RESUMEN
The politicization of science is a recurring phenomenon in US federal policymaking that is explained in part by the unstructured, collaborative nature of decision-making in most science-intensive US regulatory programs. In this chapter we spotlight some of the most significant worries arising from this longstanding approach to U.S. institutional design for expert agencies and offer recommendations for stronger institutional structures to help guard against the politicization of science.
Asunto(s)
Formulación de Políticas , Política , HumanosAsunto(s)
ADN Recombinante , Regulación Gubernamental , Industrias , Medición de Riesgo , Riesgo , Control Social Formal , Comités Consultivos , Tecnología Biomédica , Contención de Riesgos Biológicos , Ecología , Economía , Gobierno Federal , Gobierno , Humanos , Jurisprudencia , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Política Pública , Estados Unidos , United States Environmental Protection Agency , United States Food and Drug Administration , United States Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationRESUMEN
Assigning a Daubert-like gatekeeper role to courts engaged in judicial review of risk assessments prepared by federal agencies is a profoundly bad idea.I describe the role of courts in reviewing regulatory agency decision-making and explore the potential impact of incorporating Daubert principles into administrative law. A Daubert form of judicial review will prevent agencies from employing a "weight of the evidence" approach, forcing them to adopt a "corpuscular" approach that rewards efforts by regulatees to find and exaggerate flaws in individual scientific studies. Consequently, applying Daubert to federal agency decision-making will have a predictable impact on regulatory policy that runs directly counter to the precautionary policies that animate most health, safety, and environmental statutes.
Asunto(s)
Testimonio de Experto/legislación & jurisprudencia , Regulación Gubernamental , Rol Judicial , Salud Pública/legislación & jurisprudencia , Política Pública , Ciencia/legislación & jurisprudencia , Decisiones de la Corte Suprema , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Medición de Riesgo , Ciencia/métodos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
In the late 1990s, in an effort to dispute the link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, Philip Morris initiated a campaign to legislate "sound science." The campaign involved enacting data access and data quality laws to obtain previously confidential research data in order to re-analyze it based on industry-generated data quality standards. Philip Morris worked with other corporate interests to form coalitions and work-groups, develop a "data integrity" outreach program, sponsor symposia on "research integrity," and draft language for the new acts. The tobacco industry played a role in establishing laws that increase corporate influence on public health and regulatory policy decisions.