Political interference with science agencies by the first Trump administration
[citation needed] He sometimes claimed that there was a "deep state" conspiracy among federal scientists, whose members delayed approval of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments because they wanted to hurt him politically or prevent his re-election.
[7] On February 25, 2020, in the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, a senior official with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said publicly that the spread of the virus in the U.S. was inevitable.
[2][11][12] In May 2020, according to documents released in April 2022 by the United States House Select Oversight Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, the Trump administration overruled the CDC's proposed guidelines for religious organizations.
[17][18] Two weeks later, she was abruptly dismissed from the position, reportedly due to repeated clashes with the Agency's staff and a lack of aptitude for communicating in the medical and scientific field.
However, weeks before the election the program was reported to be "sputtering," because most of the targeted celebrities refused to participate and because the video firm hired to carry out the project, headed by a business partner of Caputo, had no prior experience with public health campaigns.
[25] It was also reported that celebrities suggested for the announcements were vetted for their political opinions before being approached; if they had ever criticized Trump or expressed support for President Barack Obama, gay rights, or same-sex marriage they were ruled out.
[16] On June 30 Alexander strongly criticized an interview by Anne Schuchat, principal deputy director of the CDC, in which she described the extent of the pandemic and urged Americans to wear masks.
[28] In an interview with the Toronto-based Globe and Mail after his departure from HHS, Alexander defended his actions, stating that he had wanted the CDC to make their reports "more upbeat so that people would feel more confident going out and spending money", and that he "did not think agencies should contradict any president's policy".
The updated website now states that "the body of evidence is growing that children of all ages are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and contrary to early reports might play a role in transmission.
But in April the White House, at the urging and under the direction of senior economic advisor Peter Navarro, set aside those limitations and ordered that 23 million hydroxychloroquine tablets from the Strategic National Stockpile of drugs be released to a dozen states.
[52] In September, the CDC drafted an order that would require passengers and employees to wear masks on all forms of public and commercial transportation in the United States, including airplanes, trains, buses, subways, and transit hubs.
[60] White House advisor Scott Atlas opposed closure of schools and businesses, saying the best approach was to promote "population immunity" by letting younger people get the virus while protecting the most vulnerable.
[66] After the meeting he tweeted that he had met with the group to obtain "diverse scientific perspectives", adding that "We heard strong reinforcement of the Trump Administration’s strategy of aggressively protecting the vulnerable while opening schools and the workplace.
"[66] On October 19, The Washington Post reported that Atlas had consolidated his control over the White House coronavirus task force, sidelining other physicians including Birx, Fauci, Redfield, and Hahn, and challenging their analyses and recommendations.
[89] Current and former employees of the ERS were strongly critical of the relocation to Kansas City and other Trump administration policies, and the exodus of scientific and economic talent and disruption to federal research (especially on climate change and food security) that they had caused.
Starting in summer 2020, some of the boxes included a letter signed by Trump, recommending coronavirus precautions and concluding "Together we will overcome this challenge, and our Nation will emerge from this crisis stronger than ever before.
[104] On September 6, NOAA published an unsigned statement in support of Trump's initial claim, saying that NHC models "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama.
[123][better source needed] Although there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades due to human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, Trump claimed that scientists are divided on the causes of climate change.
The administrator added that such analyses typically take months or years and are supported by research and a paper trail, but "This repeal process is political staff giving verbal directions to get the outcome they want, essentially overnight.
[128] By placing his dissent on the official agency record, Sinks signaled that Trump political appointees had dismissed career scientists' views on the proposal, and provided the Biden administration with evidence to repeal the rule.
"[133] Fauci added that he did not "take any great pleasure in contradicting" Trump, but felt obliged to do so "as a symbol to the rest of the world that science is not going to flinch in the face of somebody who's spouting nonsense.
[134] In December 2020, the committee subpoenaed HHS Secretary Azar and CDC Director Redfield for documents pertaining to their investigation, alleging that "Trump administration appointees attempted to alter or block at least 14 scientific reports related to the virus.
"[136] In April, the committee released documents indicating that Paul Alexander and other officials touted instances where they successfully blocked or altered scientists' reports to make them more optimistic.
[137] In December, the committee released a report stating that officials in the Trump administration had made "deliberate efforts to undermine the nation's coronavirus response for political purposes".
[139] In early October 2020, a subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee opened an investigation into an agency within the Executive Office of the President, to determine whether there had been political interference with the government's messaging about the coronavirus.
[141] In May 2020, the House Energy and Commerce Committee heard testimony from Rick Bright, a career scientist who was removed from his position as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) for warning about problems with the administration's response to the coronavirus.
[142][143][144][145] In the complaint, Bright said that his ouster and demotion were illegal retaliation by the Trump administration due to his warnings about the virus, his opposition to political interference in decision-making, and his objections to the promotion of hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 treatment without scientific evidence.
[153] They added, "Policymaking must be informed by the best available evidence without it being distorted, concealed, or otherwise deliberately miscommunicated.... Ending the pandemic will require decision-making that is not only based on science but also sufficiently transparent to ensure public trust in, and adherence to, sound public-health instructions.
[154][155] In the editorial, the journal strongly criticized the Trump administration's rejection of scientific expertise; its attempts to politicize and undermine the FDA, NIH, and CDC; and its decision "to ignore and even denigrate experts" within government institutions.
Six months into the Biden administration, they had not returned, and recruitment of replacements proved difficult – in part because young scientists no longer trust that their agencies will remain insulated from politics.
