news

WASHINGTON—Congressman Paul D. Tonko questioned former EPA leaders and other experts during a hearing today exploring ways the agency can rebuild itself to better advance its founding mission of protecting human health and the environment. The hearing was held by the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Remarks can be read below:

BRIEF REMARKS

As we have heard today, science is vital to EPA’s mission. In order for EPA to exercise strong environmental leadership, EPA must act with unquestionable scientific integrity. Sadly, over the past four years, there were unprecedented attacks on EPA’s scientific infrastructure and we saw ideology drive environmental policy.

I am pleased that President Biden has hit the ground running with several actions to restore scientific integrity across the federal government, including at EPA. I would like to hear recommendations from our witnesses today on how the new leadership at EPA can restore science at the agency.

QUESTIONS

Ms. Keyes Fleming, as Regional Administrator you saw first-hand the excellent science happening at EPA’s laboratories.

Q: What steps can EPA and its partners take to strengthen science in decision-making and recommit to scientific integrity?

Administrator Browner, you state in your testimony that [quote] “well-conducted science … is the foundation for EPA, regions, states, tribes, and other partners to address pressing environmental and related health challenges.”

Q: What steps can EPA and its partners take to strengthen science in decision-making and recommit to scientific integrity?

Governor Whitman, in your testimony, you state that [quote] “good science is the foundation of good policy.”

Q: Based on where EPA is today, what can agency leaders do to safeguard scientific integrity and ensure EPA actions are guided by [quote] “good science”?

Ms. Cleland-Hamnett, you were at EPA for nearly four decades as a career civil servant, working under seven different Administrations of both parties.   

In your testimony, you state that political interference with science in order to support a particular policy outcome [quote] “shreds the credibility of those policy decisions.”

Q: Based on your time at EPA, why is it important that EPA policies be based on credible and transparent science, not ideology or a particular policy outcome?

###