John,
We simply cannot protect people and wildlife without rigorous and peer-reviewed scientific studies. And as we are dealing with a worldwide public health crisis, it is clear how crucial it is for every governmental agency to rely on facts and the best available science.
That’s why I am reaching out to you and asking for your help.
Please say NO to a new proposal that will keep highly respected and peer-reviewed scientific studies from informing government decisions about environmental protections and public safety.
The Environmental Protection Agency could stop using the best available science and information to protect us and wildlife from harm. This cynical proposal is designed to benefit a few corporate interests at the expense of wildlife and public safety. That’s a cost we can ill afford, especially at a time when we need science-based solutions.
I am alarmed at how this proposal will undermine our ability to protect people and wildlife from toxic pollutants like lead and mercury. Amazingly, the newest version of the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule is even worse than their earlier proposal. By extending its reach to a broader range of data and scientific models, and more types of government decisions, this misguided effort to suppress scientific evidence purports to solve a problem that doesn’t even exist!
Tell the Environmental Protection Agency that less science hurts people and wildlife.
As we are dealing with the life or death consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, it is clear that public policy must continue to be based on the best available science and facts. It is up to every American to speak out on behalf of sound science and stop this dangerous rule.
Thank you for all that you do to help protect the health and welfare of both people and wildlife.
