0:04

One of the ways this

0:06

Trump administration is different

0:08

from the last is

0:10

relatively at least how

0:12

much more Unconstitutional how

0:14

much more organized and

0:16

comprehensive the attacks on

0:18

our Institutions particularly the

0:20

scaffolding we built for

0:22

ourselves the most precious

0:24

parts of our institutions

0:26

of our societies immigration

0:29

agriculture the VA NIH,

0:31

the CDC, the NSF,

0:33

and humanitarian work around

0:35

the globe. Do some of these

0:37

need reform? Of course they do.

0:39

Is this the way to do it?

0:41

No, it is not. These institutions, the

0:43

ones we built over the

0:45

last century that, again, however,

0:48

imperfect baseline, keep us fed

0:50

and safe. And on the

0:52

other hand, help advance

0:55

remarkable scientific progress, they're

0:57

at more risk than ever, every

0:59

single day. To combat this onslaught,

1:01

we need groups who are actually

1:04

prepared to fight back. Every week

1:06

thousands of people ask us the most

1:08

important question in the world. What can

1:10

I do? This week it was, what can I

1:13

do about this attack on science? My

1:15

job is to turn around and ask someone

1:17

who actually knows what the hell

1:19

they're talking about, the very same

1:21

question. Someone who has answered it

1:23

for themselves, who is already working

1:25

on the front lines of the

1:28

future. I found out why they're

1:30

doing the work they're doing and

1:32

what we, you and I, can do

1:34

to support it, to join their

1:36

work, to fund their work, to

1:38

find our own way to the

1:40

front lines of the future. I'm

1:43

your host, Queen Emmett, and

1:45

my guest today is

1:47

Dr. Gretchen Goldman. Dr.

1:49

Goldman is the president

1:51

of the Union of

1:53

Concerned Scientists. engineering, policy, and

1:55

justice in the Climate and Environment Division

1:57

of the Office of Science and Technology.

2:00

and later as the Climate Change Research

2:02

and Technology Director at the U.S. Department

2:04

of Transportation, under Mayor Pete. While at

2:07

the White House and at U.S. Department of

2:09

Transportation, Dr. Coleman led efforts

2:12

to advance federal scientific integrity,

2:14

environmental justice, air quality and

2:16

health, indigenous knowledge, and federal

2:19

decision-making, climate equity and transportation

2:21

systems, decarbonation, and resilience. She

2:24

has provided Science advice and

2:26

thought leadership across the science and

2:28

decision-making ecosystem she has testified before

2:30

Congress and sat on the board

2:32

of the non-profit 500 women. scientists.

2:35

She is a prolific writer

2:37

and speaker on science policy,

2:40

and her words and her

2:42

voice have appeared in science,

2:44

nature, the New York Times,

2:46

the Washington Post, CNN, NPR,

2:48

and the BBC, among others.

2:50

And I'm honored to have

2:52

her here today. For questions

2:54

or feedback, you can

2:57

always email us at

2:59

Questions, not Important.com. Gretchen

3:03

Goldman, welcome to the show.

3:05

This is so exciting. Thank you

3:07

for having me. I'm really excited

3:09

to have you here. Obviously, I

3:12

mean, I wish we didn't have

3:14

to do this. I have a

3:16

now good friend. Dr. Nahit Bedalia

3:18

was also in the White

3:20

House. I just had her

3:22

on the show recently about

3:24

bird flu. And it's like

3:27

her third time. And she's

3:29

like, why do we only

3:31

talk when there's pandemics? something

3:33

problematic happening. Yeah, great. Would

3:35

be so great if we

3:37

just didn't talk? Well, this

3:39

is wonderful. I really appreciate

3:41

you taking time. Obviously, your crew

3:43

has a whole hell of a lot

3:45

going on. Boy, it's one thing to

3:47

show up and hit the job running.

3:50

You're in it. Two-part question

3:52

for you to get us started.

3:54

And yours is so unique because,

3:56

again, same organization, different

3:59

job. Why you? And two, why do you

4:01

have to do this work? So in

4:03

all the ways that you could have

4:06

answered the call, why is this

4:08

an itch you have to scratch?

