On the recordNovember 19, 2014
Mr. Chairman, I am not a member of the Science Committee, so I wasn't part of the deliberations, but when a bill is presented as being about transparency and openness and relying on science, I ask myself: ``Well, of course, why would there be any partisan difference on something like that?'' Then you start looking at different things that make you wonder if that is what this is really about. This is a bill that came out of the Science Committee, and I looked at the list of the supporters. There is not a Democrat on the list. As I understand it, the vote was on a party-line basis. Would that mean that Democrats don't believe in these things? Or is something else going on? I submit that Republicans don't have a lot of credibility when they talk about wanting more science because I have seen so many areas where Republicans have tried to ignore the science, deny the science. The best example of this irony is that when Republicans are claiming they are for sound science, they have had so many anti-science proposals on the House floor. I think even the Flat Earth Society recognizes that there is some overwhelming consensus on some things like climate change or that man is causing climate change and that it is a serious threat to our planet. Republicans undercut their statement of support for science when they have voted repeatedly to deny that climate change exists. Well, we have a Republican majority here. It is even a larger majority for the next year.…





