"EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2013 — Amends the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 to revise the process of selecting members of the Science Advisory Board, guidelines for participation in Board advisory activities, and terms of office. (The Board provides scientific advice to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA].) Prohibits federally registered lobbyists from being appointed to the Board.
Revises the procedures for providing advice and comments to the Administrator by: (1) including risk or hazard assessments in the regulatory proposals and documents made available to the Board, and (2) requiring advice and comments to be included in the record regarding any such proposal and published in the Federal Register.
Revises the operation of Board member committees and investigative panels to: (1) require that they operate in accordance with the membership, participation, and policy requirements (including new requirements for public participation in advisory activities of the Board) contained in this Act; (2) deny them authority to make decisions on behalf of the Board; and (3) prohibit direct reporting to EPA.
Adds guidelines for the conduct of Board advisory activities, including concerning: (1) avoidance of making policy determinations or recommendations, (2) communication of uncertainties, (3) dissenting members' views, and (4) periodic reviews to ensure that such activities address the most important scientific issues affecting EPA."
The bill also requires SAB members to disclose financial relationships and interests (Sec. 2a-3D), relevant professional works (Sec. 2a-4), and that all materials used in SAB advisories to the EPA be also released to the public (Sec. 2e).
Can I remind you it was a Democratic president who implemented forced privatization of health care services through mandatory HMO's?
Link to Original Source
"I'm going to rob this bank...and then automatically stop at this red light."
But it did get me thinking about who would be so petty as to pull real life and real reputations into an online discussion where my arguement should be my words and not whether I'd stake my job on it.
I don't know about you, but I don't go around my office discussing politics, sex, religion, or any polarizing topics. My opinions on those are something I try to keep separate from my professional relationships. My personality isn't defined by my opinions on topical subjects; I don't find myself to be hypocritical for not announcing my views to everyone I know. The aforementioned type of person, is someone who doesn't understand this. Someone who can't comprehend that not sharing does not mean lying. Someone who believes this so deeply that they take it upon themselves to "expose the truth" as a selfless act to save others.
This actually sounds a lot like you. I make a point to stay away from people like you.
It all started as a largely ignored paper
Can you really qualify that as being caught though?