Comments on: Head in the Sand Science http://madisonian.net/2007/07/12/head-in-the-sand-science/ a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things Thu, 10 May 2012 20:32:56 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Frank Pasquale http://madisonian.net/2007/07/12/head-in-the-sand-science/comment-page-1/#comment-224087 Frank Pasquale Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:40:19 +0000 http://madisonian.net/archives/2007/07/12/head-in-the-sand-science/#comment-224087 Dave makes a very good point re the First Amendment. But the key now is to try to get some sort of durable consensus (maybe even a 28th Amendment) against government censorship of its own non-security-related reports. Just as government works can't be copyrighted, we should not allow the government to release objective, scientific, non-security-related information it deems helpful and not release such information it deems harmful. The article Deven cites is devastating. What is particularly astonishing is how petty and far-reaching the partisanship has become: "Administration officials even discouraged [Carmona] from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization’s longtime ties to a “prominent family” that he refused to name. “I was specifically told by a senior person, ‘Why would you want to help those people?’ ” Dr. Carmona said. The Special Olympics is one of the nation’s premier charitable organizations to benefit disabled people, and the Kennedys have long been deeply involved in it." And of course, as administration officials might also reason, many of the participants can't vote. Dave makes a very good point re the First Amendment. But the key now is to try to get some sort of durable consensus (maybe even a 28th Amendment) against government censorship of its own non-security-related reports. Just as government works can’t be copyrighted, we should not allow the government to release objective, scientific, non-security-related information it deems helpful and not release such information it deems harmful.

The article Deven cites is devastating. What is particularly astonishing is how petty and far-reaching the partisanship has become:

“Administration officials even discouraged [Carmona] from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization’s longtime ties to a “prominent family” that he refused to name. “I was specifically told by a senior person, ‘Why would you want to help those people?’ ” Dr. Carmona said.

The Special Olympics is one of the nation’s premier charitable organizations to benefit disabled people, and the Kennedys have long been deeply involved in it.”

And of course, as administration officials might also reason, many of the participants can’t vote.

]]> By: Dave http://madisonian.net/2007/07/12/head-in-the-sand-science/comment-page-1/#comment-224086 Dave Fri, 13 Jul 2007 03:48:12 +0000 http://madisonian.net/archives/2007/07/12/head-in-the-sand-science/#comment-224086 There's some case law on this from the perspective of the First Amendment and the extent to which it protects professionals in government service from contradicting government-sponsored messages that conflict with their expert opinion (or from retaliation for expressing opinions that conflict with the government's official position). For the most part, the Court has held that there's no constitutional constraint on this kind of government conduct. E.g., Rust v. Sullivan (doctors); Garcetti v. Ceballos (lawyers). There’s some case law on this from the perspective of the First Amendment and the extent to which it protects professionals in government service from contradicting government-sponsored messages that conflict with their expert opinion (or from retaliation for expressing opinions that conflict with the government’s official position). For the most part, the Court has held that there’s no constitutional constraint on this kind of government conduct. E.g., Rust v. Sullivan (doctors); Garcetti v. Ceballos (lawyers).

]]>