Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1030

Should EPA Science Reports Be More Transparent And Publicly Available?

Argument in favor

This bill would make EPA operations more transparent, especially around how they create regulations. It seems obvious that the EPA should be making its scientific studies publicly available.

Cary's Opinion
···
03/17/2015
More transparency always seems like a good idea.
Like (5)
Follow
Share
Tommy's Opinion
···
03/10/2015
Transparency is good in almost all functions. Make campaign finance funding completely transparent.
Like (4)
Follow
Share
Dennis's Opinion
···
04/11/2015
Transparency is critical so that information, measurements, and reporting that affect decision making can be absolutely verified for accuracy.
Like (3)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The requirements put forth by this bill could be very costly if the EPA tries to use the same number of scientific studies that it has in the past. If it doesn’t, the quality of its work in protecting the environment may be undermined.

KalebNyquist's Opinion
···
03/04/2015
Sounds like bad data economics. By demanding scientists rely only on public data, we restrict our data supply and therefore increase the cost of doing science. As a member of the public, I don't want to be sifting through mountains of data I don't understand -- I trust our scientists to do this for me, and trust them to choose wisely the data-sets they want to use.
Like (6)
Follow
Share
Christina's Opinion
···
02/07/2017
This would limit EPA gaining information on events that only happen one time and are therefore not repeatable. This is a misleading attempt to limit's EPA's research.
Like (4)
Follow
Share
Daniel's Opinion
···
05/07/2015
This is just another way that the government is trying to regulate the EPA. The individuals working on the information are trained professionals. They don't need the public weighing in on facts.
Like (3)
Follow
Share
    More transparency always seems like a good idea.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Sounds like bad data economics. By demanding scientists rely only on public data, we restrict our data supply and therefore increase the cost of doing science. As a member of the public, I don't want to be sifting through mountains of data I don't understand -- I trust our scientists to do this for me, and trust them to choose wisely the data-sets they want to use.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Transparency is good in almost all functions. Make campaign finance funding completely transparent.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This would limit EPA gaining information on events that only happen one time and are therefore not repeatable. This is a misleading attempt to limit's EPA's research.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Don't be fooled by this Bill's seeming transparency. It would eliminate the use of many important studies. Be careful! Couching something restrictive as something transparent is a common ruse.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This is not about transparency, it is about restricting scientists and limiting what they can do, wastibg their time and resources.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Transparency is critical so that information, measurements, and reporting that affect decision making can be absolutely verified for accuracy.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Another mis-labeled bill. Big oil's attempt to keep the EPA from exposing them.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This is just another way that the government is trying to regulate the EPA. The individuals working on the information are trained professionals. They don't need the public weighing in on facts.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill would prohibit the EPA from using studies on one-time events, such as the Gulf oil spill, pipeline spills, and pesticide bans, to inform regulations, since these events cannot be repeated.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Transparency is always a good thing. You can't get away with all the lying like if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. Every last democrat should be booted out of congress for that one.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    If more individuals are aware of policies and procedures before they are in place we may have better turnouts for elections so they feel they matter.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    If we put competent people in positions of leadership who are accountable to other elected officials who we can rely on addressing the citizens concerns, and not some interested third parties, then why do we need to add additional burden to their critical work? Another attempt at screwing with the epa
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    The report does not belong to the EPA. It belongs to the American people.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    We need public transparency so that we can see what is going on in our government.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    States already have a lot of constraints against the EPA while polluters continue their dirty work. Such a law would further hamstring the EPA.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Legislators trying to weaken regulatory bodies....
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This will inhibit the ability for the EPA to use data from longitudinal and environmental disasters and other non-replicable studies to propose solutions quickly and effectively.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Hey, if I am paying for their studies and have to suffer the consequences of their decisions, I have a right to know the bases for all government scientists' and bureaucrats' actions and decisions. Without such information, we US CITIZENS AND TAXPAYERS are subject to the whims and fancies of politically-biased government dictators.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop attacking the EPA, how many bills need to attack it in how many ways. Why not just pass a "burn it all" bill congress? It's more honest.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE