Friday, May 3, 2013

TEXAS, EPA, TCEQ, RICK PERRY, Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, and the dumbing down of sound science for profit $ i.e. The High Quality Stupid Act

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filed on Thursday, Air Alliance Houston and three other groups accuse the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of using outdated and inaccurate formulas to estimate levels of air pollution.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: