Critics Say
President Obama's choice to head the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is an "aggressively anti-business" proponent
of junk science who should not be confirmed by the Senate, his critics say.
By Joshua Rhett Miller
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
President
Obama's pick to serve as the assistant secretary of the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration is an "aggressively anti-business"
proponent of junk science who should not be confirmed by the Senate,
his critics say.
Dr.
David Michaels, a research professor and interim chairman in the
Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at George
Washington University's School of Public Health and Health Services,
was nominated on July 28 to become OSHA's next assistant secretary. If
confirmed, he would serve under Labor Secretary Hilda Solis.
Obama cited Michaels' "tremendous dedication" and expertise
while making the announcement.
According to his biography
from George Washington University, Michaels received the American
Association for the Advancement of Science's Scientific Freedom and
Responsibility Award for his work on behalf of nuclear weapons workers
and calls for scientific integrity.
Michaels
was also the chief architect of an initiative to compensate Department
of Energy nuclear weapons workers who developed cancer or lung disease
as a result of their exposure to radiation, beryllium and other
life-threatening hazards. Since 2000, the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program has doled out more than $4.5 billion in
benefits to those workers and their relatives.
But
Michaels' critics say the epidemiologist, who has conducted numerous
studies on the health effects of occupational exposure to toxic
chemicals, will bring a junk science-based, anti-business agenda to the
post. Second Amendment advocates are also up in arms, saying they
expect Michaels to seek stricter gun control in the workplace as an
issue of public health.
"It's
one of the scariest appointments the new administration has made," said
James Copland, director of the Manhattan Institute's Center for Legal
Policy, which argues that the country's litigation system adversely
affects innovation and safety.
"One
would expect this administration would pick some folks relatively left
of center, relatively pro-labor, that's to be understood," Copland
said. "But Michaels has associated himself throughout his career with
junk science claims that are pushed by the plaintiff's bar."
Michaels' detractors point to a 1993 Supreme Court
case, Daubert v. Merell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., in which the court
ruled that trial judges could hold hearings without juries in an effort
to determine whether expert testimony is relevant. The intended goal of
the ruling was to protect a trial from being corrupted by hired experts
who could sway a jury without proven scientific evidence, with the
trial judge acting as a gatekeeper of sorts.
In a June
2003 paper published by the Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy (SKAPP), which Michaels now directs, the
Daubert ruling was characterized as a "well-intentioned attempt to ensure reliable and relevant evidentiary science." But
it went on to describe the consequences of the ruling as "troubling."
The
paper said that over 10 years, "some judges, in our opinion, have
routinely misinterpreted and broadened the reach of Daubert" and
concluded that "polluters and manufacturers of dangerous products are
successfully using Daubert to keep juries from hearing scientific
evidence or any other evidence against them."
The result, according to the
SKAPP paper, has been a significant rise in the percentage of expert
testimony excluded from the courtroom, an increase in successful
motions for summary judgments, 90 percent of which "came down" against
plaintiffs, and a chilling effect upon plaintiffs since they often
don't have the same resources as large corporations and cannot afford
to "defend against aggressive attacks" on their experts.
Michaels' critics say they fear
he will use his new position at OSHA to seek to overturn Daubert.
"Michaels
is closely associated with trial lawyers, so they're going to try to
overturn this," said Steven Milloy, founder of junkscience.com. "That's
his mission. Our concern is that he's going to take this mission and
somehow implement it at OSHA."
"Trial
lawyers would love him," Milloy said. "He has a junk science agenda.
The standards of science [at OSHA] under Michaels will be extremely
low. If nothing else, he will promulgate junk science-based workplace
regulation."
David Michaels: Obama’s Toxic Choice for OSHA Administrator
[This story was first published at Red County.]
Even as ripples subside after the spectacular weekend swan dive of Van
Jones—the Obama administration’s radical (and radically under-vetted)
former “green czar”—hearings for another controversial White House pick
are on the visible horizon. When the Senate reconvenes, the nomination
of Dr. David Michaels for assistant secretary of labor for the
Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) will be on the
agenda of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.
Unlike Jones–whose appointment could be made by presidential
fiat—Michaels will have to be confirmed by the Senate. Because of
Michaels’ record of anti-business activism and his outspoken views
about the need for stringent restrictions on the possession of
firearms, the Washington Times minced no words in its Sunday editorial: “The Senate should reject Mr. Michael’s nomination.”
Recent Comments