Secret Science Reform Act of 2014

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FOSTER. I would like to thank the ranking member for her leadership on this issue.

Mr. Chairman, we frequently hear my colleagues across the aisle say, ``I am not a scientist,'' in response to a stance they may be taking on a matter which has a strong technical or scientific aspect to it. Well, I am a scientist, and that is why I am standing today in strong opposition to the Secret Science Reform Act.

Even my colleagues in the House who are not scientists, when they have a question of law, they will consult a lawyer, but that doesn't seem to be the case where science is concerned. I think that it would be good if in this House we spent a little while listening to the scientists who are concerned with these issues.

Today, a letter was introduced into the Record from the American Association for the Advancement of Science, signed by 42 organizations representing scientific organizations and research universities. In the letter, they state that the research community is concerned about how some of the key terms in this bill could be interpreted or misinterpreted, especially terms such as ``materials,'' ``data,'' and ``reproducible.''

Would the Environmental Protection Agency, for example, be excluded from utilizing research that involved physical specimens or biological materials that are not easily accessible? How would the Agency address research that combines both public and necessarily private data?

These are all important questions which this legislation and, sadly, this debate have not addressed, so I stand alongside thousands of my colleagues in science in opposition to the Secret Science Reform Act and in support of what has been referred to in this debate as ``so-called peer review.'' Let us scientists set the scientific standards and not Washington politicians.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source