In the fall of 2002, reports surfaced that the Bush Administration was manipulating federal advisory committees to assist two important constituencies: industry - particularly manufacturers of hazardous substances - and conservative religious organizations. 

Religious conservatives were particularly concerned about actions of advisory committeees working on reproduction and sexuality issues. In 2002, two committees grappling with genetic testing issues were disbanded, guaranteeing that they would not provide “advice” that the Administration would not want to hear. These committees, the National Human Research Protections Advisory Committee and DHHS’s Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, were working on solutions to the problems associated with genetic testing and research; the solutions apparently conflicted with religious views of political constituencies. (Click here to read more.) In another example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considered nominating Dr. W. David Hager to chair the FDA Reproductive Health Drug Advisory Panel, among the responsibilities of which were recommendations related to contraception. Dr. Hager was known for encouraging prayer to alleviate symptoms of premenstrual syndrome and for refusing to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. After objections from scientists and several public interest organizations, Dr. Hager was appointed as a member - rather than the Chair - of the panel.

Industry pays particular attention to advisory committees working on pollution and hazardous substance issues. Groups accused the Bush Administration of manipulating activities in two federal committees advising the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH).

• Several well-respected scientists were dropped from the Pediatric Lead Poisoning Prevention Panel. Nominees suggested by staff scientists at CDC were rejected and replaced by individuals who later reported that the lead industry had contacted them initially to ask if they would be willing to serve on the committee. (Click here to read more.)
• Scientists employed by the chemical industry or industry advocacy groups, including the Heritage Foundation and the Annapolis Institute (established in 1993 by the National Association of Manufacturers to challenge EPA proposed regulations) replaced 15 of 18 renowned university-based scientists on the advisory committe to the Director of NCEH. (Click here to read more.)

An editorial to Science magazine, "Advice Without Dissent" (Michaels et al 2002) highlighted these examples of politicization of advisory committees and raised concern about the likelihood of regulatory paralysis resulting from such shifts in federal advisory committee structure and process.

Read more:

History and role of federal advisory committees.

Additional reports of Federal Advisory Committee manipulation.

Administration response.

Recommendations for reform.

Additional Resources