There have been two recent cases in which the Environmental Protection Agency has sought to silence policy dissenters whose work would most likely help the environment but do so in a manner that is not consistent with the political desires of the administration.

The Wall Street Journal’s Kim Strassel writes:

Meet the Obama EPA, and its new suppressing, paranoid style. It was the president who once ripped the Bush administration for silencing scientific critics, and it was EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson who began her tenure promising the agency would operate like a “fishbowl.” But that was before EPA realized how vastly unpopular is its plan to usurp Congress and regulate the economy on its own, based on its bizarre finding that CO2 is a danger to health.

On the specific level, this is bad for environmentalism and for sound policymaking.

On a larger level, how’s that new transparency working out?

Trackback URI | Comments RSS