Democrats and a group of scientists are lashing out at Texas Rep. Lamar Smith over subpoenas sent to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration they believe are meant to intimidate climate scientists.
Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, sent the subpoena on Oct. 13 asking for documents and communications relating to a study published in June by NOAA showing there has been no slowdown in the rate of global warming, as was previously thought. The burning of fossil fuels is believed by many scientists to be causing global warming through the release of greenhouse gases.
Smith, a climate change doubter, pre-emptively defended the move, pointing out he had sent three previous letters to the administration asking for the documents and communications, but received only partial responses.
That wasn’t enough for Texas Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, the top Democrat on the committee.
In a letter to Smith, Johnson said he overstepped his authority with the subpoena and called it a “fishing expedition.” There’s no sign the scientists who did the study did anything wrong and the subpoena echoes what other climate change doubters have done to harass federal scientists, she said.
“The baseless conflict you have created by issuing the Oct. 13 subpoena is representative of a disturbing pattern in your use of congressional power since your chairmanship began,” she said.
Smith defended the subpoena by saying Johnson was defending President Obama’s climate change policies and said the administration’s “lack of openness is the real problem.”
“Congress cannot do its job when agencies openly defy Congress and refuse to turn over information,” he said. “When an agency decides to alter the way it has analyzed historical temperature data for the past few decades, it’s crucial to understand on what basis those decisions were made. This action has broad national and policy implications.”
Smith’s subpoena, which he was able to send without consulting Johnson as a part of a change in congressional rules, relates only to federal employees working on the study. There’s no indication in the subpoena what Smith believes he will find in the communications.
The letter indicates that NOAA attempted to protect the confidentiality of “scientific communications” by not immediately providing those documents to the committee. Smith rejected that notion.
The subpoena worries Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Center for Science and Democracy.
Rosenberg pointed out the results of the study and the methodology, which he figured Smith would have a problem with, is publicly available online. Smith, as the chairman of the committee, could call NOAA officials to testify in front of the committee without searching through the emails of scientists, Rosenberg said.
Rosenberg said the subpoena could discourage scientists who work in the private sector from working with federal scientists because their communications could be subject to a congressional subpoena. That would have a chilling effect on scientific work, he said.
“Scientists talk back and forth all the time and speculate and, believe it or not, joke with each other all the time,” he said. “Now, everyone should be on edge because they’re subject to a federal subpoena and what if someone chooses to take your statement out of context?”
