The Opinionator

July 11, 2007, 5:16 pm
An Unhealthy Disrespect
By Tobin Harshaw
Tags: Surgeon General, White House

The Times’s Gardiner Harris reported this morning that “former Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona told a Congressional panel Tuesday that top Bush administration officials repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations.”

Explosive stuff, and it led to some expected responses in the blogosphere, as well as a few that might not have occurred to us spectators.

Michael J.W. Stickings at The Reaction exemplifies the horrified amusement of the left: “Finally a presidency in full anti-enlightenment mode. I’m surprised they haven’t taken the logical next steps and come out against, say, gravity. An apple fell on Newton’s head? No, we can’t talk about that.”

While Nick Anthis, the Scientific Activist, is in predictably high dudgeon. “There’s no reason why we should be particularly surprised about all of this, but Carmona’s testimony is particularly shocking,” he writes. “Without a doubt, this administration has been the most hostile to science (and anything else that counters its narrow, extreme, short-sighted, and destructive right-wing agenda) of any that I know about. This will be the Bush legacy, and thank God (for the sake of scientific progress) it’s almost over.”

Steve Benen at the Carpetbagger Report is more amused by the Bush administration’s response. “Bill Hall, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, added, ‘It has always been this administration’s position that public health policy should be rooted in sound science.’ ” reports Benen. “It looks like Hall made the comment over the phone — so reporters wouldn’t have to see him struggle to keep a straight face. I do have one question, though. After years of heavy-handed politicization, why didn’t Carmona resign as soon as he realized how pathetic the White House is?”

Still, some feel the White House was only following precedent. “Carmona says he was told to shaddup about stem cell research and the morning-after pill Plan B,” writes Nick Gillespie at Reason. “He was talking to a committee convened by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and joined by two other ex-surgeons general, David Satcher, who served under (cough, cough) Bill Clinton, and C. Everett Koop …. Satcher told a tale of political buttinskyism too.”

Gillespie cites a Washington Post article, which noted that Satcher was told he could not release a report on sexuality and public health, “in part because of sensitivities triggered by the Monica Lewinsky scandal,” and that “Clinton also forced out Joycelyn Elders as surgeon general in 1994 after her controversial remarks that public schools should consider teaching about masturbation.”

“On that last point,” notes Gillespie, “just think what would have happened had schools actually started teaching masturbation. Talk about federal overreach! If there’s one thing you don’t even need vouchers for, much less a centralized curriculum, it’s probably masturbation. I imagine that within a few years, American students’ standing in international rankings would have dropped through the floor.”

Dick Polman acknowledges the Clinton precedent, but sees a more disturbing pattern:

Indeed, everything Carmona said yesterday merely confirms what John DiIulio was the first to say, five long years ago. DiIulio, a University of Pennsylvania professor and domestic policy expert, lasted barely a year as director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. His parting shot looks more prescient with each passing day: “There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you’ve got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis.”

Now, those of us who have watched far too many reruns know that Mayberry had a physician of its own, Dr. Peterson, whose practice struggled because none of Andy Griffith’s townsfolk wanted to see him — they questioned his expertize and were scared of what he might have to say. Perhaps DiIulio’s clever line held a bit more truth than even he realized.

----

July 11, 2007, 9:19 am
Storming the iPhone’s ‘Walled Gardens’
By Tobin Harshaw
Tags: Technology

The iPhone has conquered humanity — or at least that part of it willing to shell out $500 a pop — and as we all know, it only works with AT&T’s cellular service. That’s a problem for Ben Scott, writing at The Guardian’s Comment Is Free blog:

The only solution to this problem is a political one. Decisions that legislators and regulators in Washington make now will determine what the internet looks like in the future. The US Congress is holding a hearing this week — call it the iPhone hearing — to discuss the new technology and its impact on consumer choice…

Our elected leaders will decide if there will be maximum consumer choice between networks, devices and services. Will consumers have free rein on the internet, or will they be guided into “walled gardens” of “preferred content”? And — if the disappearing democratic ideals of cyberspace don’t get you worked up — will you be able to buy the iPhone this year without paying hundreds of dollars in penalty fees and handcuffing yourself to a long-term contract?

The idea of regulation doesn’t sit well with Tim Worstall, the popular British blogger. “Actually, I think this is something we can safely leave to markets to work out for themselves,” he writes on his blog. “As AOL tried to create a walled garden and failed, in the medium term those mobile companies which try to do so will …. Perhaps the best way of looking at these hearings is the cynical one: a chance for a few Congressmen to shake down a few more companies for campaign contributions.”

Speaking of consumer choice, Jacob Sullum at Reason’s Hit & Run blog has found a new twist on the V-Chip:

Here’s an interesting alternative to yanking soda, potato chips, and candy from vending machines in schools: A company called Vend Sentinel offers a system that allows parents to pay for their children’s beverages and snacks in advance and decide which items they’re allowed to buy, using a swipe card and PIN number. I imagine this arrangement might lead to a gray market in vending machine cards, as kids with stricter parents pay kids with more permissive ones for the privilege of buying a Coke or a Snickers bar. Still, it puts the responsibility for controlling what kids eat where it belongs, while providing a diversity of options to reflect a diversity of parental preferences.