The Bolen Report is the archive for the infamous "Millions of Health Freedom Fighters - Newsletter," Health Care Crisis Management Consultant, and Consumer Activist, Tim Bolen's RUTHLESS, but humorous, analysis of North America's Health Care System.

The articles begin on this page and continue to another page.  The newest articles are at the top. Click SEARCH to find specific subjects.
 

Return to Home Page

Millions of Health Freedom Fighters - Newsletter Signup

Search This WebSite

Who is Tim Bolen?

Who Are These Quackbusters?

Our ALLIES in Health Freedom

The ENEMIES of Health Freedom

The BROKEN Health System

The REAL Health Fraud

Contact Us

 
 

The Federal "Data Quality Act" Is Our Friend...

Opinion by Consumer Advocate  Tim Bolen 

Saturday, August 27th,  2011

More Articles About the Geier Case

The Attack on Mark and David Geier... 6/21/11

Why Was The Word-Wide Vaccine industry So Panicked Over The Geiers Addressing the UNEP Meeting in Japan? 5/24/11

About Kathleen Seidel - Would You Leave Your Child in This Woman's Day Care Center? 6/2/11

What's Coming Up in the Geier Case... 6/13/11

The Fundamental Issues Coming Up in the Geier Case... 6/16/11

The Vaccine Industry's Campaign to Destroy Mark and David Geier is Failing Miserably ... 8/2/11

The United Nations Invites Mark Geier MD to Lead the Charge Against the Vaccine Industry... 8/8/11

All About Thimerosal - Why the Controversy? 8/16/11

Vaccines - The Emperor Has No Clothes... 8/26/11

The Federal "Data Quality Act" Is Our Friend... 8/27/11

Some Words About Bobbie Kennedy Junior... 9/12/11

The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part One) 10/4/11

The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part Two) 10/13/11

The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part Three) 10/22/11

The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part Four)  11/5/11

WHO, CDC, and FDA SCORNED at Third UN Mercury Conference...  11/7/11

CDC Tells Federal Court -  "FOIA Means Nothing to Us.  We'll Withhold Whatever We Want..."  11/12/11

Want to Keep Your Baby Healthy?  Stay Away From Pediatricians... 11/21/11

Maryland Board of Physicians May Not Survive Attack on Mark and David Geier... 12/4/11

Maryland Board of Physicians Seeks a Whitewash... 12/4/11

The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part Five) 12/18/11

The Forming Alliance  - Health Freedom Movement Joining with Autism Parents... The World has Gone Crazy - It is time to fix it... 2/24/12

Part Two - The Forming Alliance  - Health Freedom Movement Joining with Autism Parents... The first meeting was a huge success... 3/6/12

Mark & David versus Goliath... 4/14/12

REAL Scientific Journals Don't Lie - Mercury in Vaccines is BAD For You... But There is Relief... 5/3/12

US State Department Holds Another (cough) "Mercury" Meeting... 5/9/12

Mercury in Vaccine PUSHERS Not Doing Well at UNEP (4) - Despite Desperate Moves... 6/29/12

Knock-Down, Drag-Out War at UNEP (4)... The Battle to Get Mercury Out Of Planet Earth's Environment... 7/4/12

Tension Increases - Federal Judge Orders CDC to Produce Secret Documents... The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are - And Has Covered It Up... (Part Six) 7/6/12

Maryland Board Fails - They Could Not Stop the Geiers... The Counter Attack Begins... 7/27/12

Maryland Board - Eight Minutes, Fourteen Seconds...  8/29/12

It is no secret that I constantly sell the idea that an alliance needs to be made between the North American Health Freedom Movement and the Autism communities.  I keep pointing out that each community, having operated on their own for years, have developed strategies and tactics that serve them well.

My best argument, made to the Health Freedom Movement, FOR that alliance is simple:  I point out that the Autism community is the best public example of what happens when a social, in this case medical, system goes bad, and stays bad - an issue we fight every day in Health Freedom.  I also point out that the Autism community is LARGE and ANGRY.  Then too, Autism seems to be an affliction of the Upper Middle Class - people who do not take "no" for an answer - and they generally are of the opinion that the government works for them - not the other way around.  Just like us.

My best argument to the Autism community, FOR that alliance is that the Health Freedom movement has separate components that work together, we have a very good track record, we are experienced, and we are used to dealing with the human filth that inhabits the formal opposition.  We know when to put on a biohazard suit, and go into the fray with fumigation equipment, so to speak.

In middle March of 2007 I got a call from Anne Dachel from Age of Autism (AOA) asking me why I hadn't done any articles on the Autism problem.  My answer was direct:  Because, Anne, I said, "I don't know anything about the issue."

