He talks about why this particular administration and it’s party are particularly at fault. Part of his answer is the fundamental basis of conservatism, which is a political philosophy that resists change and strives to retain the status quo. Science is all about change, adaptation as information grows.

“The dynamism of science — its constant onslaught on old orthodoxies, its rapid generation of new technological possibilities — presents an obvious challenge to more static worldviews. From Galileo to Darwin and beyond, this conflict has played out repeatedly over the course of history.”

But there’s more to it than just the underlying conflict of attitudes of change vs. constancy. The modern Republican Party has built its power base upon two key constituencies: Commercial Industry and the religious right. Both groups have strong reasons to abhor science outcomes in certain areas.

Commercial Industry has been attacked by many over scientific results of the effects of their behaviors. Companies are subject to governmental controls on the basis of the health and safety effects from their products and actions, so they are motivated to fight the science that is being used against them. So they fight the data, they fight the interpretations, and they try to present their own studies that show what they want the outcome to be. Their economical advantage is in confusing the science and making their own “science”.

Religious conservatives are fighting the appearance of attack upon their beliefs by science (i.e. Evolution), which gives them strong motivation. They are also tempted to defend their moral agendas, and since our modern world revolves around science and uses science to study effects, they try to shape the science to support their moralistic agendas.

There are other factors at work. Conservatives’ distrust of big government gets aimed at scientists and science agencies funded by the government or taking place at government agencies. Also, science gets labeled as “liberal” because of the connection to academia and universities. Combine that with the “educated East-coast liberals” vs. “red state” commoners attitude held by many conservatives, and you can see that science is getting all the negatives from their point of view.

All of these factors combine to place the modern Conservatives that are the strong power base of the Republican Party at odds with science as a whole, and driving them to push their own agendas at the expense of good science.

Mooney does acknowledge that some on the Left are as guilty of science manipulation as those on the Right. He specifically mentions environmental groups and their concern over genetically modified foods, mercury pollution, and even embryonic stem cell research (hyping quick cures). But his emphasis is on the Republicans because their power base currently is more widespread and deeper involved in the abuse of science, and this administration is especially guilty of swaying the facts to fit their own agendas. It is not isolated groups within the Conservative faction, the way it is in the Liberal faction. It is a widespread and deliberate action by this administration.

Mooney does advocate supporting Republicans who show support for science - such as John McCain. However, he points out that so far the moderate Republicans haven’t had much effect in mitigating the right wing of their party.

“The Bush admisistration has alienated and spurned moderate Republicans such as former EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman and former treasury secretary Paul O’Neill, who wanted to take global warming seriously rather than hide behind distortions and evasions of reliable scientific consensus.”

His attention is partisan, because the attacks on science are particularly coming from one party. He is also concerned on a more general level, but feels the Republicans are right now especially guilty and deserving of particular response. His recommendations for action are aimed more generally and applied in an even-handed manner.