Whose Science?

In December, The New York Times's David Hakim reports on Scientists Loved and Loathed by Agrochemical Firm Syngenta; and vice versa, corporate research grants loved and loathed by scientists.

The article goes into the 3 different examples of scientists working in Agrochemical research.

• Pesticide effects on bee health (Dr. James Cresswell)
• Herbicide atrazine effects on prostate cancer & other health issues (Dr. James Simpson)
• GMO corn engineered to kill insect larvae (Dr. Angelika Hilbeck)

Issues covered: It starts with money of course. In UK 15% of university research is funded by private industry.

Scientific findings bound by confidentiality agreements. The funding source has "editorial control."

Partnerships between corporations, researchers and government which include secret patent deals.

Regulators as collaborators not watchdogs.

This pre-dates Trump; it is a good example of why March for Science shouldn't focus just on what is going on in Congress and White House today.

This is the questions I have: "whose science?, and how can an informed citizen know?

I listened to a great podcast this week where David Axelrod interviewed Former HHS Secretary, former Utah governor, and former head of the EPA, Mike Leavitt.

Why @GOP Congress should proceed with caution on Obamacare. Former Bush HHS secy Mike Leavitt on #AxeFiles. https://t.co/uGG6gUgGf5 pic.twitter.com/6XVQrMtlKl

— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) February 16, 2017

I've been seeking out podcasts recently which feature thoughtful Republicans. I want to learn where the common ground is. The first half of this podcast is on the Affordable Care Act (good listening too), but at minute 35 the conversation shifts to the EPA. When talking about the environment, Leavitt found political balance between, for example, sustainability and development, almost impossible. The objective of policy makers, Leavitt says, "is to find that balance."

In minute 43, when the conversation shifts to nuclear power, Leavitt asks "whose science?" I've found a transcript for an earlier conversation that captures the same point:

People continue to ask me, "Why is it that you politicians ignore the science in developing public policy?" The frustration I feel is the question: "whose science?" because, as a policymaker, I am constantly having scientists of general, good reputes give me different points of view. I have come to find out that all scientists do not agree; that it's not something that is absolute, and there are people of substantial sincerity and enormous credential who see the world differently. So, when you're in a public policy making role and you follow one science,there is always another science that disputes what you've said.

In Seattle Science March, and the work the group continues long-term, this is a central question.To find the scientific consensus on an issue, where do we go? Who do we ask?  There is always doubt, additional questions, unknowns--that is the nature of scientific pursuit--but we do learn things over time. Our knowledge of how things work does progress.

I'm with @Indivisible

Introductory video:

@Indivisible website

List of upcoming town halls for members of Congress. Staffers say in-person meetings mean most effective. Town Hall Project 2018.

National action calendar.

Locate events.

Trump cabinet hearings.

Environmental Legislation Summary.

A source for MOC Town Hall Meetings

Friday, Feb. 10 Politico article by ELANA SCHOR and RACHAEL BADE.

WHY WE ARE NOT THE TEA PARTY (pg. 10 The Indivisible Guide)
The Tea Party’s ideas were wrong, and their behavior was often horrible. Their members:

• Ignored reality and made up their own facts

• Threatened anyone they considered an enemy

• Physically assaulted and spat on staff

• Shouted obscenities and burned people in effigy

• Targeted their hate not just at Congress, but also at fellow citizens (especially people of color)

We are better than this. We are the majority, and we don’t need petty scare tactics to win.

Some tactics:

Record everything! Assign someone in the group to use their smart phone or video camera to record other advocates asking questions and the Member of Congress’s response. While written transcripts are nice, unfavorable exchanges caught on video can be devastating for MoCs.

Share everything. Post pictures, video, your own thoughts about the event, etc., to social media afterward. Tag the MoC’s office and encourage others to share widely.

From another FB thread about reaching Pat Toomey's office:

2. Letters are the only thing getting through at this point [Note: I've heard that postcards are better because they can impound letters for five weeks to check for contaminants]. Regional offices are a much better mail destination because the compile, sort, and send everything. DC mail is so backed up right now it takes twice as long to send things there.

