ДBY HANK REICHMAN

A new survey of 63,000 scientific experts across 16 federal agencies, conducted by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) in cooperation with the Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology at Iowa State University, shows that the Trump administration continues to “sideline science.”  According to the survey, government scientists report iissues including “censorship and self-censorship, political interference in scientists’ work, low morale, decreased agency effectiveness, and dwindling resources.”

The survey was conducted in February and March of this year and follows a July 2017 report by the group, Sidelining Science Since Day One, and a December 2017 report by the AAUP, National Security, the Assault on Science, and Academic Freedom. 

Here are some of the survey’s findings:

• As of June 2018, the 18th month of his administration, President Trump had filled 25 of the 83 government posts that the National Academy of Sciences designates as “scientist appointees ”  President Obama had filled

  63 such positions and President Bush had filled 51 positions only 12 months into their administrations.  Across all agencies, 79 percent of respondents (3,266) reported workforce reductions during the last year due
  to staff departures, retirements, or hiring freezes.
• Of the respondents who noticed workforce reductions in the past year, 87 percent (2,852) reported that such reductions made it more difficult for their agencies to fulfill their science-based missions.
• Across all agencies, 50 percent of respondents (1,947) either agreed or strongly agreed that the level of consideration of political interests hindered the ability of their agencies to make science-based decisions.  At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 48 percent of respondents (255) were in agreement; at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, 69 percent of respondents (235) agreed; 76 percent of National Park Sservice respondents (168) agreed; and 81 percent of Environmental Protection Agency respondents (345) agreed.
• Across all agencies, 31 percent of respondents (1,208) agreed or strongly agreed that the presence of senior
  decisionmakers who come from regulated industries or who have a financial interest in regulatory outcomes in-
  appropriately influenced their agencies’ decisionmaking. 70 percent of EPA respondents (293) agreed, as did more than 40 percent of respondents at both the USFWS (137) and NPS (94).
• Across all agencies, 39 percent of responding federal scientists (1,624) reported that the effectiveness of their
  divisions or offices had decreased over the past year. The percentage varied across agencies, from 64 percent of EPA respondents (284) reporting decreased job effectiveness compared with 16 percent of Food and Drug Administration respondents (58).
• 8 percent of respondents at agencies that work on climate change (631 respondents) agreed or strongly agreed that they had been asked to omit the phrase “climate change” from their work. The highest numbers were 47 percent at the NPS (100 respondents) and 35 percent at the EPA (147 respondents).
• 20 percent (703 respondents) reported that they had avoided working on climate change or using the phrase
  “climate change” without explicit orders to do so. Responses on what is, in effect, self-censorship varied by agency. The highest levels were 32 precent at the US Geological Survey (169 respondents) and 30 percent at the EPA (134 respondents).

“When federal scientists can’t carry out their work, it’s the public that suffers,” explained Charise Johnson, a UCS research analyst who worked on the survey.  “When you can’t research threats and share accurate information with the public, there are real consequences. People depend on federal science to protect them from pollution, chemical exposure, and natural disasters.”

Andrew Rosenberg, director of UCS’s Center for Science and Democracy, warned, “the challenges we’re seeing for scientists in the Trump administration are serious.”