The New York Times analyzed the partisan use of scientific research, quoting UGA associate professor of agriculture and applied economics Andrew G. Keeler, a former member of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, on the differences between the Clinton and Bush administrations in calculating economic costs of science-based programs. “The Clinton administration got these lowest possible costs by taking every assumption that would bias them down,” he said. “But they were very clear about what the assumptions were. Anybody who wanted to could wade through them.” The Bush administration has been less forthcoming about methodology, he said.
