Budget cuts and government offices closed: the global attack of Donald Trump the science News

WHO in the day of his inauguration he thought (or hoped) that the denial of the holocaust of the american president Donald Trump on the climate change caused by the action of man had to be an attitude designed to soften over time, he was wrong, of coarse. From that January 20, 2017 - as evidenced by a survey of the New York Times - the workings of the U.s. administration to de-legitimise the role of science in federal policy (at least of that which in fact is opposed to the model of development trumpiano) has not stopped a moment, was and is in some sense "scientific". With the negative effects - Trump or not Trump will weigh for years, warn experts.

it Is an action to the carpet, wrap-around, almost "pervasive", he explains to the newspaper the new york Michael Gerrard , director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, that by 2017, has identified more than 200 attempts of the administration to Trump the thesis to limit the role of science. There's something for all tastes: cuts in funds or even stop the studies on climate change and health to which are opposed the great industries of oil and coal; closure of study centers of governmental studies, like the one that was working on countermeasures on insects invasive. But not only: in San Francisco a study on the effects of chemicals on pregnant women, you had to stop for a sudden lack of funds. The list is long.

The skills? Do not count or they count only if they coincide with the policies of the administration current. Trump has always said that government regulations have led to a crisis in the companies and removed some of the main objectives of the administration, such as the increase in the production of fossil fuels. Well, in line, in 2017, the officials of the Interior have deleted a study of 1 million dollars of the national Academies of science, engineering and medicine on the health risks arising from "removal of mountains" coal mining in West Virginia. And right on issues such as these - the supervision of the environment and the extraction of energy that is consumed, the confrontation of the most severe among the federal regulators and the administration. The land where the interests are very high. With the result, notes with concern the newspaper, which many federal scientists have been forced to pack up.

of Course, emphasizes the New York Times, in some cases, these attacks were rejected. Each year - systematically - Trump has proposed drastic cuts to the budgets of several federal agencies as the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. But not always you go to the sign: to have the last word on the levels of the budget, it is Congress that has rejected these cuts. They have thus been able to breathe a sigh of relief programs of space exploration of Nasa and the all-important medical research at the National Institutes of Health, where, thanks to a budget increased by 12% the United States is at the forefront of the molecular biology and genetics.

Zero smiles in the environmental field. Here a variety of staff cuts have made it very, very difficult to work at the Agency for the protection of the environment (Epa), for example: the staff is now at the lowest level of the last ten years. In addition, in June last year, the White House has ordered agencies to reduce by a third the number of federal panels that provide technical advice, acknowledging that they are no longer needed. But forgetting that many of the achievements of the last century in the key environmental and development are just the result from the federal investigation that is now under pressure.

The american newspaper has also heard the opinion of an expert that studies the use of science by politicians, Wendy E. Wagner , professor of law at the University of Texas at Austin: "When decapitiamo the government's ability to use science in a professional manner, this increases the risk that we start to take wrong decisions, that we start to lose new risks to public health."

there were also Numerous acts of intimidation against scientists, such as that suffered by the experts of the Noaa (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to support the president even when he was wrong to say that the hurricane Dorian would have threatened the state of Alabama. A question even hilarious if it had not taken place in a context so dramatic. A scientist from the federal Patrick Gonzalez , the National Park Service and adjunct associate professor at the University of California, Berkeley, has received a letter of censure after he spoke to the Congress about the risks that global warming poses to the national parks.

Betsy Smith , a climatologa with 20 years of experience at the Epa in 2017, has seen to cancel his study of the long-term effects of climate change on main ports, expressed her bitterness: "In the past, when we had an administration that is not very favorable to the environment, we could still sit quiet and do our work. Now it seems to us that the Epa is run by the fossil fuel industry. Seems to be an attack wholesale".

"The Republic will fight always in defense of the freedom of information, to its readers and to all those who have at heart the principles of democracy and civil coexistence"

Carlo Verdelli SUBSCRIBERS TO REPUBLIC © Reproduction reserved Today on the Conte launches the "marathon" of the government and promises: “we will Change the decrees Salvini” By premier puppet to leader of the people. Thus was born the contismo Francis and the brotherhood in the one God Education, but the ministry. And the M5S becomes the minority in the Council of ministers Manfredi, the new minister of the University: "A plan by 500 million to hire young researchers"