Tags

, ,

What could be better, Matt Blunt asks, than the appearance of scientific objectivity on controversial issues?  Actual objectivity would be most inconvenient, but our governor knows how to convene a well packed task force.  Two of them, in fact, recently.

One is a task force to study the physical and psychological effects of abortion on a woman’s health.  The members of the task force are all from organizations opposed to abortion, including Alliance for Life-Missouri, and you can guess what sort of conclusions they’ll reach.  It’s all very (un)scientific.  A columnist at the Columbia Missourian takes them to task:

C. Everett Koop, former surgeon general under Reagan, could not determine the effects of abortion on a woman’s physical and psychological health based on extensive scientific research, despite his own conservative stance on the issue. His letter to the president only said, “the available scientific evidence about the psychological sequelae of abortion simply cannot support either the preconceived notions of those pro-life or those pro-choice.” That is as true today as it was in 1989. How can we, the people of this great state, expect a fair and unbiased report from this biased “task force” if the surgeon general could not find a conclusion?

The other task force the governor has created is studying how CAFOs should be regulated in Missouri.  At least the members are fully familiar with the issue, considering that most of them are part of the CAFO industry.  Still, the governor did invite Ken Midkiff of the Sierra Club.  Midkiff scornfully refused to lend his good name to such a travesty.

Matt Blunt is pandering to his religious base and giving Smithfield Farms some political cover.  He hasn’t stepped out of character.