4:10

What do you have to do

4:12

this? Yeah, I love that too

4:14

far question. So the why me

4:17

part is that I'm a scientist

4:19

that likes to communicate is probably

4:21

the shortest answer. always liked science,

4:23

but the more that I learned

4:26

about things, the more I started

4:28

to get interested in the sort

4:30

of policy and societal elements of

4:32

that. When I was a senior

4:34

and undergrad, a professor wrote on

4:37

my paper an engineer that can

4:39

write your going places, and I hadn't

4:41

up until that point really thought about

4:43

the communications of the side of things,

4:45

but I learned that that turned out

4:48

to be a really valuable skill set

4:50

to be able to do the technical

4:52

work and to be able to communicate

4:54

it. And so I wasn't ready to

4:56

give up on the technical work and

4:58

I did switch to environmental engineering which

5:00

seemed more applied to me to the

5:02

problems facing. the world and I felt

5:05

drawn to do that so I got

5:07

a PhD in environmental engineering and always

5:09

had sort of this mind of thinking

5:11

about what could I do with that

5:13

would be more applied so not just

5:15

being a practicing engineer or better

5:17

scientist but what could I do

5:20

with that and one sort of

5:22

formative way that I determined that

5:24

was in graduate school I

5:26

at one point went to observe a

5:29

court hearing in I was in Atlanta,

5:31

so in downtown Atlanta I went to

5:33

the courthouse and there was a court

5:35

case about it was a fight over

5:38

a permit for a coal plant that

5:40

they were going to build in South

5:42

Georgia and the lawyers were arguing about

5:44

the air quality monitoring and modeling that

5:47

they were using to issue the permit

5:49

and whether or not it was sort

5:51

of the adequate number that you would

5:53

apply to that estimate of pollution from

5:56

that plant and It just was amazing

5:58

to watch because... it was that

6:00

they were talking about my science. They were

6:03

talking about the things that I was doing

6:05

in my graduate work and that we would

6:07

talk about in lab group, but they were

6:09

talking about it in an entirely

6:11

different way. It was an entirely

6:14

different frame and the things that

6:16

mattered and the points you could

6:18

emphasize were just entirely different. And

6:20

it gave me this aha moment of. Oh,

6:22

the way that science is used in

6:24

the world is not how it's

6:26

used in an academic context and

6:28

sort of scientific context. And the

6:30

way that translates really matters for

6:33

outcomes, right? Whether or not they

6:35

issued that permit, whether or not

6:37

that power plant got built, was

6:39

dependent on how it was communicated,

6:42

which was something that the engineer

6:44

was not determining for the most

6:46

part. So that got me really

6:49

interested in policy and advocacy and

6:51

thinking about what can you really

6:53

do with technical knowledge that is

6:55

more impactful for and connected to

6:58

real world outcomes? And so that

7:00

sold me on going the policy

7:02

route, so to speak, and thinking

7:04

about what I could do with

7:06

policy space. So I... moved to Washington

7:08

DC without a job and looked around

7:11

and got lucky to get a position

7:13

at the Union of Concerned Scientists a

7:15

few months into my time here and

7:18

the rest is history. I stayed a

7:20

decade. I did that work through multiple

7:22

administrations and then got called up to

7:25

the Biden Harris administration to do a

7:27

lot of the same kind of topics

7:29

I was working on in science policy

7:32

but do it from the White House,

7:34

and then I stayed in government another

7:36

two years, and then I felt called

7:38

to come back in this current moment, but

7:41

I'm sure we'll get into. That's amazing.

7:43

It's such a fascinating moment,

7:45

and I talk about this a lot.

7:47

My sister's somewhat similar in that she's

7:49

taught at schools in Tanzania and in

7:52

Boston and affected the lives of 15

7:54

kids today, for sure, no question. But

7:56

she's also worked on both Obama

7:58

campaigns and in policy. data science

8:00

knowing like this is much proper and

8:02

it's you know possibly not going to

8:05

happen but it could affect many

8:07

more lives in the sense right

8:09

but you have to have that

8:11

first-hand experience like your live experience

8:13

you know you have to have a leg to

8:15

stand on to really be as effective as you

8:17

probably hope that you could be yeah no

8:19

it's good you need to have the real

8:21

world context so you're back just

8:23

in time I think for some folks,

8:26

I mean, I'm sure our inerting

8:28

listeners are very aware of the

8:30

union of concerned scientists, but it

8:32

really takes on a whole new meeting now,

8:34

at least from the outside. But

8:36

the organization, besides your

8:38

involvement, has actually been around

8:41

for quite a while. I think it was

8:43

founded in 67, 68, 69, some of that.

8:45

Not like a banner time for the US

8:47

by any stretch. But tell us a little

8:49

bit about, so folks can understand when we

8:51

get to the end and say, what can

8:53

I do when we're like contribute to the

8:55

union and show up at the protest and

8:57

legal battles and all that kind of stuff.

8:59

Help us understand sort of why and

9:01

how it started and really how it's evolved

9:03

because it's not like it's been an easy

9:06

fight for the past 50 years either. I mean,

9:08

it's not great right now, but

9:10

you walked back into this job

9:12

knowing the history and knowing what

9:14

it would take no matter. what

9:17

happened. So tell me about how

9:19

the organization started and how it

9:21

is today. Yeah, it certainly evolved.

9:23

So we were founded in 1969

9:26

by a group of scientists at

9:28

MIT that were concerned about the

9:30

militarization of science. So at that

9:32

point in time, one dynamic was

9:34

that a lot of science funding

9:37

was going towards military applications and

9:39

they realized this was going

9:41

to be problematic for the

9:43

world and it wasn't the

9:45

direction that science should be

9:48

going. concerned scientists to fight

9:50

against that. And over time,

9:52

we've maintained elements of that

9:54

work through our global security

9:56

program, which thinks a lot

9:58

and works on. nuclear nonproliferation.

10:00

There's also lots of work we

10:03

do around climate now, food and

10:05

agriculture, the Center for Science and

10:07

Democracy, which is the part that

10:09

I had worked in my previous

10:12

tenure, and lots of climate and

10:14

energy applications as well, and clean

10:16

transportation, I knew I was missing

10:18

one, so. To me, the through

10:21

line through all of that time

10:23

and all those programs is thinking

10:25

about what is the role of

10:27

science and technical information and technical

10:30

experts in furthering policy conversations. So

10:32

making sure that we are putting

10:34

science to work to make the

10:36

world safer and healthier and more

10:38

secure. So that's the general way

10:40

that we think about how to

10:42

do things and one way that

10:44

I. always think about it is

10:46

in the lobby of the DC

10:48

office there used to be this

10:51

cartoon and it was a theater

10:53

full of people and everyone in

10:55

the theater is laughing except for

10:57

this one guy with like a

10:59

serious face and that the woman

11:01

next to him says can't you

11:03

forget for one second that you're

11:05

a concerned scientist and I always

11:07

liked it because I thought like that's

11:10

kind of the idea that we are working

11:12

on and thinking about and worrying about

11:14

the thing that's around the corner. So

11:17

what's next? What should we be working

11:19

on? What should we be trying to

11:21

prevent happening that's bad? How can we

11:23

be sort of improving the world? And

11:25

so across our programs we think about

11:28

how to do that in different ways

11:30

and really have this unique perspective of

11:32

bringing science to the table and leading

11:34

with the science lens as opposed to

11:37

other groups that don't necessarily have that

11:39

as the focal point. I love that

11:41

so much. I think I need

11:43

that cartoon. I mean, my professors

11:45

did not write that on my

11:47

paper when I was, you know,

11:50

a religious studies major at Colgate,

11:52

which applies to nothing I do

11:54

except, you know, understanding

11:56

how people in societies

11:59

tick. But... Now that I've been doing

12:01

this for so long and working on

12:03

policy stuff and philanthropy stuff and investing

12:05

stuff and all these different things and

12:08

keeping abreast of the news and all

12:10

that, I feel like Homer Simpson sometimes,

12:12

you know, out with friends and everyone's

12:14

like, oh, what a warm winter day. And I'm

12:16

like, don't fucking say it. Don't ruin

12:18

this for them. They're having a nice

12:20

day. Be somebody different right now, basically.

