Comments on: Mau-Mauing the Congressional Research Service http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/02/mau-mauing_the_congressional_r.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Thu, 24 May 2012 10:04:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Allen Thomson http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/02/mau-mauing_the_congressional_r.html/comment-page-1#comment-455 Allen Thomson Tue, 07 Feb 2006 03:08:13 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/02/mau-mauing_the_congressional_research_service.html#comment-455 > Hoekstra's letter is in the same vein of a generalized war on expertise. OTA is the classic example, but EPA, OSHA, the CIA's intelligence directorate and, recently, NASA have come under fire over the past 25 years for imprudently speaking the truth as they knew it. A cynical person (not me, of course) might say that Democrats tend to ignore truth and Republicans tend to attack it. > Hoekstra’s letter is in the same vein of a generalized war on expertise.

OTA is the classic example, but EPA, OSHA, the CIA’s intelligence directorate and, recently, NASA have come under fire over the past 25 years for imprudently speaking the truth as they knew it.

A cynical person (not me, of course) might say that Democrats tend to ignore truth and Republicans tend to attack it.

]]> By: Nick Schwellenbach http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/02/mau-mauing_the_congressional_r.html/comment-page-1#comment-454 Nick Schwellenbach Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:33:04 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/02/mau-mauing_the_congressional_research_service.html#comment-454 I find it disturbing that Hoekstra goes beyond simple disagreement with the CRS and instead suggests that there is institutional "partisan or other bias" at CRS. Though I doubt that CRS will go the route of the Office of Technology Assessment, the non-partisan congressional body that evaluated difficult scientific and technical questions that was shelved by the Republicans in the 1990s, Hoekstra's letter is in the same vein of a generalized war on expertise. It's one thing to attack opinions, it's quite another to undermine the institutional basis for making informed decisions. I find it disturbing that Hoekstra goes beyond simple disagreement with the CRS and instead suggests that there is institutional “partisan or other bias” at CRS.

Though I doubt that CRS will go the route of the Office of Technology Assessment, the non-partisan congressional body that evaluated difficult scientific and technical questions that was shelved by the Republicans in the 1990s, Hoekstra’s letter is in the same vein of a generalized war on expertise.

It’s one thing to attack opinions, it’s quite another to undermine the institutional basis for making informed decisions.

]]>