The Trump administrations on open access to research

From Harvard Open Access Project
Revision as of 15:32, 23 January 2025 by WikiSysop (talk | contribs) (→‎2019)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  • During Donald Trump's first term as President, I tracked his administration's actions and positions on open access. I plan to do the same during his second term. — Peter Suber.
    • I tracked his first term on Twitter, which I no longer use.
    • I'm tracking his second term on Mastodon. To read or follow my Mastodon posts without a Mastodon account, use the HTML version, the RSS feed, or the Bluesky bridge account. (They're all OA!)
    • The largest part of this page is a collection of my tweets on his first term. Most of those tweets are about OA, but some are about falsifying or politicizing science.
    • I created it for several reasons. I want to help readers get a rapid overview of his first administration's record on these issues. I want to make it easy for me and others to link to all or parts of that history. I want that history online to help understand and anticipate what might do in his second term. I want to help users who don't want to visit Twitter/X. The Twitter/X search engine is in decline and I want to pull together a more complete collection than I could generate from any small number of searches. Although these tweets are still online, I want to capture them before they disappear.
    • When a tweet used a shortened URL, especially one that is dead or likely to die, I replace it here with a living, full-length URL. I leave the original Twitter handles and hashtags unchanged. When the tweets included URLs, I include them and turn them into active links; but in one case (a very long URL for a Google search), I use an active link without spelling out the URL.
    • I'm starting with the tweets I remembered and was able to find. I'll add more later if I find more.

First term (Jan 20, 2017 - Jan 20, 2021)

2017

Scott Pruit, #Trump nominee to head #EPA, sued for blocking public access to polluter emails in Oklahoma.
https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/02/07/lawsuit-filed-against-trump-nominee-scott-pruitt-denying-public-access-polluter

2018

  • April 22, 2018
    • 1/8 Scott Pruitt, head of #Trump's Environmental Protection Agency (@EPA), is proposing a kind of #opendata mandate. @MikeBastasch: it "will reverse long-standing EPA policy allowing regulators to rely on non-public scientific data in crafting rules...."
https://dailycaller.com/2018/03/19/epa-scott-pruitt-secret-science/
  • 2/8 Under the new policy, "EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny....Also, EPA-funded studies would need to make all their data public."
https://dailycaller.com/2018/03/19/epa-scott-pruitt-secret-science/
  • 3/8 Most right-wing calls for #openaccess have been politically selective, designed to embarrass liberals or harass climate researchers. I discussed examples in this 2010 article (+ problem of supporting OA & opposing politically selective calls for OA).
https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4738862
  • 4/8 At first it seems the Pruitt policy is politically neutral. Among those arguing it's not, see Yogin Kothari (@YoginUCS). Some of the most relevant & best-confirmed science on the harms of pollution use private medical records and cannot be made OA.
http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/381485-scott-pruitts-trojan-horse-transparency-proposal-would-undermine
  • 5/8 The Pruitt policy is modeled on Lamar Smith's politically one-sided and Orwellian HONEST Act. See this Google search.
  • 6/8 The Union of Concerned Scientists (@UCSUSA) just obtained @EPA docs via #FOIA showing that Pruitt's push for transparency is highly political. Note that these docs were formerly OA on the EPA web site and recently taken down.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/yogin-kothari/here-are-the-transparency-policy-documents-the-epa-does-not-want-you-to-see
  • 7/8 Apart from exposing the political underbelly of the Pruitt policy, kudos to @UCSUSA for providing #openaccess to the docs it obtained by #FOAI. Too few FOIA applicants take that important extra step.
https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1cE4-gEJOeNxOv5DtZnBHopfNoxoDJ4-M
  • 8/8 The Pruitt proposal is still not public. But Pruitt sent it to the White House for approval on April 19.
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=128011
  • April 25, 2018
    • 1/3 Open letter from 985 scientists to Scott Pruit at @EPA: "We urge you to cease any plans to restrict the types of science that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can use in regulatory decisionmaking...."
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ucs-documents/science-and-democracy/secret-science-letter-4-23-2018.pdf
  • 2/3 "EPA can only adequately protect our air and water and keep us safe from harmful chemicals if it takes full advantage of the wealth of scientific research that is available to the agency...."
  • 3/3 "Proponents for these radical restrictions purport to [care about] reproducibility & transparency. In reality, these are phony issues that weaponize ‘transparency’ to facilitate political interference in science-based decisionmaking, rather than genuinely address either...."
  • US Dept of @Interior follows @EPA in deceptively using the rhetoric of #openaccess to *limit* the science that policymakers can consider. Worse, already in effect, not subject to public comments. #Trump #openwashing.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/409984-interior-implements-new-science-policy
  • [@DavidWojick replied to my post above:] People have a basic right to review the underlying science when proposed regulations affect them adversely.
  • [My reply to @DavidWojick above:] So far, so good, but one-sided. Agencies must be allowed to use all valid science in coming to their decisions. Ruling some out because it isn't already open blocks well-informed decisions. And using #openaccess rhetoric to dress up that obstacle to good policy is dishonest.
  • [In response to a tweet on EPA openwashing] Yes. I've been tagging @EPA openwashing for the Open Access Tracking Project (http://bit.ly/o-a-t-p). See items tagged to date:
http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/item_search?q=#oa.epa+AND+#oa.openwashing
  • Sorry for the dead link to the @OATP tag library on @EPA openwashing. Here's the live one.
http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/item_search?q=%23oa.epa+AND+%23oa.openwashing
From @undarkmag: "The Department of the @Interior is seeking to streamline its schedule for document archiving (and destruction). Some scientists worry about what will be lost."
https://undark.org/article/request-streamline-federal-document-purge-doi/

