Advice on Advisers

SCIENCE POLICY

The federal government has no business asking those who serve on scientific and technical advisory boards how they voted, says a National Academy of Sciences report released last week.

"Scientists, engineers, and health professionals nominated primarily to provide S&T [science and technology] input should be selected for their scientific and technical knowledge and credentials and for their professional and personal integrity," the report says. "It is no more appropriate to ask S&T experts to provide nonrelevant information--such as voting record, political party affiliation, or position on particular policies--than to ask them other personal and immaterial information, such as hair color or height."

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) earlier this year documented what it claims are numerous cases where people nominated to scientific and technical advisory panels were asked about their political views or whether they voted for President George W. Bush.

The NAS report, compiled by a committee of former federal officials, including the science advisers to former presidents Richard M. Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, also addresses federal appointments. The report offers ways to improve the process for filling senior posts, such as the top science slots at federal departments.

John H. Marburger III, science adviser to President Bush and director of the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP), called the report "a useful guide to improving the federal appointment process."

John E. Porter, a Washington lawyer and former congressman who chaired the committee that wrote the NAS report, says the panel intends to work with OSTP and Congress to ensure that presidential administrations follow the recommendations on advisory boards and S&T appointments.

UCS Chairman Kurt Gottfried says Congress should strengthen and enforce rules governing appointments to scientific advisory panels by forbidding improper questioning.