Senators have the herculean task of ensuring that our nation’s future is in the hands of appropriate leaders. Through the Senate confirmation process, they are responsible for vetting nominees for the most senior leadership positions in federal agencies.
There are more than 1,300 positions requiring Senate confirmation, many of whom will shape policies and programs that rely heavily on scientific expertise and knowledge. These are positions critical to protecting public health and the environment, keeping the nation’s food and drug supplies safe, and advancing US interests. Senators need to ensure that nominees are the right fit for the job and avoid costly mistakes that risk human lives and the health of our planet.
Some positions you may have heard of include the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security for the Department of Energy; the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering for the Department of Defense; Administrators for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Transportation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and Directors for the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
My colleagues have raised concerns already about President-elect Trump’s picks to lead the EPA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Department of Justice, and why the new NOAA administrator must understand and advocate for science.
Appointees’ Science Savvy Matters
Why should we care that presidential appointees know how to understand and apply science appropriately in their decision making? One key reason is that President-elect Trump’s scientific understanding does not inspire confidence, so senators should at least make sure the people running the executive branch have a firm grounding in science.
Perhaps you remember “Sharpiegate” in 2019, when then-President Trump doctored the forecast path of Hurricane Dorian with a black Sharpie maker. He altered the official weather forecast to suggest the hurricane might strike Alabama. Despite corrections from the National Weather Service, President Trump continued to insist he was correct, creating public confusion about who needed to evacuate and where emergency response resources would be needed. This put American lives and livelihoods at risk and wasted taxpayer dollars.
Senators evaluating nominees who will oversee policies and programs deeply rooted in science should vet them for the following:
- Strong scientific background. Does the nominee know their quarks from their quasars or their atoms from their amino acids? Do they consult bona fide experts in the subject matter? Do they check for people posing as experts who are really purveyors of disinformation or misinformation? Do they check the potential conflicts of interests of the experts they consult? A strong grasp of technical material is essential for making rules that keep us safe, for instance from environmental contaminants such as the carcinogenic gas ethylene oxide.
- Analytic skills. The nominee should be able to analyze complex data, interpret scientific research, and apply findings to policy or program development and implementation. Maximizing electric grid reliability, for instance, requires our leaders to integrate data about the costs and benefits of energy storage options considering multiple factors such as local growth projections, increased electricity demand, solar and wind profiles over time, energy generation by fossil gas technologies, and policy incentive impacts.
- Critical thinking. Look for someone who questions assumptions, even questions their questions about the assumptions! A nominee should be aware of the heuristics and biases that challenge all human cognition and set up strategies to address these limitations. For instance, biases that block funding for all federal research that uses fetal tissue put at risk advancements in vaccines, transplants, and treatment of degenerative diseases like Parkinson’s.
- Communication skills. The nominee must be able to communicate complex scientific concepts so clearly that your grandma (and even the President) will understand. For instance, explaining nuclear toxicology concepts is important for helping the public understand why and how to avoid radiation exposure.
- Problem-solving abilities: They should be adept at identifying problems and developing innovative, science-based solutions. There will be no shortage of opportunities to test this skill, especially during periods such as “danger season,” the time of year when climate change impacts like hurricanes, extreme heat, and wildfires peak and collide with one another.
- Ethical judgment: Senators must ensure the nominee has a strong sense of scientific integrity and intellectual honesty, as they will be making decisions that can significantly impact public health and safety. Why? Because lives and livelihoods are at risk. Lessons from prior administrations and examples of anti-science actions during the first Trump administration are well-documented by UCS.
- Collaboration and teamwork: The nominee should play well with others, including scientists, policymakers, and members of the public who are directly or indirectly affected by their programs. The nominee has a particular responsibility to respect and defend the federal scientific workforce because these experts are essential for keeping people and our planet safe and healthy.
- Adaptability: Having the ability to adapt to new scientific developments and changing policy landscapes is a must because science evolves, as does the social-ecological system scientists are working within. Nominees will need to integrate the latest science with other considerations as they decide on the optimal solutions to complex problems.
- Leadership skills: This includes the ability to inspire and guide teams, and to make tough decisions when necessary. The captain of the ship needs to navigate through a sea of scientific jargon, uncertain evidence, and different assumptions and values. Dialogue on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty is just one example issue where leadership plays a critical role in global stability, in this case in preventing a runaway arms race.
- Passion for public service: A genuine commitment to using science to benefit society and improve public policies is a must. Taxpayer dollars will pay this nominee’s salary, so I want them acting in my best interest.
Some of these might seem like “no duh” suggestions. But we don’t have to look too far back to see when a lack of scientific expertise, a lack of respect for scientific methods, or a predilection for ignoring science resulted in preventable death and disease, or profound harm to our planet. For senators who find science daunting, this simple rubric can help to highlight who should be trusted to lead federal departments and agencies that rely on science to address the important concerns and needs of their constituents.