2019

New @SciAm editorial is admirably specific on how the new Congress could undo some Trumpist damage to science and science-based policy-making. Includes recommendation to oppose the @EPA's #openwashing "science transparency" rule.
https://scientificamerican.com/article/an-open-letter-to-u-s-scientist-legislators/
Despite the Trump admin's regressive track record on #openaccess to federally-funded research (e.g. at @EPA and @Interior), its new National Action Plan talks the talk on good OA policy. See Initiative 3. Now to watch for the details and the walk.
https://open.usa.gov/assets/files/NAP4-fourth-open-government-national-action-plan.pdf
From Kelvin Droegemeier (@kdroege), Director, White House Office of Science & Technology Policy, @WHOSTP: #Trump “recognises the importance of striking the balance of an open research environment & safeguarding American assets and intellectual property.”
https://sciencebusiness.net/news/us-science-and-tech-leadership-has-trumps-unwavering-focus-says-science-adviser
  • Trump's @EPA "is preparing to significantly limit the scientific and medical research that the government can use to determine public health regulations."
https://nytimes.com/2019/11/11/climate/epa-science-trump.html
  • The policy rests on #openwashing. Don't be fooled. For more background, see my April 2018 thread. [Link to thread of April 22, 2018, above.]
  • Update November 26, 2019 See this call on the @EPA by six major journal editors to rescind the proposed rule. "The most relevant science, vetted through peer review, should inform public policy. Anything less will harm decision-making that claims to protect our health."
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2019/11/25/science.aba3197

2020

  • Immediate #OpenAccess to fed-funded research benefits authors & readers. It benefits nonresearchers as taxpayers, boosting the impact of their investment, & as beneficiaries of better healthcare, technology, policy, & education. @WhiteHouse, @WHOSTP, @realDonaldTrump, #OAintheUSA
  • [In reply to this SPARC tweet:] January 16, 2020 On behalf of 210 U.S. college & university libraries, we ask @realdonaldtrump to make #OAintheUSA a reality. Making taxpayer-funded research immediately available gives students, researchers & faculty access to latest and best science to fuel innovation and speed up discoveries.
"The [#Trump @EPA] suppressed the work of its career employees and dismissed legitimate science...dozens of former and current employees have alleged. The employees are asking investigators to discipline the top officials responsible."
https://govexec.com/management/2020/01/career-employees-allege-epa-leaders-silenced-them-key-deregulation-effort/162559/
  • When the @WHO says that #glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic" and Trump's @EPA says otherwise, who are you going to believe? Clue: The Center for Food Safety (@CFSTrueFood) reports that the EPA "relied almost entirely on #Monsanto studies."
https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/5904/siding-with-monsantobayer-trump-epa-once-again-greenlights-roundup
  • Update June 19, 2020. Finally, a federal court orders review of the Trump @EPA decision that glyphosate is safe for use.
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-agency-ordered-reassess-glyphosates-impact-health-environment-2022-06-17/
The White House OSTP (@WHOSTP) just called for public comments on US federal #openaccess policy (for texts, data, & code). Comments are due on March 16.
https://federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
Refs to immediate/unembargoed OA suggest that it's related to the rumored #Trump action. #OAintheUSA
US Dept of @Interior may adopt an #openwashing policy like @EPA. It encourages #opendata (good). But excludes non-compliant research from agency policy-making (bad). At EPA, this ruled out evidence that pollutants cause medical harm (the whole point).
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/484747-new-interior-rule-would-limit-which-scientific-studies-agency-can
A political official in Trump's @Interior Department has inserted falsehoods about #climate into at least 9 of the Dept's scientific reports, environmental studies, and impact statements.
https://nytimes.com/2020/03/02/climate/goks-uncertainty-language-interior.html
  • The @WHOSTP and "govt science leaders...from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, [South] Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, & UK are asking publishers to make all #COVID19-related research & data immediately available to the public."
http://listserv.crl.edu/wa.exe?A2=LIBLICENSE-L;23fe98a3.2003&FT=&P=&H=&S=
  • Footnote. That version of the OSTP announcement differs in small ways from the version issued by the US Embassy in South Korea in the name of the OSTP. Not clear why they differ.
https://kr.usembassy.gov/031220-president-trumps-science-advisor-leads-conference-call-with-government-science-leaders-from-around-the-world-on-covid-19/
  • FWIW, the one quoted in the first tweet is slightly stronger. But it's *not yet* posted at the OSTP web site or linked from the @WHOSTP Twitter feed. Not clear why the weaker one is posted to a US govt site and the stronger one (so far) is not.
  • 1/ The @EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) has criticized the draft EPA "transparency" policy as unnecessary and harmful.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/495115-epas-independent-science-board-says-secret-science-proposal-may
  • 2/ The SAB is right. Don't be misled by the EPA's rhetoric of transparency here. The EPA is #openwashing. I've given my reasons in a couple of past Twitter threads. [Links to my threads from April 22 and 25, 2018; see above.]
  • Update May 5, 2020. "The [@EPA] rule is so flawed that the EPA's science advisory board, which includes several Trump appointees, is questioning the agency's approach."
https://americanindependent.com/epa-scientific-studies-blocked-pollution-air-water-donald-trump-andrew-wheeler/
  • 1/ Here's my submission to the @WHOSTP on strengthening US federal #openaccess policy. The main argument is to eliminate #embargoes on federally-funded research.
https://suber.pubpub.org/pub/apqb1mp4/
  • 2/ FYI, I make public my conflicts of interests.
https://cyber.harvard.edu/~psuber/wiki/Conflicts
I hope that publishers arguing against the elimination of embargoes will make their conflicts public as well.
  • 3/ The deadline for submissions is May 6, two days from today. There's still time [for] your own!
https://x.com/WHOSTP/status/1256334620494229504
If you want to write a comment, here's the original RFI (still using the original, superseded due date).
https://federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
  • [In reply to this tweet from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy:] May 1, 2020 Reminder: The Request for Information Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting From Federally Funded Research closes on May 6, 2020. We want to hear from you! #science
https://govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-02-19/pdf/2020-03189.pdf
The @WHOSTP call for comments on federal #openaccess policy (esp eliminating embargoes) ended on May 6.
https://federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
Here e.g. is my submission.
https://suber.pubpub.org/pub/apqb1mp4
Hoping for White House action before the run-up to the election makes it impossible!
#OAintheUSA
Another false and dangerous statement from the Trump White House.
https://politico.com/news/2020/10/27/white-house-science-office-ending-pandemic-432827
I used to respect the @WHOSTP.
The pandemic has not ended in the US. It's worsening. Our two worst days for new #COVID19 infections both occurred last week.

