or Authoritarian regime ?
TCEQ don’t eat catfish and speckle trout from Galveston Bay
flounder float white side up in Galveston Bay
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Governor Rick Perry's Nuclear Dump payday $250,000, but what about
Texas?
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Interference at the EPA - Science and Politics at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr." flounder9@verizon.net
To: "Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy" BSE-L@aegee.org
Cc: heggem.daniel@epa.gov; sibert.christopher@epa.gov; denne.jane@epa.gov;
hazen.susan@epa.gov; mcrosby@ucsusa.org; erobinson@ucsusa.org;
enegin@ucsusa.org; cjdvoice@yahoogroups.com; madcow@lists.iatp.org
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 9:48 PM
Subject: Interference at the EPA Science and Politics at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Thursday, May 22, 2008
The Junk Science of George W. Bush posted February 19, 2004 (March 8, 2004
issue)
TEXAS TWIA PONZI SCHEME
sucks, we just sent our check in for TWIA, can you say ponzi scheme. there
robbing peter to pay paul, and paul and peter are both broke...
Monday, April 15, 2013
Hurricane Ike: 5 Years Later Conference Rice Dike Proposal September 24-25,
2013
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Rick Perry, Texas, BSE aka mad cow disease, CJD, and 12 years of lies there
from
Friday, April 19, 2013
APHIS 2013 Stakeholder Meeting (March 2013) BSE TSE PRION
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Foodborne Transmission of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy to Nonhuman
Primates
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Chronic Wasting Disease Detected in Far West Texas
Monday, February 11, 2013
TEXAS CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE CWD Four New Positives Found in Trans Pecos
Thursday, May 02, 2013
Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) Texas Important Update on OBEX ONLY TEXTING
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Chimpanzees Released After 30 Years Of Testing, Brace Yourself For Smiles
TEXAS, EPA, TCEQ, RICK PERRY, Lamar Smith, GOP and the dumbing down of
sound science for profit $ i.e. The High Quality Stupid Act
I love Texas, and I don’t care what you eat. but when the negligence starts
to effect my family and myself, then it becomes my business.
personally, I think it’s time for slick rick perry and all his corporate
cronies, it’s time for them to go, they have done enough harm to Texas and our
people.
rick perry is a cancer to Texas, environmental steward he is not, he never
has been, nor will he ever be $
still disgusted in Baciff, Texas,
just my opinion, with some facts, via my 1st amendment rights...
tss
No comments:
Post a Comment