Some time ago I began to write a blog about support of
science, and the role of science in policy and decision making under the Trump
administration. While this would seem to be a straightforward task since all of
the evidence is amazingly consistent, in fact, it has been difficult. The
reason it has been difficult is that each time I compile the sources and
information necessary to write this blog something else happens which
illustrates starkly the abandonment of the use of science by this
administration. At this time, shortly after Trump’s announcement of the United
States withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, I am trying to start again. I
know it may be futile to expect to cover everything but I am writing anyway.
There is no shortage of material. For the purpose of this blog I will focus on
the message sent by Trump’s science budget proposals and not seek to be all
inclusive. After all, it is the budget proposal which best states the
administrations intent. I will also try to touch on the anti-science warriors
who have been appointed to high level government positions, including cabinet
While it is attractive to think of science as non-political,
science exists in the real world and is, in fact, subject in many ways to
political considerations. We have been fortunate that the politicians in
Washington including both congress and the executive branch have recognized
both the economic and humanitarian benefits of scientific research. They have,
with a few exceptions maintained and grown the government’s support of
scientific research in both basic and applied fields in both biomedical and
other areas of research.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.