Newt Gingrich on Science: Say What You Need to Say

I’ve just done a DeSmogBlog piece analyzing Newt Gingrich’s stances, and statements, on key scientific topics. I find him wanting on at least four of them: 1) the question of how politicians should obtain scientific advice; and then his views and remarks on 2) evolution, 3) stem cell research, and 4) global warming.

The first critique is, in some ways, the most important:

The Undermining of Science Advice. In 1995, Gingrich-led congressional Republicans did away with the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), which had previously served as their in-house source of science advice. As I reported in my book The Republican War on Science, Gingrich instead espoused a “free market” approach to scientific expertise: Rather than having institutional science advice in place, members of Congress could just meet with scientists as they saw fit in order to inform themselves.

Is this a good idea? My book included this quote from Robert Palmer, a longtime Democratic staffer on the House Science Committee: “Gingrich’s view was always, ‘I’ll set up one-on-one interactions between members of Congress and key members of the scientific community. Which I thought was completely bizarre. I mean, who comes up with these people, and who decides they’re experts, and what member of Congress really wants to do that?”

One of the pathologies of American politics today is our unending “my expert versus your expert” games. If you don’t want to believe in global warming, then hey, just find yourself a scientist who says it’s not caused by humans. There are plenty of them around, after all. That this strategy is considered acceptable is attributable, at least partly, to Gingrich-style political thinking. And sure enough, as I went on to report in Republican War, once Gingrich and his allies got rid ofOTA they proceeded to hold hearings to attack mainstream science on global warming, ozone depletion, and other issues.

I conclude that on science, Gingrich is certainly no Santorum–no out-and-out science denier. On the other hand, the apparent cynicism of his stances is certainly troubling. Full piece here.

Comments on this article

By clicking and submitting a comment I acknowledge The Intersection Privacy Policy and agree to The Intersection Terms of Use. I understand that my comments are also being governed by Facebook's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.