Is It Really “Shocking” that Donald Trump will Eliminate NASA’s Climate Research Program?
I thought I’d publish the email I just got from the Sierra Club (of which I’m one of about 2.5 million members), and offer a comment or two at the end:
“SHOCKINGLY STUPID!” That’s what one climate policy expert called reports that Donald Trump will eliminate NASA’s climate research program.
Just when you thought Donald Trump’s plans for the environment couldn’t get more outrageous or short-sighted: a top Trump advisor recently announced the new administration will eliminate ALL climate change research conducted by NASA.
We know from experts that NASA plays a critical role in understanding climate change. What Trump advisor Bob Walker calls a crackdown on “politicized science” is a blatantly political move to pander to corporate polluters at the expense of essential research and human health.
Saving our planet from Trump and his pro-polluter advisors is going to require a 24-7, full-court press. We’re mobilizing supporters and formulating strategies to fight the anti-environment forces descending on Washington as I write, but we can’t do it without you. Will you rush a donation now?
NASA’s research into climate phenomena is valued by the world’s scientists and policymakers. Eliminating the agency’s Earth science work would devastate international efforts to understand and decelerate human-caused climate change.
As the president-elect taps Big Oil barons and climate-change deniers as top advisors, federal scientists are increasingly concerned their work will take a backseat to Trump’s plans to boost and deregulate the fossil fuel industry. Gutting NASA’s Earth science division, warned one scientist, could put us back in the “dark ages” of climate research.
Since Trump’s election, I’ve seen what our Sierra Club community is capable of, and I know you won’t go back to the dark ages quietly. Please, stand with the Sierra Club today — we have never needed you more.
We’re so grateful to have environmental champions like you on our side. In the last few weeks, over 150,000 of you have sent a message or called the White House. More than 80,000 people have signed up as new supporters. Tens of thousands of people like you stood in solidarity with Standing Rock in more than 200 cities. And that grassroots pressure worked — just two days ago the Obama administration announced that it will not grant the final easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Army Corps of Engineers will conduct an environmental review and explore alternate routes for the project.
We’re fighting like hell for the planet we love. Your support helps us do it. Thank you.
My notes:
Anyone who’s shocked that the Trump Administration plans to eviscerate NASA’s efforts to perform research and reporting on climate change isn’t really paying attention. The Republican oil-puppets in the senate have been trying to make this happen for years. Now this pro-fossil fuel corruption comes with the full force of the executive branch as well. What precisely did we expect?
There is no doubt that collective action helps, and yes, the spear that the Obama Administration just put through the Dakota Access Pipeline is one of the best examples of this phenomenon in the history of humankind. It’s hard not to admire the many thousands of people, including the latest barrage of 2000 U.S. military vets, who descended on the area to support the water protectors and brought this outrage to the attention of the international community.
There is similarly no doubt that defending our planet against environmental destruction is going to require a “24/7 full-court press.” I applaud people who have the stamina to participate—even those who (like me) make modest donations to help the cause. I know there are people who have given up, and, though I’m not joining them, I find it hard to find fault with them.
Craig,
It’s always controversial when funding is withdrawn from any research project.
However, the reaction from the Sierra Club, like your own, is partisan and politically biased. I fail to see how giving the incoming President further evidence of the politicization of this issue, is helpful.
I fear the public will simply see this as the people they voted against continuing to scream, “I want to get my own way” !
The charge that NASA’s climate research program is corrupted by political bias, if true, is serious. Like all programs involving public investment and funding it should be investigated by an independent authority, and NASA should extend full cooperation.
It’s the prerogative of the elected legislative and executive arms of government to decide policy and funding, not pressure groups.
Wise governments, should follow a process of investigation, analysis, and assessment so as to establish that any decisions are in the public interest, and not simply ideological or political Witch-hunts.
This is true for all administrations, both right and left.
The damage done by a reckless administration could be incalculable. But as long as the administration stays within the confines of the constitution, the American system delivers the power and authority to elected officials. Ultimately, it’s they, not the Sierra Club, who must answer to the voters.
Donald Trump strikes me a President whose main object was to become President. Unfortunately, now he’s elected, he’s surrounding himself with individuals equally inexperienced in the responsibilities of government.
Obama may have been too conciliatory, too weak and vacillating, but Trump is proving to be to hasty and reckless when it comes to following due process.
Cancelling US financial contributions to various UN organizations may need little justification, but NASA is an American Icon, a Sacred Cow !
Investigating, reviewing NASA, and holding NASA to account is a proper Presidential function. The left and NASA may not like such interference, but if done fairly and objectively the public will accept the right of the President to monitor and scrutinize publicly funded institutions.
The American people should not accept a President who for ideological/political purposes shuts down, or excessively interferes with public institutions simply because he doesn’t like what they research.
The Republican’s in Congress should remember, it’s they who will bear the brunt of the electorates disapproval.
Craig – not surprised at All its probably only 1 of many of a long list of Ideology driven decisions that will come down the Pike over next 4 years.
Its Industry Blowback because of James Hansens and other Scientists good work on GHG and Global Warming . This work conflicts with the shallow short term profit world view of the Trumpsters political backers. So that is some of the motivation.
I don’t know about the other things you brought up Marco concerning investigating NASA for what ever ??/ NASA has done some damn good work and many modern technologies they helped develop the beginning etc. Including solar etc.
But the general anti governmental attitudes of some of the business class sometimes gets exaggerated into false witch hunts etc., Has happened many times.
Just dont know.
BTW NAAS’s James Hansen is a Believer and Advocate in the Nuclear Genie as a key tool to use in the fight against GHG emissions.
I am not sure but I think James Hansen is retiring soon or has. Also another one of the leaders of the climate research team there at NASA has terminal cancer , saw him on TV show explaining global warming earth models fascinating work
Silent,
It’s not a matter of whether NASA or any other publicly funded government organization is, or isn’t, guilty of political bias, inefficiency, or corruption, a prudent government has a duty of care to ensure all public institutions are monitored, constantly reviewed and kept free from undue political influence and remain objective.
This is a difficult task for the executive which is by it’s nature, political. In any system of elected representative government, only elected officials set policy. The civil service must strive to effect that policy to the best of it’s capacity.
Policies may be folly, even disastrous, but as long as the elected government remains constitutional, the civil service must follow policies set down by the executive.
When a government organization is accused of political bias, it must be investigated independently if only to clear the organizations good name and retain public confidence.