3 ms·

Trump and his people have openly spoken and acted against the media. Also, IIRC, the prior Republican administration blocked scientists from speaking openly and

Trump and his people have openly spoken and acted against the media. Also, IIRC, the prior Republican administration blocked scientists from speaking openly and had politicos edit all communications, while the Obama administration allowed the scientists to communicate unfiltered. One speculative statement from an anonymous EPA official doesn't offset that. > Even the NYTimes has admitted I'm not sure what that means. The Times has reported all sides of the spectrum. The broke the Hillary Clinton email server story, for example, and also Trump's tax returns.

caseysoftware 10y ago
It's quite common that employees cannot comment on behalf of their employers. EPA scientists are executive branch employees so their boss is Trump. > However, one of the consequences of the election is that the new administration now controls what federal agencies say and what side of an issue they take in a debate about, for example, climate change or reproductive rights. Ref: https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/government-employees-get-have-opinions-too https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/government-employees-...
- hackuser 10y ago
  That justifies Trump's power to do it, but it doesn't make it good or acceptable. The President has the power to do many things that are wrong. Trump could order other employees to invade other countries and to kill and torture people. > EPA scientists are executive branch employees so their boss is Trump. And Trump's boss is the American people. Everyone in the executive branch and throughout the government reports to them, ultimately.
tropo 10y ago
Not that it is normally allowed to have underlings spilling data and opinions everywhere, but scientists are special. Conservatives with equal skill go into engineering because that is a more reliable path to a comfortable income. That leaves science with a bias, and that bias is now in conflict with the leadership. Allowing people to have unfiltered communication might be nice, but it doesn't count for much when you already know they mostly agree with you. In case I missed it, was the Obama administration fine with employees expressing opinions that conflicted with Obama's views? That would count for something. For example: coast guard employees endorsing off-shore oil drilling, health and human services employees taking pro-life positions, border patrol agents supporting a wall, military generals opposing non-traditional gender in the military, department of education employees opposing evolution, department of labor employees praising right-to-work laws...
- hackuser 10y ago
  > was the Obama administration fine with employees expressing opinions that conflicted with Obama's views? I saw it many times. For example, military officers did openly debate the gender issues before a decision was made (I don't know about after).
  - tropo 10y ago
    They were not allowed to support the A-10 or oppose the F-35.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      Certainly there is always some of that around in any organization: Don't undermine your boss. Some bosses are more open or effective at that than others. The executive branch has well over a million employees, so everything you can imagine is probably going on somewhere all the time. In those cases, I think those situations were local to Pentagon programs; they were not instructions from the White House; they weren't blanket gag orders for whole departments on every issue.

caseysoftware 10y ago

It's quite common that employees cannot comment on behalf of their employers. EPA scientists are executive branch employees so their boss is Trump. > However, one of the consequences of the election is that the new administration now controls what federal agencies say and what side of an issue they take in a debate about, for example, climate change or reproductive rights. Ref: https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/government-employees-get-have-opinions-too https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/government-employees-...

hackuser 10y ago
That justifies Trump's power to do it, but it doesn't make it good or acceptable. The President has the power to do many things that are wrong. Trump could order other employees to invade other countries and to kill and torture people. > EPA scientists are executive branch employees so their boss is Trump. And Trump's boss is the American people. Everyone in the executive branch and throughout the government reports to them, ultimately.

tropo 10y ago

Not that it is normally allowed to have underlings spilling data and opinions everywhere, but scientists are special. Conservatives with equal skill go into engineering because that is a more reliable path to a comfortable income. That leaves science with a bias, and that bias is now in conflict with the leadership. Allowing people to have unfiltered communication might be nice, but it doesn't count for much when you already know they mostly agree with you. In case I missed it, was the Obama administration fine with employees expressing opinions that conflicted with Obama's views? That would count for something. For example: coast guard employees endorsing off-shore oil drilling, health and human services employees taking pro-life positions, border patrol agents supporting a wall, military generals opposing non-traditional gender in the military, department of education employees opposing evolution, department of labor employees praising right-to-work laws...

hackuser 10y ago
> was the Obama administration fine with employees expressing opinions that conflicted with Obama's views? I saw it many times. For example, military officers did openly debate the gender issues before a decision was made (I don't know about after).
- tropo 10y ago
  They were not allowed to support the A-10 or oppose the F-35.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    Certainly there is always some of that around in any organization: Don't undermine your boss. Some bosses are more open or effective at that than others. The executive branch has well over a million employees, so everything you can imagine is probably going on somewhere all the time. In those cases, I think those situations were local to Pentagon programs; they were not instructions from the White House; they weren't blanket gag orders for whole departments on every issue.