12:23

Yeah. Yeah. That is the funniest part

12:25

with it. Someone just thinks that you're

12:27

doing a small talk about it. because

12:29

we can. Yeah, no, no, no. I

12:31

truly, I will offer that primer about

12:33

most things. The other day, Dead Bird

12:36

on our deck. And my kids are

12:38

like, oh, there's a dead bird. I'm

12:40

like, don't touch it. And they're like,

12:42

why? I'm like, how much time do

12:44

you have? Oh my gosh. Yeah, our

12:46

kids just immediately roll their eyes or

12:49

leave the room because we're like, well,

12:51

actually, go into whatever science. So they're

12:53

like, please stop. It's

13:00

Quinn. Maybe you're like me and

13:02

sometimes you just spiral out. Not

13:05

just because everything is a lot,

13:07

all of the time, but because some

13:09

part of you actually wants to

13:11

do something about it. But I mean,

13:13

holy shit, where to start, right? Great

13:15

news. We built an app for that. It's

13:18

called What Can I Do? Even better

13:20

news, it's free, and it's fast.

13:22

It takes just three clicks to

13:24

start unfucking the world. Visit what

13:26

can I do dot Earth to get

13:29

started. for free. That's all really

13:31

helpful. So, you know, it's one

13:33

of those things where you're like,

13:35

it would be nice if the

13:37

union of concerned scientists

13:39

could just cheer for

13:42

scientific advances, like, hey,

13:44

we've established this really great

13:47

baseline and these institutions

13:49

that work for us

13:51

and obviously everything is imperfect,

13:53

but we're doing our best

13:56

and where it's measurable and

13:58

We're helping the greatest number. people.

14:00

Now let's like, let's really reach

14:02

her stuff instead of being

14:04

on the defensive all the time. But

14:06

like you said, all you have to do

14:09

is show up at one court case to

14:11

understand like, whoa! Like, this can

14:13

be spun any which way, right?

14:15

It's like when you see the thing

14:17

online and some guys lecturing a woman

14:19

about, you know, a book and she's

14:22

like, I wrote the book, that's my

14:24

book. Yeah, you know, thank you so

14:26

much. Yeah, I mean, I will say

14:28

it's not all defensive. the positive vision,

14:31

sort of what would we do if

14:33

given the opportunity? And that is a

14:35

really critical role. You could play in

14:37

NGOs because often, you know, the people

14:39

in decision-making power either don't have time

14:42

to think about it or it's something

14:44

that's really moving and you don't have

14:46

time to develop some new policy and

14:48

talk to stakeholders and so you really

14:51

need something that's ready to go. And

14:53

actually one example of this that I

14:55

really liked is in my UCS tenure

14:57

I worked on the Air Quality Public

15:00

Health Act, which was, it was a

15:02

proposed bill. It was like, it was a

15:04

really neat idea. It was like, looking

15:06

at putting monitors at the fence

15:08

line of facilities, because one sort

15:10

of challenge with the Clean Air

15:12

Act is that there's not a

15:14

provision of it that very well

15:16

covers communities living next to sources.

15:18

You mean cancer rally? Yeah, exactly,

15:21

exactly. So it's kind of, you know,

15:23

we just place monitors, we want the

15:25

center city, we want to know what

15:27

the average person is exposed to. So we're

15:29

sort of intentionally by design, not trying

15:31

to find out what people in Cancer

15:34

Alley are exposed to. And so that's

15:36

sort of this legal limitation of a

15:38

clean air act. And so this bill

15:40

was to specifically add monitoring at the

15:42

fence line of facilities, monitors in communities,

15:45

and then specifically give that the regulatory

15:47

T. put it into the Clean Air

15:49

Act so that you could actually address

15:51

the problem because it would have the

15:53

teeth to do something about it. And,

15:56

you know, at the time it wasn't

15:58

really going to move quickly. and Congress,

16:00

but then the inflation reduction act happened

16:02

and that was, you might remember, it

16:05

was sort of, no one really knew

16:07

it was moving, they sort of was

16:09

kind of like quiet talks and then

16:11

they just suddenly said, surprise, we have

16:14

this giant bill, our law, and that

16:16

Air Quality Public Health Act had been

16:18

pulled in because it was already this

16:20

nice beautiful. Sure. Idea that was already

16:22

developed. And so when that was moving

16:25

quick, they could pick it up. And

16:27

so, you know, you don't know, and

16:29

those kind of opportunities will come

16:31

up. So it's good to do

16:33

the positive visioning, even if you

16:35

don't see the pathway yet. Well,

16:38

and that's the thing, you know,

16:40

if you've never even been adjacent

16:42

to policy at any level, you

16:44

don't totally understand, you know, the

16:47

version of that is like, like, how

16:49

many policy walks. at any given moment,

16:51

right? And having your ready to go

16:53

printed, like laminated on the front, slip

16:56

it in, like, sure, fuck it, we'll

16:58

do that one too. It's amazing, you

17:00

know, because somebody somewhere was like, hold

17:02

on a minute, I've got exactly this.

17:04

So 13 years ago, you gave a

17:07

speech at Georgia Tech graduation,

17:09

and you talked about how easy would have

17:11

been for your class to focus exclusively

17:13

on the grades, but how in

17:15

addition they. fronted more student

17:17

organizations than ever before, and

17:20

found time and really measurable

17:22

ways to contribute

17:24

hyperlocally around campus. And

17:27

you talked about how important it

17:29

is to learn how to

17:31

solve problems, to identify areas

17:33

of need, and to react. In

17:35

the last 10 days, you've let

17:37

a stand up for Science March,

17:40

you suing the so-called Department of

17:42

Government Efficiency, and it's Monday

17:44

at 430. So. How have you taken

17:46

those lessons in that mindset of

17:49

it can't just be about knocking out

17:51

papers of the right? It's got to

17:53

really apply that. How do you see that

17:55

now as the leader of this organization

17:57

aspiring new folks to sign? we're

18:00

going to apply this lawsuit here, we're going

18:02

to front this march, we're going to do

18:04

these to certain things. Where do you identify

18:06

the need to react when there's need

18:08

everywhere? Yeah, yeah, it's such a good question

18:10

because I'm not in danger of being bored

18:12

in this moment, right? Yeah, so to bring it

18:15

back to the Georgia Tech days for a second,

18:17

I think one thing I sort of learned there

18:19

is that you sort of have to... sit with

18:21

problems, which of course you kind of learn

18:23

that in any PhD program where you just

18:25

got to sit within it because it's not

18:27

going to be obvious and it's not some

18:29

sober bullet on anything you're working on. And

18:31

my advisor did a good job of modeling

18:34

that for me, like he would let me

18:36

sort of see him think basically work through

18:38

something and figure something out, like he

18:40

didn't just say come back when I

18:42

figured it out, you know, but he

18:45

allowed me to sort of see him.

