Almost two years ago, in June 2005, the New York Times uncovered the fact that the White House hired [tag]Philip Cooney[/tag], a former lobbyist for the [tag]American Petroleum Institute[/tag], to be chief of staff of the president’s [tag]Council on Environmental Quality[/tag]. As part of his responsibilities, Cooney re-wrote government reports on [tag]global warming[/tag], editing out scientific conclusions he didn’t like, and substituting the conclusions of scientists with his own politically-motivated opinions.
It was one of the more egregious examples of Bush’s “hackocracy”: the [tag]White House[/tag] literally put a Big Oil hack on the public payroll to change government reports about [tag]climate change[/tag]. And as we learned yesterday, Cooney’s responsibilities kept him quite busy.
A House committee released documents Monday that showed hundreds of instances in which a White House official who was previously an oil industry lobbyist edited government climate reports to play up uncertainty of a human role in global warming or play down evidence of such a role.
In a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the official, Philip A. Cooney, who left government in 2005, defended the changes he had made in government reports over several years. Mr. Cooney said the editing was part of the normal White House review process and reflected findings in a climate report written for President Bush by the National Academy of Sciences in 2001.
There’s that word again, “normal.” It’s the same word Karl Rove used two weeks ago about the prosecutor purge. Apparently, unprecedented political initiatives launched in secret by the White House are so routine since 2001, we should just accept them as “normal.”
The comments came at a fascinating hearing yesterday of House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which has been exploring accusations of political interference in climate science by the Bush administration. Indeed, we learned quite a bit yesterday.
For example, remember former NASA public affairs officer George Deutsch? He tendered his resignation in February 2006 after we learned that he badgered NASA’s technical staff to refer to the Big Bang as a “theory”; was given a job as a press aide despite not having a day of press experience; Deutsch told his colleagues his job was to “make the president look good”; and he lied about having a college degree.
Yesterday’s hearing Deutsch’s first sworn statements.
Mr. Deutsch said his warnings to other NASA press officials about Dr. Hansen’s statements and news media access were meant to convey a “level of frustration among my higher-ups at NASA.”
Well, that explains everything.
But my personal favorite came when Dr. James E. Hansen, the top climate expert at NASA testified on efforts to silence his work on global warming. Republicans attacked him with a vengeance.
[GOP lawmakers] disputed his contention that taxpayer-funded scientists are entitled to free speech. “Free speech is not a simple thing and is subject to and directed by policy,” said Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah)….
Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) raised Hansen’s work on “An Inconvenient Truth,” the documentary on Al Gore’s global-warming efforts, as evidence of Democratic sympathies. Hansen is a registered independent.
Several Republicans criticized Hansen for comparing administration efforts to limit and monitor scientists’ speech with similar efforts in Nazi Germany.
Issa said he hoped Hansen wasn’t influenced by money tied to a prize named after John Heinz, a former Republican senator and deceased husband of Teresa Heinz Kerry, the wife of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.).
Let’s be clear: in October 2004, Hansen put his career on the line by giving a public lecture telling the public what he’s seen: an administration that has ignored the evidence on climate change. Since then, the administration has insisted that officials sit in on Hansen’s media interviews while trying to block his lectures.
House Republicans, in turn, believe this is grounds to try and smear Hansen. I wish I could say I’m surprised.