Relates to battling the taliban, the u. S. And its allies are doing everything it can to prop up the afghanistan military, the army and the local police force. To your point, a lot of people are asking, it has been more than 15 years, where is the progress . The Pentagon Bureau chief and Senior Editor at the military times, thank you for joining us. Guest my pleasure. Host coming up, we have current American Association for the advancement of science ceo, rush holt. He will be here to talk about the role that the federal science Advisory Boards are playing in the trump administration. Later on, we are joined by Pratik Chougule of the american conservative to discuss his piece on the u. S. Education system leaving the leaving highly intellectual children and their parents behind. Sunday night on afterwards. Journalist Stuart Taylor examines Campus Sexual Assault he isin his book, interviewed by the editor in chief of the National Law Journal and legal times. Share, for the viewers, what is your general thesis that we are looking at . What are we going to be reading about . The just of it is there has been a huge myth that has taken root, that there is an epidemic of campus rape. There is a culture of campus rape where it is encouraged and condoned by the administrators and that its out of control and increasing. And that it requires completely demolishing all due process and the presumption of the mrs. Resumption of innocence. This comes from extreme feminists, male hating extreme but the nests feminists, it was also pushed ahead by the obama by the obama administration. On cspan2s book tv. Tv, live allbook day coverage of the gaithersburg, maryland book festival. Starting at 10 00 eastern, maria olson on her book, not the cleaver family. Goodman, author of whistleblower at the end at the cia, author Sharon Weinberger at 12 15 p. M. At 1 15 eastern, Craig Shirley on reagan rising, the decisive years, 1976 to 1980. At 2 15 p. M. , the author of wrestling with his angels, the political life of abraham lincoln. 3 15, Sally Freeman on the jersey brothers, a missing naval officer in the pacific and his familys quest to bring him home. Watch our live all day coverage of the gaithersburg, maryland book festival starting today at 10 00 eastern on cspan twos book tv. Washington journal continues. Host joining us now is rush the ceo of the American Association for the advancement of science. He is also a former congressman from new jersey. Thes here to talk about future of federal scientific Advisory Boards under the trump administrations epa and interior departments. Thank you so much for joining us. Guest good to be with you. Host lets start by explaining to our viewers what the American Association for the advancement of dance is of science is. Guest were the largest general science organization. We go back to 1848. Our mission is to advance science for the benefit of all people. We have programs in science education, science and law, public policy, science in society, science and religion, science in public affairs. We have 100,000 members from all seek to world and we not only develop appreciation of science and what it brings to people, but also defend the conditions under which science can thrive. Host talk about what are these federal science Advisory Boards. What is the purpose of them . Been advisoryave committees to various government bodies. These would be civilian in many cases, academic, but balanced Advisory Boards. Some of them are scientific. There are probably 1000 advisory committees in the federal government. Areuple hundred of them Science Advisory Committees, to the pentagon, the interior department, the transportation department, in the case of the current news, the Environmental Protection agency. Host in the current news, the New York Times reported that the epa has widened an open door for businesses and in doing so, ousting five scientists from its board, dismissing at least five members of a major scientific review board. The latest signal from what critics call a campaign by the truck administration to restrict the agencys regulatory reach. Totrump administration restrict the agencys regulatory reach. Talk of them about about how that changed talk a little bit about how that changed and how similar changes might affect other agencies. Guest the Environmental Protection agency has a particular need for good scientific advice. There are tough decisions to be made about how to regulate pollution in the air and the water and how to look after endangered species or local ecosystems. How to defend environmental justice. For all of these things, it is good to start with an understanding of how things actually are and how things work. A goodis for policy is understanding of how things are, and then you bring to bear, all the different interests that go into making policy. You should start with what science is. To understandpt how things are and how things work based on evidence. Created, thereas have been Science Advisory Committees, and they are important to that work. What we see now in the new under the new leadership of the epa is some of these scientists have not been renewed in their positions on the advisory committees, and a on customary way. Generally, they would be renewed. Suggests that there are those in the epa who just dont want to know. They were they dont want to hear from the advisory committees. Host we are joined by rush holt, a former congressman from new jersey and now the 18th chief executive officer of the American Association for the advancement of science. Democrats can call 202 7488000. Republicans, 202 7488001. Independents, 202 7488002. Ats take a look at it more epa spokesman j. P. Free air statement. People on the sport to understand the impact of regulations on the community. We want to expand the pool of applicants for the Science Advisory Board to as broad a range as possible, to include universities as well as, i cant see the end of that quote, but as well as are not typically represented. Scientists andor folks in the industry and academic in academia to Work Together . Guest there is no question that these scientific Advisory Boards should have a diversity