2021

  • January 1, 2021
    • On its way out, the Trump admin might approve the @EPA's regressive pseudo-open proposal.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/532249-epa-secret-science-rule-appears-to-clear-white-house-review
For my arguments against it, search for #openwashing or see these two twitter threads from April 2018. [Links to my threads from April 22 and 25, 2018; see above.]
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/01/in-a-parting-gift-epa-finalizes-rules-to-limit-its-use-of-science/
  • Update January 8, 2021. "Many observers believe [Democrats] could use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to revoke the rule."
https://sciencemag.org/news/2021/01/trump-s-new-rule-restricting-epa-s-use-certain-science-could-have-short-life
  • Update January 12, 2021. "Green groups on Monday filed a lawsuit in an attempt to prevent a new rule limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) use of certain studies from taking effect."
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/533714-environmental-groups-sue-in-bid-to-block-epa-secret-science-rule
  • Update January 29, 2021. The #openwashing policy from Trump's @EPA might be rolled back before it takes effect.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/536264-court-rules-against-fast-track-of-trump-epas-secret-science-rule
https://washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/02/01/trump-secret-science/
#environment #climate #openwashing
New study: The #Trump @EPA removed public info from its web site, 80% of the time "just prior to or during active regulatory proceedings."
https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Access-Denied-Report.pdf
  • March 6, 2021
    • 1/ Good news: #Biden's @Interior Dept just rescinded its #Trump-era #openwashing policy.
https://nationofchange.org/2021/03/04/science-wins-at-the-interior-department/
  • 2/ Last month the similar policy at @EPA was overturned in court, at the request of the #Biden admin.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/02/01/trump-secret-science/
#Trump → #Biden:
"The Environmental Protection Agency’s webpage about climate change reawakened from a four-year slumber on Thursday morning. Turn to the page now and you’ll see: 'EPA is restoring the science in addressing the climate crisis.' "
https://grist.org/politics/biden-revives-epa-climate-change-site-trump-deleted/

Second term (Jan 20, 2025 - Jan 20, 2029)

2025

I'm starting a #Mastodon thread on the new #Trump administration's actions and positions on #OpenAccess to research.
I posted frequently about the actions of his first administration. But I did it on #Twitter / #X, which I no longer use.
As background to this new Mastodon thread, see my tweets on his first term, which I've collected on a wiki page.
https://cyber.harvard.edu/hoap/The_Trump_administrations_on_open_access_to_research
For updates, watch this space.
#OpenWashing #OSTP #ScholComm #USPol #USPolitics
[This is the first post in a growing Mastodon thread. For now, I plan to use the thread for all my posts about the OA-related actions and policies of the second Trump administration. At least for now, I don't plan to copy each post to this wiki page. To find them, go to this post on Mastodon and scroll through the thread. You won't need a Mastodon account. I couldn't treat my Twitter posts this way because they were not all in the same thread.]