18:47

be vulnerable and work on things. So

18:49

it was great for sort of me

18:52

understanding that it's not that people are

18:54

geniuses, it's that you sit with a

18:56

problem and you work on it and

18:58

you think through what possibilities could

19:00

be. And so that sort of

19:02

set me on that journey of

19:05

sort of thinking about you just

19:07

got to work through it and

19:09

it's just the only way that

19:11

I'm thinking about it is sort

19:13

of... I mean, one, just where

19:15

can we play a unique role

19:17

given there's various people in various

19:19

capacities on this challenge? And what

19:22

is our expertise and what are

19:24

our skill sets and where are

19:26

we sort of set up to

19:28

do? So that certainly. huge factor

19:30

and I would say at the

19:32

same time we're of course in

19:35

this really unique moment with the

19:37

Trump administration not following the rules

19:39

right whether those are formal rules

19:42

i.e. laws or you know processes

19:44

norms ways of doing policy that

19:46

since the founding of the country

19:48

we've adhered to right and so

19:51

given that environment We do need

19:53

to think differently, think bigger, look

19:55

at what's in front of us

19:58

and try different tactics because... it's

20:00

not, we can't apply the same

20:02

playbook to this new context in

20:04

lots of ways because it is

20:07

just a different game and I

20:09

think that's both because of the

20:11

actions that they're taking and also

20:14

because of wanting to really be

20:16

thoughtful about what's. useful for the

20:18

scientific community to do. And we

20:20

often work with fellow scientists, including

20:22

federal scientists and also scientific societies

20:24

and other leaders in the science

20:26

community and thinking about how can

20:28

we work together or bring science

20:30

specifically to that. And so it's

20:32

sort of a different question in

20:35

this era where things that we

20:37

might have done in the past

20:39

like driving a lot of technical

20:41

experts to give a public. comment

20:43

on a rulemaking, for example, is

20:45

something that is usually historically a very

20:47

good action to take and it can

20:49

be really impactful and value add to

20:51

have a bunch of experts weigh in

20:53

on the technical merits of a rule.

20:55

But in this environment right now, right,

20:57

it's sort of unclear. Are they even

20:59

going to follow the rulemaking process? We'll

21:01

see, right, but you got to think

21:03

outside the box. It is a weird

21:05

thing to take charge of this organization

21:07

that's been around for so long, seen

21:10

so much turmoil fought for baseline policies

21:12

and standards and processes and

21:14

reached for better and more science,

21:16

you know, existed 20 years before

21:18

Exxon New, all these different things.

21:21

Like it's been around block, like

21:23

you said, it's so much more complicated to

21:25

look at it and go, okay, we have

21:27

evolved, this is what we do, now I'm

21:29

in charge, I worked on this, I worked

21:31

in the White House, this and this. But

21:33

what if no one's playing by the

21:35

same rules anymore? Right, and scientists are really

21:38

good at the rules, right? You really like

21:40

rules. So I feel like I've been trying

21:42

to really make sure we're not stuck in

21:44

that frame, right? Because it's so ingrained, right?

21:46

And I mean, I guess another way to

21:48

think about it too is I think back

21:50

to our founding and the fact that we

21:52

were standing up to the military industrial

21:54

complex and they were trying to

21:57

really organize and getting their power

21:59

to challenge. that and you know

22:01

we have different forces today but

22:03

it's that same principle of where

22:05

can we be brave where can

22:07

we keep in mind what the

22:09

vision is and not back down

22:11

even against odds and challenges that

22:13

seem much bigger than us and

22:15

I think about that tradition a

22:17

lot and that even though it

22:19

looks different like that's our role

22:21

that's what we should be adhering

22:24

to is speaking that truth of

22:26

power and obviously you're not

22:28

the only ones in the fight. I

22:30

mean, and part of being leaders recognizing

22:32

like you can't do all of the

22:34

things. Have there been, I mean, you've had

22:36

the job from 48 hours, have you

22:38

had moments where you realize, well, can

22:40

we not play by the rules on

22:42

this specific thing? Is there a version

22:45

of us becoming, you know, Gretchen unchanged

22:47

here and doing things a little

22:49

differently? Yeah, I mean, I think that is the

22:51

kind of thing I think we need

22:53

to just be asking questions of what's

22:56

effective in this moment because it. different.

22:58

I think it's also where people

23:00

are that you have to look at

23:02

because if you look at the last

23:05

Trump administration there were people in the

23:07

streets every day there was a huge

23:09

protest and we're starting to see that

23:11

a little bit more now for the

23:13

most part it's been a little quieter

23:16

right it's a little bit different

23:18

overall vibe in the world and

23:20

so It's also this question of what are

23:22

people willing to do? What are people

23:24

positioned to do in a world where

23:27

it just feels different? There's this idea

23:29

and I think it mostly holds true.