of perspectives. That is essential for science to function. You have to have different views , a diversity of views so you can make sure that you are not introducing bias into your analysis of evidence. Law thatalso federal governs advisory committees that says they must be balanced. You haveoes not mean to have equal numbers of people who have financial special with peoplea law who dont have financial special interest in a law. You probably have no one who has a financial special interest in a law. You should have people who are interested in the evidence. A Science Advisory Committee should be looking at the evidence, not the result of the policy. Require ang does balancing of competing interests. Politics comes into making the policy, but the starting point for those policies in science does not require and should not makingis requirement of sure that the interested or affected parties are represented. You are looking for the evidence, you are not looking to make a policy. The Science Advisory Committees have no contact to the board of science counselors the board of science counselors has no contact with the regulators in the epa. They provide the evidence, a review of where the fields are, what research should be conducted before the regulations are made. Is a misguided statement to say the Scientific Advisory committee should have representation of the affected industries. Host some of the critics of this move include some of your democratic former democratic colleagues in congress. Toa letter sent administrator prewitt, House Democrats said we have serious can turns about this action that has prematurely removed all applied experts from the epas board and deprives epa from particle scientific and to protectxpertise human health and the environment. Are these concerns that you share . Did serve in congress that i am not here as a member of congress. I represent a non a nonprofit membership society, and we dont have a partisan position on any of this. Im not here to talk about the environmental policies. I am here to talk about the place of science in our society and government. It is too important to peoples lives and welfare for it to be degraded or dismissed. That is what im afraid we see happening in so many places. It is not just with the new administration. Been, over the years, and erosion in the appreciate an erosion in the appreciation of science. In understanding of what it brings to our lives and our public policies. That whatse, i agree we see at the epa and various other places is a downgrading and dismissal or neglect of science advice. The science advice should be the star of the policymaking the start of the policymaking. That is what im here to talk about and defend. Host deborah is talking calling in from virginia, democrat line. Caller good morning. It is nice to see you, sir. Duken just graduated from this weekend with his phd in cell molecular biology. I have a great interest in science going on. My question to you is, i live in south side, virginia. Duke electric has been allowed to dump coal ash into our rivers. They were blocked and had to clean it up the last time they did it, but does this mean, now, that they dont have to clean up the river anymore . Thank you. First of all, congratulations to your son. I hope that he will not only make real advances in understanding of the molecular basis of life, but i also hope he will find ways to take his science public. The science of advisory committees we are talking about do this on a pro bono basis out of a sense of republic of public responsibility. There is a place for cellular molecular myelin jests on the Advisory Boards of the epa and other government agencies. I hope your son will do that. I dont know about the duke power case. The effect of coal ash on streams is the sort of thing that these advisory committees would advise epa about. These committees dont do the research. The advise epa on what Research Needs to be done and what research they should use informing policy in forming policy. That someean environmental pollutants, some damage to human health will go unchecked, because the advisory committees have not given the appropriate have not been there to give the appropriate direction to the regulators. Politicalhe current climate, do you believe that there is a war on science . Guest i hesitate to use the phrase war on science. It is often used. I think there has been an erosion over some decades in the appreciation of science. If you ask people in a survey in a Opinion Survey do they value science, 90 will say yes. If you scratch the surface and say well what is so special about science, why is this considered the greatest invention of humans for understanding how things work . Thrive . S it need to you will find most people are at a loss. We are seeing right now, that this appreciation or erosion in appreciation is reflected in the fact that there are very few sciences being appointed in various government agencies. Dozens of positions that are explicitly science positions that are unfilled right now. Its not that they are waiting for confirmation. No one has been named. In every new administration, there is some delay, but this is delayng a really ominous and the silence about science is troubling. It is more a neglect of science that a war on science than a war on science. I wrote to president elect trump the day after he was elected to urge him to surround himself with some scientist. Not all scientists by any means. There should be, at every level of government, scientists who can help deal with next months crisis and the crisis after that. People who are able to analyze unfolding crises and help the president do what needs to be done. Help the head of the epa do what needs to be done. Isolating yourself from science is not a wise policy. Host wred you think the voice of science and scientists is, in the political debate . Organizers had insisted before hand that they march well political was nonpartisan and an by a sea oflied antitrump signs and repeated condemnations of the trump administration. A blast sayingt donald trump does not believe in climate change. Is there a role for scientists who may not