Request from Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) for GAO to Investigate Federal Science Advisory Boards

September 18, 2002

VIA FAX

The Honorable David M. Walker
Comptroller General of the United States
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street, NW
Washington, DC 20458

Dear Mr. Walker:

As a Member of the House Committee on Science, which has special oversight responsibility for civilian research and development programs, I am deeply concerned about recent reports alleging the politicization of scientific advisory boards under the Bush Administration. Specifically, I am referring to an article entitled “HHS Seeks Science Advice to Match Bush Views” that was published in The Washington Post on September 17, 2002. The article states that a number of board members with close connections to the chemical industry have been appointed to advise the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Environmental Health (CDC/NCEH) on low-level exposure risk to environmental chemicals. It also claims that the Food and Drug Administration has opted to obstruct the release of a multiyear science-based report on the regulation of genetic testing after intense lobbying by the very companies that make the tests. Additionally, the article references the forced replacement of large numbers of CDC/NCEH advisory board members at one time and that litmus tests were used by Bush Administration officials in selecting new advisory board members.

Conflicts of interest and high attrition rates present a clear danger to the independent counsel provided by advisory boards that are composed of people with scientific, legal and academic expertise with a variety of views. As a Member of Congress, I rely on the independent analyses of these boards to formulate sound science policy for our nation. When narrow criteria, such as litmus tests, are administered to select advisors of particular ideologies, the resulting reports are anything but objective. When independent advisory boards are purged periodically, the knowledge and experience gained over several years and the strategic outlook of these boards are lost. As a result, it is impossible to make informed decisions on some of the most pressing and complicated issues in the public debate because credible, independent analyses simply are not available. My personal ideology may not always agree with the results of independent commissions, but it is only through honest and open discourse that scientists are able to provide public officials with the facts needed to make informed decisions.

Therefore, I ask that the GAO conduct an investigation into the alleged politicization of independent science advisory boards that serve the federal government. Specifically, I am interested in the composition of these boards, if litmus tests have been used to select members of particular ideological persuasions, and if members’ tenures have been ended prematurely because of the perception that they hold ideologies differing from the current Administration. Historically, has the tenure of outside scientific advisory committees of federal agencies been terminated when Presidential administrations changed? I am also interested in how the findings of unreleased reports may have been obstructed by Administration officials and how previously released reports may have been ignored for ideological reasons. Please contact Dan Pearson of the Democratic staff to discuss this request in detail and to negotiate a specific scope of work and timeline.

Sincerely,

Eddie Bernice Johnson
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Research

More information and documents pertaining to preserving scientific integrity