23:31

Certainly having children I realize I see

23:33

this in them and I certainly see

23:35

it myself which is the unknown is

23:37

often scarier than the result. You think

23:39

about it like a diagnosis from a

23:42

doctor or whatever it might be or a

23:44

grade? Or don't they show that and

23:46

studies right that people are... People take

23:48

a lower prize that's certain than an

23:50

uncertain bigger person. Yeah. Right. You had

23:52

the first administration come in and all

23:54

these horrific things he had said and

23:56

done to women and people and fired

23:59

and all this. And what's he going

24:01

to do, right? And like he said,

24:03

marching all the time, marching all the time,

24:05

marching all the time. We watched what he

24:07

did, but you know, we had the house

24:09

for part of that, so it was kind

24:12

of held back, we didn't this, they

24:14

didn't have a plan, they didn't

24:16

expect to win. Now, years and years

24:18

of planning, it's much more, I

24:20

mean, relatively organized, comprehensive, right? The

24:22

people that are being put in,

24:25

also we don't have a house

24:27

or a Senate record. an environmental

24:29

justice and cancer alley

24:31

when you have to fight for everything, right?

24:33

How do you keep those most basic fundamental

24:36

fights on the radar while

24:38

you're having to sue this

24:40

department that's not a department when

24:42

you have to stage marches and all

24:44

that? Because like you said, we need

24:46

people in the streets, but also we

24:48

can't stop these things that we're doing.

24:50

You know, the kids that can't breathe

24:52

in LA because they're still oil drags

24:54

every 10 blocks. Yeah, no, exactly. I've thought

24:57

a lot about that and that that's

24:59

like I keep saying it's keep the

25:01

vision is how I've been saying like

25:03

don't move the goalpost because we're now

25:05

in this world where everything where you

25:07

feel like even if you get any

25:09

little concession it feels good right the

25:11

point is still that we need to

25:13

address those big systemic inequities that exist

25:15

and the kids in cancer alley as

25:18

you said and so that's one way

25:20

that I'm trying to think about it

25:22

and make sure we don't lose that.

25:24

And so I mean, one way that

25:26

I do that is also just to

25:28

think about what is our responsibility in

25:31

this moment, right? I could say, oh,

25:33

we're just not going to work on

25:35

that now, but I cannot abandon the

25:37

people and the places and the issues

25:40

that we purport to care about, right?

25:42

So, and, you know, it would be

25:44

with all the... layers of privilege involved,

25:47

right? It would be easy for me

25:49

relatively to say, okay, we're going to

25:51

just work on AI technology, you know,

25:54

something that's more politically palatable in the

25:56

current environment, but that's not what you

25:58

can do if you are. a community

26:00

that has been fighting this fight

26:02

for decades. And we owe it

26:04

to them to stay with them,

26:06

to continue to fight, to be

26:08

loud and insist on that goal. And

26:10

so I think a lot about my

26:13

role in that now, especially as

26:15

the administration is targeting many

26:17

people, right? There's a lot

26:19

of people that just don't.

26:22

they don't feel safe speaking up because

26:24

of the targeting that's happening. And so

26:26

I think a lot about what is

26:28

the responsibility of me and my organization

26:30

in this moment where, you know, we

26:32

are in a position to speak up

26:34

in lots of ways that others aren't.

26:36

And so we have to do that

26:38

in order to live our values and

26:40

continue to work toward that goal, even

26:42

if it's not going to happen today

26:44

or tomorrow. What has been, and this

26:46

feels like a particularly insane

26:48

question, considering. everything

26:50

we just discussed, but coming

26:53

back into this role, what has been

26:55

your biggest obstacle so

26:57

far that maybe you didn't see

27:00

coming? And again, I realize in

27:02

context, that's hilarious and S9, but

27:04

what didn't you see coming that

27:07

maybe you're wrestling with while you

27:09

do everything else? Yeah, it's a good

27:11

question. I think I didn't

27:13

expect it to look so different

27:15

than last time because... My previous

27:17

role, I was the research director

27:19

in the Center for Science and

27:21

Democracy at the Union of Concerned

27:23

Scientists. And so my job was

27:25

tracking federal science, basically, like what

27:27

is the use and misuse of

27:29

science that is occurring under the

27:31

Trump administration. So that was a

27:33

lot of tracking any time they

27:35

had scientific integrity violations or anything

27:37

that happened where they just messed

27:39

with the science and then communicating

27:41

that to the Hill, to the media,

27:44

to... agencies and that it was

27:46

a lot we had it was more

27:48

than 200 times we had tracked their

27:50

attacks on science and that kept us

27:52

busy it was essentially once I forget

27:54

the map I think it was like

27:56

at least one a week for the

27:59

four years and that was a lot

28:01

but now it's sort of you almost can't

28:03

even track it that way because the

28:05

scale is just so extreme

28:07

right eliminating or attempting to

28:09

eliminate an entire science-based agency

28:11

you know that's like a

28:13

hundred attacks or whatever I don't know

28:15

right we're gonna fire 8,000 people from the

28:18

VA and you're like where do I put

28:20

that in the fucking spreadsheet yeah like

28:22

number of it like what it's just not

28:24

you can't like even measure things in

28:26

the same way and It's funny, like

28:28

lately I've just been calling an all-out

28:31

assault, because it just feels more,

28:33

like it's just like, you know, we felt

28:35

like that was happening in the first

28:37

term, too, but now it really is

28:39

happening, it just feels different. How do

28:41

you respond to that? All organisms,

28:43

to some degree, are intelligent

28:46

problems. It's just they've evolved

28:48

to solve different kinds of

28:50

problems. And whole ecosystems of

28:52

working together, that's an intelligent

28:54

social phenomenon. For all the

28:56

talk about the Age of

28:59

Information, we're really entering the

29:01

Age of Nature. Nature's Genius

29:03

is a new podcast series

29:05

from the pioneers. It explores

29:07

how the solutions we need

29:09

are present in the sentient

29:12

Symphony of Life, starting February

29:14

18th, wherever you get your

29:16

podcasts. Are you like, what have

29:19

I done? It does feel like my

29:21

comfort zone, because that was like a

29:23

lot of my career building was around

29:25

the fighting Trump administration. So it feels

29:27

it feels fine. It just in terms of

29:29

the specific tactics, it's just a little

29:32

different because you're not as reliant

29:34

on or last time we did more of

29:36

just following processes, right? We'd

29:38

submit scientific integrity violations,

29:40

we'd sort of. Try to get GAO

29:43

reports like I'm trying to think of some

29:45

examples of things that were like not on

29:47

the scale that now would matter Like you

29:49

wouldn't bother to like do things that are

29:51

going to be well in nine months There

29:53

might be a strongly worded letter out of

29:55

this authority on something Well, that's the thing.

