Let's say the Trump Administration has every right to harass and exit any scientist it wants without reason or cause. That is the way most southern states see employment, as if a beauty contest. "If I like you then the job is yours. If I don't then I get to throw you out the door."
In other words, if from some reason Scott Pruitt didn't like his secretary because she had hazel eyes, then he could fire her without any reasons or backlash. I think we all know where and why that standard exists. By the way, how is Scalise doing?
June 27, 2017
By Rhett Jones
...According to emails (click here) obtained by the New York Times, the top scientist on the Environmental Protection Agency’s scientific review board was instructed to downplay the mass dismissal of advisors when she testified before Congress. “I felt bullied,” she says now.
The EPA is technically required to listen to official scientific advice when setting policy. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Whitman v. American Trucking Associations that the Administrator of the EPA is not even allowed to factor in the costs of implementation when setting new air quality standards. It, therefore, behooves the current climate change-denying administration to clean house and try to find some kooky (or greedy) scientists that agree with them.
In May, EPA head Scott Pruitt informed 18 members of the agency’s Board of Science Counselors that their terms would not be renewed. The scientific community was outraged and several scientists on the board resigned in protest. One member of the board told the Washington Post, “I’ve never heard of any circumstance where someone didn’t serve two consecutive terms.” Two weeks later, Dr. Deborah Swackhamer, an environmental chemist, and leader of the board was due to testify in front of the House Science Committee.
Her formal testimony had already been submitted to the committee when she received emails from the EPA’s chief of staff, Ryan Jackson. The emails reportedly informed Dr. Swackhamer that when it came to the dismissals she should follow the agency’s “talking points.” He also pressed her to publicly note that “a decision had not yet been made” about the dismissals. But according to the Times, “several scientists on the board had already received notices that their terms would not be renewed.” In the weeks following her testimony, dozens of scientists at the EPA have been informed that their terms would not be renewed and according to Dr. Swackhamer, “The Board of Scientific Counselors had 68 members two months ago. It will have 11 come September 1.” That date is also when the EPA is expected to eliminate more than 1,200 employees....
But, the people are expecting fairness and high quality employees in their government. When manipulation of the truth, in the name of domestic tranquility of course, is at the center of an administration the idea quality employees get paid reasonably good salaries, becomes a real issue because THEY ARE SMARTER THAN THEIR BOSS!
