The US House of Representatives, now with a Republican party majority, is seeking to make good on its pledge to declaw the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. Earlier this week the House passed a bill that would change the rules for appointing members to the Science Advisory Board (SAB), which provides scientific advice to the agency.

Among many other things, the bill bans the advisory board's members from participating in activities that directly or indirectly involve review or evaluation of their own work. A scientist who has published a peer-reviewed paper on a particular topic, for example, would not be able to advise the EPA on the findings contained within that paper.

The administration of US President Barack Obama said it would veto the bill, which it said would negatively affect the appointment of experts and would weaken the scientific independence and integrity of the SAB.

Andrew A. Rosenberg, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote a letter to House Representatives saying the bill "effectively turns the idea of conflict of interest on its head, with the bizarre presumption that corporate experts with direct financial interests are not conflicted while academics who work on these issues are."

An evaluation by a scientist with expertise on topics the Science Advisory Board addresses likely will have done peer-reviewed studies on that topic, making the opinion more valuable, not less, Rosenberg added.