29:57

It's the whole it's like Emperor has no

29:59

close to around and going, so you're telling

30:01

me none of this shit matters anymore? I

30:03

hope a lot of it does. It does, but not

30:06

to them. Yeah, I mean, we'll see. It is

30:08

a little more dramatic, I think right now,

30:10

because the early days they're just throwing

30:12

stuff at the wall and seeing what

30:14

steps. We're sort of seeing the court

30:16

stuff. So I think it could actually,

30:18

the equilibrium could get closer to what

30:20

it was the first time, but at

30:22

least in this current moment, it feels

30:25

like... you got to deal with the

30:27

more immediate elements. And I mean, I guess the

30:29

other thing I'd say, and then this part

30:31

might still be the same, is that there's

30:33

a ton of work that can and does

30:36

happen to prevent bad things from

30:38

happening in the first place. And

30:40

we did a lot of this

30:42

in the first term, and I

30:44

think this will happen again now,

30:46

where... We learn through the grapevine

30:49

something's happening or is going to

30:51

happen and then you can take

30:53

different strategies to push back on

30:55

it, whether that's going to the

30:57

media. going to members of Congress,

30:59

working with people within agencies, and

31:02

a couple times there were big things

31:04

like that, that we got them to

31:06

walk back, and then they never happened.

31:08

So there's a lot of it ends

31:10

up being sort of less seen, but

31:12

it's really critical because it's way easier

31:14

to stop something from happening than it

31:17

is to repair it after it happens.

31:19

On that note, I've been really focused

31:21

on infrastructure a lot the past year

31:23

or so, and how we don't appreciate

31:26

these. someone called them cathedral.

31:28

These institutions that we spent the

31:30

past hundred years from, hey, it

31:32

turns out washing your hands in

31:34

penicillin and rebuilt health agencies and

31:36

CDC and all these different things

31:38

on top of it, right? And

31:40

microships and look, we can predict

31:42

the weather, you know, two days

31:44

out and five days out and seven,

31:47

and all these things. And then you've

31:49

got USAID's work on the famine system,

31:51

right, or the NOAA. They're like, well,

31:53

we're just super gonna sell that

31:55

building. those things that help us

31:58

as a society. get ahead

32:00

of things that can hurt us, right? Seeing hurricanes,

32:02

seeing famine coming, it's easy to be like, well,

32:04

a bowl of it didn't really bother us in

32:07

2014. It's like, well, would you like to know

32:09

why? You know, because we did that work to

32:11

help the people who deserved it there, because

32:13

one life is not more than another,

32:15

but also, it's called public health, infectious

32:17

disease. That's how it works. And we're

32:19

dismantling that. And so like you said,

32:21

it's so much easier to prevent easier

32:23

to prevent these to prevent these than

32:26

to prevent these. pairing to do. We

32:28

are going to be affected by some

32:30

of these things. And you don't wish

32:32

that on anyone, but you can't

32:34

fire half the VA. You can't stop

32:36

tracking storms and things like

32:39

that without there being repercussions.

32:41

And eventually, you would hope,

32:44

despite all the disinformation, that

32:46

people would understand who and

32:48

what is actually being done.

32:51

Does that make sense? To me,

32:53

that's the opportunity right now, because,

32:55

you know, we... have always talked about

32:57

sort of the impacts and connections to

32:59

why science and especially federal government science

33:02

is valuable in your daily lives. But

33:04

now it's a little... easier to get

33:06

people's attention in talking about that because

33:08

of the attacks on NOAA and other

33:11

places where it's pretty intuitive that, oh,

33:13

if I don't have the app on

33:15

my phone, that tells me the weather,

33:17

if we aren't collecting that data, you

33:20

sort of see the impact more. And

33:22

that's one thing that I think, even

33:24

though I think for people like you

33:26

and me, you know, that's probably pretty

33:29

obvious how science is creating a

33:31

better day-to-to-day life for us. But I

33:33

think for people that aren't... thinking about

33:35

that every day or, you know, deep

33:37

in the weeds of this stuff, it's

33:39

not something they really thought about and

33:41

you'd think it might have broke it

33:43

through by now, but I think now

33:45

we're sort of seeing it reach new

33:48

audiences because of the severity of what

33:50

the administration's doing. And so, you know,

33:52

I've always thought in the scientific community,

33:54

right, there's always like this perennial conversation

33:56

about effective science communication and how can

33:58

we be better about that? This is

34:00

the best science communication challenge and opportunity

34:02

that we've ever had because now that

34:04

people are seeing the impact of what

34:07

happens if you cut federal science efforts.

34:09

We can explain that to people and

34:11

we have the year of more decision-makers,

34:13

more people around the country. And so,

34:15

you know, it's our shot now because

34:17

it's a scientific community to really spell

34:19

out why this affects our public health,

34:21

our safety, our security, our well-being, our

34:23

US science leadership in the technology development

34:26

space, you know, all kinds of things.

34:28

And I know you all are very

34:30

nonpartisan, but when like farm subsidies are

34:32

ripped away and again, like health benefits

34:34

for the VA and you go back

34:36

to I mean, I'm dating myself, I'm

34:38

1,000, but you know, the 2009 Obamacare

34:40

arguments and people saying, get your government

34:43

hands off my Medicare. And when this

34:45

enormous chunk of, you know, military is

34:47

a version of public servants, has their

34:49

health care affected in some way? And

34:51

all these farmers where the margins are

34:53

not right at this point, are having

34:55

those subsidies taken away when there's already

34:57

not key protections for workers and they're

34:59

coming for your workers, most of which

35:02

are immigrants of some version. you're going

35:04

to have the ear of more of

35:06

those folks because more people are being

35:08

directly affected than really ever before. There's

35:10

not a lot of gray area at

35:12

this point, right? And it makes their

35:14

job easier. If the Democrats, and again,

35:16

that's not you, have failed to meet

35:19

people where they are in their everyday

35:21

lives in a lot of versions, people

35:23

are going to be hurt and some

35:25

people are going to die and suffer.

