Science & Democracy Resources

Strong U.S. investment in independent science has brought the nation economic progress, science-based public policy, and global scientific leadership.

The administrator of Medicare threatened to fire his chief actuary if he communicated to Congress his cost estimates for the Medicare Prescription Drug Mobilization Act of 2003.

In a forceful letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, scientists challenged a policy restricting the use of recently discovered genetic data in reviewing the status of endangered species.

Reports: Scientific Integrity in Policy Making

G.W. Bush's Executive Order (EO) 13422 of 2007 injects political appointees into agency rule-making, cripples an agency's ability to issue guidance to public, and promotes free market concerns over public welfare.

A high-profile appointment of a scientist with questionable credentials is the selection of Dr. Joseph McIlhaney to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.

In 2004 the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) exaggerated the impact of forest fires on spotted owl habitat in an attempt to expand old-growth logging in the Sierra Nevada. 

On scientific and medical issues, from childhood lead poisoning to reproductive health to toxic mercury pollution, federal government science is being manipulated, distorted, and suppressed at an unprecedented scale.

Survey of scientists at the FDA reporting significant interference with the FDA’s scientific work, compromising the agency’s ability to fulfill its mission of protecting public health and safety.

A 2007 UCS survey of nearly 5,500 scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency which shows political interference in the scientist's work, barriers to communication of scientific results, and concern's about agency effectiveness.

A report detailing political interference in science at the EPA, combining dozens of interviews with current and former staff, analysis of government documents, more than 1,600 survey responses, and 70 pages of written comments from scientists.

In February 2006, the phrase “to understand and protect the home planet” was removed from the NASA’s official mission statement. Scientists worried the change meant funding would be shifted away from studies of Earth, including climate change research.