Inhofe requests inquiry into EPA science advisers

Sen. James Inhofe has asked the EPA inspector General to investigate the EPA’s air quality scientific advisory boards, accusing them of improper bias and financial conflict of interest.

An example of the sort of cronyism at issue is Jonathan Samet, the chair of the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Council.

Samet not only has received millions of dollars in grants from the EPA — in furtherance of the the EPA’s regulatory jihad against American industry through air quality standards — but is also in charge of reviewing said research.

Samet recently wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that there is no limit to how tightly the EPA can regulate air quality. But there is no science to back up that statement, Congress never intended such an outcome and we can’t afford it.

Samet is the archetypal junk scientist — twisting science to advance a special agenda. For example, he has condemned ecologic-type epidemiologic studies when they conflicted with his research on residential radon, but hypocritically embraces that same study methodology when it comes to his own air quality research.

Inhofe is right to ask for an inquiry. The EPA IG will probably refuse or conduct a whitewash. But with any luck we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the EPA’s Clean Air Act.

Click to read Sen. Inhofe’s letter.

6 thoughts on “Inhofe requests inquiry into EPA science advisers”

  1. Not to mention that it is in part the result of the EPA that gas is so expensive. Their clean air standards and the application of such by region causes the oil companies to come up with multiple blends per region/state/city. How much do you think that costs the oil companies to produce which gets passed on to the consumer? Add in the federal and state per gallon taxes and I’d bet that a large portion of each gallon of gas price is due wholly to the government (and in this case the EPA), which, by the way, is supposed to hold public hearings on new regulations – these hearings have become a joke. So, sorry, I’d rather trust an oil and gas company (despite some inherent flaws and the few bad ones), than unelected bureaucrats whose entire purpose it seems to be is to justify their existence through more draconian regulations that cost the average consumer money.

  2. Bill Cash: The oil industry funding of its exploration, exploitation and manufacturing of fuels comes from its shareholders and profits. The EPA is funded exclusively by you and me. Why on earth would you trust a bunch of socialists spending other peoples money to promote its agenda to crush oil and coal companies?

  3. The oil companies want to provide products to the people as cheaply as possible and as safe and clean as possible. They do not need the EPA to do that. It costs way to much to let someone get hurt or have a spill. The free market will put the bad ones out of business. In a hurry.

    Do you like $4.00/gallon gas if you do then thank the EPA and Federal Government. The other side is our over regulation will soon result in our gasoline and diesel being imported from India and China where there is no pollution control or ability for citizens to sue and put the bad actors out of business. We will also have rolling blackouts as power plants are forced out of business due to needless regulations.

    I want the USA to be the greatest nation on earth and without our ability to harness our own energy cheaply and easily we will never achieve that again. It is time for the EPA and the federal government to get out of the way. They are broke you would think they would want the taxes from a growing energy economy.

  4. Frankly, I have more difficulty with the money Inhofe receives from the oil industry. We know what their purposes are. I have much more faith in the transparency of the EPA than the oil industry.

  5. Obama promised that his administration would provide “transparency” in government. Let’s see how “clear” a response from the EPA they receive. I hope that Mr. Inhofe will press them against the wall until he gets to the truth. The EPA has been, and continues to be responsible for the financial burdens placed on industry, without any true science to articulate its justification.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.