35:27

But this is like, like, here you

35:29

go, here's your chance. Yeah, no, exactly.

35:31

And those things aren't split by party

35:33

lines, right? Like the way that the

35:35

federal science supports people, right? Everyone can

35:38

get cancer and benefits from cancer research.

35:40

Well, what is Medicaid cover? Medicaid covers,

35:42

I think, half of births in the

35:44

U.S. So yeah, you can. Yeah, that's

35:46

right. That is not a long party

35:48

lines. Right. And the health stuff too.

35:50

It's, you don't know. and you're going

35:52

to need to benefit from that research

35:55

or opportunity to have access to doctors

35:57

and whoever else. So let's work towards

35:59

a two version of what we call,

36:01

you know, what can I do? So

36:03

we've got this whole app, it's sort

36:05

of a, apex, the tip of the

36:07

sword for what we do. It's what

36:09

can I do dot earth. This is

36:11

this whole app we built. Turns out,

36:14

I didn't know why we were really

36:16

building it, besides it fit in it,

36:18

and it turns out, you know, right.

36:20

Best friend died of cancer about 15

36:22

years ago. This is what came of

36:24

it. But I know what it feels

36:26

like in the middle of the night

36:28

to be like, what the fuck am

36:31

I supposed to do about this? How

36:33

do I do? What do I do?

36:35

I feel impotent. I'm not a scientist,

36:37

you know, this and this and that.

36:39

There's a lot of ways to help.

36:41

There's a lot of measurable ways to

36:43

help. But there's a lot of measurable

36:45

ways to help. But there's a lot

36:48

of measurableable ways to help. But there's

36:50

a lot of measurable ways to help.

36:52

There's a lot of measurable ways to

36:54

help. There's a lot of measurable ways

36:56

to help. There's a lot of measurable

36:58

ways to help. There's a lot of

37:00

measurable ways to help. There's a lot

37:02

of measurable ways to help. There's a

37:04

lot of measurable ways to help. There's

37:07

a lot of measurable ways to help.

37:09

There's a lot of measurable ways to

37:11

help. There's a lot of measurable ways

37:13

to help. There's a lot of measurable

37:15

We're soliciting and publishing 500 to 800

37:17

word first person accounts from fired or

37:19

defunded scientists humanitarian workers etc etc etc

37:21

etc And then the second thing is

37:24

yeah, what can people do with their

37:26

voice their body their dollar? What is

37:28

most measurable to you the newfound leader

37:30

of this? chaotic moment. Yeah, the first

37:32

thing I would say is that there

37:34

are things you could do. So don't,

37:36

if people take away, nothing else from

37:38

this hour that there are things we

37:40

can do that are actionable, that aren't

37:43

working. I think it is. It is

37:45

easy to sort of throw your hands

37:47

up because it's so chaotic in this

37:49

moment and it's just hard to see

37:51

the pathway. But I think that will

37:53

become clear over time and I think

37:55

there are things we can do now

37:57

that are effective. So first, work with

38:00

us, support us, whether that's with dollars

38:02

or time to the Union of Concerned

38:04

Scientists. We are UCS.org and we have

38:06

ways you can join email lists. have

38:08

a separate pathway specifically for technical experts.

38:10

So if you have a technical degree,

38:12

if you are scientists, engineer, etc. etc.

38:14

we also offer opportunities where expertise is

38:16

relevant to that action. So sometimes there's

38:19

more specific things you can do if

38:21

you have expertise in a certain area.

38:23

And that is a way to get

38:25

plugged in at the sort of the

38:27

base level. Right now anything we can

38:29

do to explain the harms, so explain

38:31

what's happening and how it affects people

38:33

in your life, how it affects your

38:36

community, how it affects your city, your

38:38

city, your state. Just getting the word

38:40

out on that, you know, it's a

38:42

challenging media environment right now and a

38:44

lot of people are not it's not

38:46

breaking through and this is the biggest

38:48

opportunity we have for it to break

38:50

through because we're getting closer. It's a

38:52

little clearer how it's affecting people and

38:55

so the more we can all be

38:57

in our communities and explaining that and

38:59

especially scientists I think are really good

39:01

in understanding how their science and how

39:03

technical information affects the world. So one

39:05

is just communicating the challenges and that

39:07

goes a long way. Make sure you're

39:09

communicating that to your decision-makers to to

39:12

Congress. It is of course a Congress

39:14

is oriented a certain way now that

39:16

is they're not inclined to necessarily push

39:18

back in major ways, but we're seeing

39:20

that start to crack. We're seeing some

39:22

members start to push back on individual

39:24

things, especially as it pertains to their

39:26

specific district or place. So anytime there's

39:29

an opportunity to tell your member how

39:31

it affects you, your school, your community,

39:33

in some way, that gets a lot

39:35

further and it gets attention a lot

39:37

better if you're able to tell those

39:39

more individualized stories. And at the federal

39:41

level, there's a couple where we're working.

39:43

on a few things that are bipartisan,

39:45

believe it or not. There's a few

39:48

things that are bipartisan right now in

39:50

Congress. Do you recall what that word

39:52

means? Vague memory. Yeah, and so one

39:54

of them is the Scientific Integrity Act,

39:56

which would codify a lot of the

39:58

Scientific Integrity Protect. that were put in

40:00

over the past couple decades, most recently

40:02

by the last administration. But that one

40:05

is, you know, if you read it,

40:07

you would say this is all very.

