In a recent episode of The Simpsons, Homer finds himself, albeit temporarily, as a used car salesman. While taking his first customers for a test drive, Homer tries to cover up the odor of his flatulence by turning up the radio. Obviously, one had nothing to do with the other; that’s what made it funny.
I kept thinking about this scene while reading Leon Kass’ defense of Bush’s Council on Bioethics in a Washington Post op-ed yesterday. There are a variety of controversies surrounding the council, but Kass’ justifications appear to be completely unrelated to the questions that have arisen.
As you may have heard, last Friday afternoon, the White House fired two members of the panel who, not coincidentally, had recently announced their disagreement with the administration’s approach to human embryo research. Elizabeth Blackburn, a UC San Francicso biologist, and William May, a renowned ethics scholar at Southern Methodist University, were essentially told that their “services were no longer needed.”
A White House spokesperson refused to explain what prompted the dismissal, other than to say the president wanted members with “different expertise and experience” — which just happened to mean finding people who would agree with Bush’s opinions.
Kass, who chairs the council, seemed outraged that anyone would suggest that politics played a role in the firings, calling the very suggestion “malicious and false,” but yet offered absolutely no arguments or evidence to contradict the charge. The point of Kass’ entire essay seemed to be: “Never mind those fired scholars; look at these great new members!”
Of course, no one has questioned the scholarship of the new members, rather, many scientists and public officials have charged the White House with playing politics with the entire commission. Kass seems to be intentionally missing the point.
In sort-of addressing Blackburn’s dismissal, Kass said Blackburn had “contributed a great deal of expertise and insight.” Unfortunately for Kass, Blackburn’s insight now leads her to believe that “Bush [is] stacking the council with the compliant.”
Kass also went into great detail touting the several reports the council has put together.
In a little over two years, the council has issued three major reports (on human cloning, on enhancement uses of biotechnology and on stem cell research), with a fourth due in April (on regulating biotechnologies touching the beginnings of human life). We have also issued an anthology of readings on “Being Human” to contribute to public understanding of the deeper issues of bioethics.
They’re all fascinating, I’m sure, but no one has accused the panel of laziness. If Bush’s Council on Bioethics was a think tank, the publication of three well-received reports in two years would be pretty good. The point is, however, that the council is supposed to be offering the White House balanced and accurate information. Instead, it’s been relegated to rubber-stamping pre-determined positions that meet the president’s political agenda. Kass’ defense does nothing to address the actual criticisms.
But perhaps the most outrageous of Kass’ claims was that the new members of the council come to the panel because of their qualifications, not their positions on the bioethical issues.
Their personal views on the matters to come before the council in the coming term are completely unknown, but I am confident that they will come to them only as a result of genuine reflection and a full consideration of all the scientific and other evidence.
As Reason’s Ronald Bailey noted yesterday, this is total nonsense.
In fact, everyone knows their personal views; they’ve been obvious for some time. Each of them have been writing about their opposition to human embryo research in journals for years, speaking on these issues at conferences, and conducting interviews outlining their positions. Are we to believe that Kass is simply unaware of all this?
Of course not. Kass, like the White House staffers who tapped them for the council, are well aware of their beliefs. Indeed, that’s why they were chosen and those who disagreed were fired.
It’s a good thing Kass’ thoughts appeared in print. He didn’t have to worry about keeping a straight face.