#Resist Works

Vox's  Matthew Yglesias posted an excellent summary of #Resist successes so far:

The main concrete victories of resistance thus far are:

• House Republicans abandoned a plan to gut the Congressional Ethics Office.
• The Trump administration abandoned a plan to cancel Affordable Care Act enrollment advertising.
• The VA was granted an exemption from Trump’s hiring freeze.
• 500,000 green card holders were granted exemption from Trump’s immigration orders.
• The Department of Defense has secured permission to grant exemptions to the ban for Iraqis who work with the US military.
• Most dual citizens (Germans, most recently) seem to be getting exemptions from the Trump ban.
• A House Republican plan for a massive sell-off of public lands has been canceled.

More diffusely, resistance is already costing Trump politically. A planned trip to Harley-Davidson in Wisconsin was canceled because the company didn’t want to deal with the protests. Disney’s CEO canceled a planned trip to the White House. Maintaining a constant atmosphere of contentiousness has cost Trump the usual honeymoon period and saddled him with approval ratings that are already underwater.

Not listed is getting 2 Republican senators to align with Democrats against DOE nominee DeVos. Hopefully we can add that to the list tomorrow after the vote.

Why the #altgovt movement is important. @Alt_DeptofED @ALT_DOJ @alt_fda @ActualEPAFacts @alt_labor @Alt_NASA @AltHHS @AltForestServ pic.twitter.com/rA0XNOnFc0

— Rogue EPA Staff (@RogueEPAstaff) February 4, 2017

Two other articles:

• Slate's Jamelle Bouie : Protest Works
• Erica Chenoweth, Guardian OpEd, 3.5% of population can stop dictator.

Crucially, nonviolent resistance works not by melting the heart of the opponent but by constraining their options. A leader and his inner circle cannot pass and implement policies alone. They require cooperation and obedience from many people to carry out plans and policies.

 

Speaker Bercow just cancelled Trump visit to parliament. A proud moment for Commons. Racism and sexism not welcome here.

— Harriet Harman (@HarrietHarman) February 6, 2017

The Prisoner's Dilemma: How Obstructionist should the Democrats be?

Minute 26:20 of today's Slate's Political Gabfest. Discussing Democrats' strategy for Judge Gorsuch confirmation hearings.

Dickerson: I'm all for protests. And I think it's as great as the Tea Party protests. Some Democrats worry that (their base is incredibly energized right now and they're very excited about that) but they're worried now that they will face the same problem Republicans faced ... sometimes there's a strategic reason to pick your battles ... and that the call for absolutely full, constant, total, and complete resistance to Trump on every measure is not strategically wise.
Bazelon: ... that purity tests are a problem.

credit: Elyse Singer to ‎Dahlia Lithwick

Later (~min 41), Plotz, rightly, characterizes the choice for Democrats to be rational and grown-up versus Republican's and Tea Party's scorched-earth approach as the Prisoner's Dilemma . I resolve the dilemma by believing we should stay consistent with our values, our identity as Democrats--we believe in government, in liberty and justice, in the rule of law, in democracy, in majority protecting minority rights. We should stay to true to ourselves.

The Tea Party ended with a President Trump. They other guys and gals are the Party of No. They are ok with a scorched earth; I'm not. I want Democrats to think, to remain open-minded, big-tent, liberal and to care for country as much or more than for party. We are the majority. If each of us works hard (knocks on doors, calls, writes letters, shows up at Town Halls, donates, votes) we will win.

The next election, if Price is confirmed, will be GA-6. Let's win that race. Support Jon Ossoff.

Other reporting on Gorsuch:

• America, The Jesuit Review clears up the fascist joke.
• Dahlia Lithwick, Amicus podcast. I look forward to Gorsuch answering the two questions posed: is he independent? does he judge based on the Constitution and precedent or based on his political beliefs? He'll certainly answer yes, but, the Senators will be watching his body language and reading between the lines (mixing metaphors).
• Trump's "so-called judge" tweet raising the bar for Gorsuch

5 Calls

I like 5 calls for facilitating your day's phone calls:

• It knows your senators and representative, and their phone numbers.
• Gives you a choice of issues
• Gives you a short script