Bill Would Prohibit EPA from Issuing Rules Using 'Secret Science'

Republican leaders on the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee last week introduced a bill intended to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing regulations based upon “secret science.”

The committee will hear testimony from scientists and research officials tomorrow at a hearing on the legislation, but no one from the EPA is scheduled to face Congress.

The bill was introduced by Environment Subcommittee Chairman David Schweikert (R-Ariz.) and cosponsored by Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

“The Secret Science Reform Act ends costly EPA rulemaking from happening behind closed doors and out of public view. Public policy should come from public data, not based on the whims of far-left environmental groups,” Schweikert said.

“For far too long, the EPA has approved regulations that have placed a crippling financial burden on economic growth in this country with no public evidence to justify their actions,” he added. “This common-sense legislation forces the EPA to be transparent and accountable with their findings.”

The bill states “The Administrator shall not propose, finalize, or disseminate a covered action unless all scientific and technical information relied on to support such covered action is (A) specifically identified; and (B) publicly available in a manner that is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction of research results.”

It’s a unified effort by Science Committee Republicans, with original co-sponsors including Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Paul Broun (R-Ga.), Research and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.), Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Chairman Emeritus Ralph Hall (R-Texas), Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-Ill.), Energy Subcommittee Chairman Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), Vice Chairman Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), and Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas).

“Virtually every regulation proposed by the Obama administration has been justified by nontransparent data and unverifiable claims,” Smith said. “The American people foot the bill for EPA’s costly regulations, and they have a right to see the underlying science. Costly environmental regulations should be based on publicly available data so that independent scientists can verify the EPA’s claims.”