want to get into the political fray, but want to talk about scientific issues . Guest im glad you brought up the march. It was a phenomenon. We have not seen anything like it in half a century. It was the first time in a long time that scientists said we can, we should and we will step into the public square. I think that is perfectly appropriate. It does not distort the science or introduced bias or introduce bias. Science is designed to protect against bias. You certainly dont want to politicize the science. The converse is not necessarily true. If science can shed light on public issues, signing scientists should definitely be out there. A process of this valuable way , andinking is in question they should be out there in the public square. I disagree with that account that it was partisan. Was there, and they was not a and it was not a sea of antitrump signs. Sign that said einstein was a refugee. Was that antitrump because of his immigration policies . You can think that if you want, that i saw it as you should perspectiveverse for science to work. Event, morearkable than one Million People worldwide in hundreds of cities on every continent. Even antarctica, believe it or not. The march of science was an important step where scientists and nonscientist friends of science said is it it is appropriate to be out in the public square, advocating for science. Host we are talking with rush holt, current ceo of the American Association for the advancement of science. Also a former arms control expert at the department of state, where he monitored the Nuclear Programs of countries. Up next, we have brian coming calling in from maryland on our independent line. Caller good morning. If the like to find out epa has any statutory Advisory Boards that are required. Guest yes. On the completely up legal basis of these boards, but they do some of them are created by the administrator, some of them are directed by congress. They have a board that advises the secretary directly. Board thatnother advises the deputy secretary about the office of research and development. Within doe, they have Research Agencies around the country, researching toxicology and the behavioral behavior of water and all sorts of other things. There is this board of scientific counselors that advises the leadership of the epa about their internal research. Practice, whatt is the state of the field, and they are looking at Childrens Health and looking at particular matter and particulate matter and small Water Purification systems. Not for major cities, but subdivisions. They advise the leadership on how the research should be conducted. Host nancy is on our democratic line, on the south shore of massachusetts. Caller good morning and thank you for taking my call. I would like to make three impact ofarding the electromagnetic fields and increase radiation radio frequencies in our environment. The first point is that it has come to my attention that the regulations now in place to not adequately protect the population in our country. Study ofno recognized the grid, the electric grid and the Health Effects of additional ,roadband radio frequencies that is the culmination of bringing on 5g. I would like to know if there is any official studies being done by scientists in universities and in the Government Regarding this matter. Is, i the short answer dont know what is underway. Speaking as a scientist, a physicist myself, whatever affect their might be from what you are describing, it surely is small, or it would have been observed because there have been lots of studies. I dont know specifically what is underway now. Appropriate for epa advisory committees to look into this . Perhaps. And, Public Health agencies of course, independent researchers who are not affiliated with any government agency. That is where most of the findings originate, from independent investigators who find something that is important. While im talking about it, one of the reasons the attention has been focused on this failure to reappoint people to the advisory or to suspendepa the Advisory Boards at the department of the interior is because there has been legislation in congress over a number of years that has not passed. It has passed the house from time to time, it would change attempt to guide politically, the scientific advice of these boards. For example, one of the pieces of legislation before congress right now would say the epa may not use any information that comes from a study that was not the intent of the study. Suppose someone was looking at environmental factors that hurt people, and they were studying some kind of chemical or some kind of electromagnetic waves and they happened to find an effect of some other kind of chemical or some other kind of electromagnetic wave. This legislation would say well this cannot be considered by epa in making regulations because that was not the intention of the study. That sounds to me like it is just an effort to prevent the scientific advice from getting into the appropriate place in the agency. Host dominic is calling from georgia on our republican line. Caller thanks for taking my call. I have a contrary view. I agree with a lot of what you are saying, however, there is another way to look at this. He says nothing about you said something about science being the starting point. A godless science is one of the most Dangerous Things in the world, today. A lot of the problems we have today is because things that come out of science like poison and weapons and god knows what else, probably more dangerous than anything else. My only comment is that science is to get a grip and get some kind of control of itself so its not blindly just doing anything at once to do, but there is some kind of higher purpose and we dont kill ourselves in the process. Thats all i had to say. Guest certainly, scientists cannot, should not be a moral ammoral. What i meant to say ishat policy should begin with an understanding of the way and czar. Our best way at getting an understanding is science. After understanding that, you can bring in all of the competing interests that should be
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.