40:09

bread and butter obvious things like maybe

40:11

we shouldn't tamper with science but right

40:13

now in this moment how important it

40:15

has been to have things written in

40:17

law as opposed to policies that don't

40:19

have the same weight and so that's

40:21

something that is a big opportunity if

40:24

we can get traction on that one

40:26

so that's a congressional piece that's happening

40:28

right now and yeah and so those

40:30

are some of the big things that

40:32

we're thinking about right now the other

40:34

thing I would say is we also

40:36

do a ton of state level and

40:38

community work and so a lot of

40:41

that is continuing and in some areas

40:43

might even be ramping up in this

40:45

current environment and so the more that

40:47

we can support those efforts some people

40:49

like the feel of that better than

40:51

the sort of federal defense work and

40:53

so there we're continuing to work on

40:55

that we have a lot of clean

40:57

energy grid things happening at the state

41:00

level state and regions a lot of

41:02

sort of transportation transit focus on at

41:04

the community level and a few other

41:06

efforts around there and some work in

41:08

the Midwest around farms and food systems

41:10

and public health. So there's lots of

41:12

things in that realm too and so

41:14

don't forget about your state and local

41:17

communities as well. Yeah we're really not

41:19

with rose-colored glasses but we're really not

41:21

in a pivoting but really something people

41:23

towards state and local you know as

41:25

much as is applicable. I mean your

41:27

dollar goes much farther it's change if

41:29

not progress that you can see and

41:31

feel much more suddenly, much more acutely

41:33

certainly. And, you know, as long as

41:36

whatever that state and local program is

41:38

not entirely dependent on federal funding, it

41:40

has a chance to actually keep going

41:42

in some way. That is all super

41:44

helpful. I'm going to ask you one

41:46

last question, and I'm going to let

41:48

you get out of here. What is

41:50

a book you've read in the past

41:53

year that's either opened your mind to

41:55

made a perspective on something you're aware

41:57

of, but you hadn't considered before, changed

41:59

your thinking. or just open up a whole

42:01

new thing, or it could literally just

42:03

be like a coloring book, or

42:06

a book about dragons, because Lord

42:08

knows, you know. Yes, I really

42:10

appreciate that expansion of the question,

42:13

because it is with small kids.

42:15

I'm not doing a lot of

42:17

uninterrupted lengthy reading, because that is

42:19

not an option of possibility. But

42:22

actually, the thing I will give

42:24

you is an actual adult book.

42:26

Adult book? Not for children. Yeah. So

42:28

I will say braiding sweet grass, which

42:30

is about indigenous ways of knowing,

42:32

which I don't know if that's

42:34

come up, but your show, but when

42:37

I was in the White

42:39

House, one of the topics

42:41

I covered was indigenous knowledge

42:43

in federal decision making. And

42:45

so thinking about how the

42:47

federal government should recognize and

42:49

consider indigenous ways of knowing

42:51

in. federal activities. And that had

42:53

never been done before. It was a

42:55

completely new idea to think about. And

42:57

I had a team at the science

42:59

office at the White House to figure

43:02

out what that would mean. And I

43:04

took that very seriously of thinking about

43:06

what does that mean, what is my

43:08

role, what is the role of the

43:10

federal government in this context. to figure

43:12

out what that would look like. And

43:15

that book, really well written, it's

43:17

really thoughtful, and the thing that

43:19

I liked is that it's really

43:21

concrete between Western academic science and

43:24

indigenous knowledge and how do they

43:26

compare on specific things. So it

43:28

makes it a little more concrete,

43:30

which I found a lot. more

43:32

accessible when you're first getting into it

43:34

and trying to understand what we're talking

43:36

about and how you think about it

43:38

and relative to the way that I

43:40

was trained as a scientist. And so

43:42

just really reading that and then thinking

43:44

about how that applies and how therefore

43:47

I should think about applying it in

43:49

a federal government context was really expansive

43:51

and I don't know if I figured

43:53

it out entirely but I think it's a

43:55

really important thing for us all to wrestle

43:57

with and the idea that science as we

43:59

understand it. in Western society is

44:01

just one way of knowing. I love

44:03

that. It's a wonderful book, certainly, and

44:05

you're right. It's a little more pragmatic, isn't

44:08

the word for it. It is a little.

44:10

It's like tangible. It's a little more

44:12

tangible. It's a little more tangible. Yeah,

44:14

I'll give you that on your grown-up

44:16

book versus adult book. This is a

44:18

ridiculous side thing, but as a parent

44:21

I think you'll find this funny. So

44:23

my wife, this is going to sound

44:25

insane, co-wrote the new Wicked movie that

44:27

came out this year. Oh, wow. I

44:29

know. Very exciting. And one of the

44:31

few awards that she and the other

44:33

screenwriter one was the AARP award. We

44:36

just got done with all the all

44:38

the stuff. ARP 2025 Screenwriting Award

44:40

and they call it

44:42

movies for grownups. And

44:45

my 12-year-old, he goes, oh, you

44:47

got the adult movie award.

44:49

She's like, nope, nope, it's,

44:51

see, that's what they call

44:54

movies for grownups. He's like,

44:56

what's the difference? It's a

44:58

dull movie. She's like, nope,

45:00

nope, we're not doing anything.

45:02

Well, no one will fall to you

45:04

for also just reading truly the

45:06

fluffiest of the fluff at night

45:08

I just literally read whatever nine-year-old

45:11

reads at this point as long as

45:13

it's not too stressful. I can't do

45:15

it. I got enough of that Mostly

45:17

I'm reading dragons love tacos. So by

45:19

the way, fucking stress stressful. Just stop

45:21

like where is the quality control?

45:24

Also as someone with the food allergy,

45:26

the idea of that is so stressful.

45:28

The idea that they'd be like OPS.

45:31

There's funny to you. for one of my kids

45:33

we did a dragon's love tacos birthday

45:35

party and we did the whole thing

45:37

in the backyard and buried the salsa.

45:39

We had a whole thing and all

45:41

the kids buried the salsa. It's amazing.

45:44

You're such a better parent than I

45:46

am. That's incredible. I was just like

45:48

here's a bowling ball. Best wishes. That's

45:50

amazing. Good for you. Hopefully there was

45:52

no one with a salsa allergy. Amazing.

45:54

Thank you so much for this. Really

45:56

appreciate the time. This is awesome. Yeah.

45:58

Yeah. Thank. That's it

46:01

for this week's conversation. For

46:03

more conversations, scroll back in

46:05

the feed or visit podcast

46:08

dot important not important.com to

46:10

search by name, topic, whatever.

46:12

Thanks for sharing. Thanks for

46:15

leaving a review and thanks

46:17

for giving the shit.