A couple of recent events have shown that the Reactionaries in Congress are slowly turning their attention to politicize federally funded research - a scary prospect. Let's review the process so far.
Start with what has happened at National Institutes of Health (NIH) over the past few years regarding the replacement of certain NIH panel members due to their supposed political leanings. Next, keep in mind the report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists in February of 2004 outlining how the current administration has misused scientific data, or completely altered reports. <More below>
Now, move to June 2005 and refresh your memory on the request issued by Representative Joe Barton (Texas Republican who represents many oil companies, I mean people). Rep Barton, apparently a closet climate researcher, asked for three researchers to provide him with a large amount of their data collected over the past years, and he also questions their findings. This has been reported in the NY Times and on NPR's Morning Edition and
here. In the
NPR piece, there is an interesting quote by Barton
stating that with public funding comes responsibility and these scientists should not be opposed to sharing their data (kind of an interesting statement since 1. Their results have been published in peer review journals, and 2. Republicans are obviously opposed to any transparency or public information regarding their actions). However, Sherwood Boehlert (NY republican and chair of the House Science Committee) did confront Barton and supports the researchers.
The current administration was also opposed to the publishing of a recent paper by the National Academy of Science that discusses a model of what could happen if botulinum toxin was put into the milk supply chain. The paper was published July 12, 2005 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science and is not a medical nor biochemical analysis, but rather a mathematical model of a particular food supply chain. It also references other papers that discuss this general issue of food safety and already are available.
Finally, we move to two researchers whose funding was put into jeopardy by Rep. Randy Neugebauer (also a Republican from Texas, anyone see a pattern here?). This congressman added an amendment to the health and education spending bill passed by the House to, now get this, cut the funds from two research grants already awarded by the NIH. Only two. This is not Congressional earmark money, such as money awarded to Billings to build a new Community Center. This is money that the NIH already had awarded after a rigorous peer review process. You can find the details of the research here or here. Neither study is politically charged, so the question is, why pick on these two? Who came up with the idea to go after these two? Regardless, this is a very bad precedent to set where Congress meddles with the peer review process and decides which research grants they want to fund.
Much of the strength of this country has come from its development of new technology and breaking through new scientific barriers. If politicos now want to dabble in this (as well as play remote expert physician), we will all lose. It is one thing to decide that we (as a people) cannot afford to fund research (although a very bad idea, IMHO), but it is another for politicians to pick and choose research projects to kill after the proposal has been submitted and funded only because they don't like it, or cannot understand it.
Clearly, the Reactionary Republicans are now attempting to squelch any remaining independent voice - in this case, scientific research - by eliminating it. With no pesky data (read, facts) being put forth, they can have their "debate" as they like it. Today, they are still battling scientific results they don't like as well as their political opponents who use the data against them. Tomorrow, they will be free to brush aside new claims as opinion.
I think that this is the just the beginning. There will be more attempts to politicize science to discredit it and the researchers involved. How long will it be before a research grant is awarded to a "scientist" to study "Intelligent Design"? Then, because of the attention given to these recent events, the same Congressmen can point to the uproar over their own attempts to meddle and cry foul. Is our peer review process doomed? I hope not, but I am worried.