What evolved from that was a collaboration between Kenneth Stoller, MD, FAAP and Anne Dachel to write two superb articles for my newsletter:  "Throwing children into oncoming traffic: The truth about Autism" and "The Mushroom Cloud that Caused Autism".

You can read those by clicking on the titles.

Coming to the point...

So, when Ken Stoller MD calls me at home at 8:30 PM at night to talk to me about my latest Autism article "Vaccines - The Emperor Has No Clothes...," I take the call.  Ken is a fountain of information.

Ken's comments on my article centered around what's called the "Data Quality Act" and its prospective use in the situation I described surrounding the State Department's issuance of an unsigned, un-accounted-for, document to the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) on mercury claiming that mercury was no problem in vaccinations.

I suggest you read, carefully, the linked article "Federal Agencies Subject to Data Quality Act"  -  By Susan M. Bisong of Modrall Sperling.  But, for now, let me give you the gist of what you are going to read, because this is a powerful tool for us to use:

"The Data Quality Act (DQA) is an attempt by Congress to ensure that federal agencies use and disseminate accurate information. The DQA requires federal agencies to issue information quality guidelines ensuring the quality, utility, objectivity and integrity of information that they disseminate and provide mechanisms for affected persons to correct such information. It is important for natural resources and environmental attorneys to be aware of this law in the event that a client has an interest in filing a petition with an agency to challenge the quality of information it has used or disseminated. Questions that remain unanswered about the DQA are whether agency information quality guidelines apply to rule-making and whether an agency's denial of a petition to correct information is reviewable by the courts.

I. Background Information

In 1980, Congress enacted the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) in response to the federal government's growing demand for data from small businesses, individuals, and state and local governments and attempted to institute controls over government requests for data. 44 U.S.C. 3501(1). Under the PRA, Congress established the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and designated it as the overseer of other federal agencies with respect to paperwork. 44 U.S.C. 3503(a) and (b). The OIRA is responsible for developing uniform policies for efficient information processing, storage, and transmittal systems, both within and among agencies. Id.

The DQA, which is uncodified, amends the PRA. 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. It was enacted in December of 2000 as a two-paragraph provision buried in an appropriations bill. See Treasury and General Government Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Pub. L. No. 106-554, 515 Appendix C, 114 Stat. 2763A-153 (2000) (attached to the back of this memo). The DQA took effect on October 1, 2002, the deadline for federal agencies to issue their final information quality guidelines.

II. Purpose of the Data Quality Act

Congress enacted the DQA primarily in response to increased use of the internet, which gives agencies the ability to communicate information easily and quickly to a large audience. Under the DQA, federal agencies must ensure that the information it disseminates meets certain quality standards. Congress' intent was to prevent the harm that can occur when government websites, which are easily and often accessed by the public, disseminate inaccurate information. See Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies; Republication, 67 F.R. 8452, 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002).[1]"

There is a lot more to read - especially for those of us contemplating its use.

So how does the "Data Quality Act" actually work?

That's the question.  Despite my intent, last night, to go to bed early and read the DQA material in the morning, Ken had my attention, and I began to read.   Time flew by.

The most interesting article on the subject I found was about the use of the DQA in the enactment of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  ESA management, as required, established an ESA DQA program (see how quickly I can fall into government alphabet jargon?) called "The purposes, effects, and future of the Endangered Species Act's best available science mandate."

The key statement here is the "best available science mandate" phrase in the title.  Think how that phrase, forced on the vaccine construction, would impact the vaccine debate.  Just below I will give you the outline for the Endangered Species Act plan to follow DQA guidelines.  Imagine applying this outline to the vaccine argument.

I.   INTRODUCTION
II.  THE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE MANDATE
     A. Overview of the Endangered Species Act
     B. The Best Available Science Mandate: Statutory and Regulatory
        Requirements for Consideration of Science and Observation of
        Scientific Norms
        1. Statutory Requirements
        2. Implementing Regulations and Policies
III. A BRIEF TAXONOMY OF STANDARDS FOR SCIENTIFIC DATA
     A. Research Science: Replication and Review
     B. Courtroom Science: Relevance and Reliability
     C. Regulatory Science: "Sound Science, " Precautionary Principle,
        or Agency Discretion?
IV.  THE FUNCTIONS OF THE ESA's BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE MANDATE
     A. The Intent Behind the Best Available Science Mandate
     B. The Effects of the Best Available Science Mandate in Practice
        1. Substantive Decision Making
             a. Why Science is Net Enough
             b. Why the Best Available Science Mandate Plays Only a
                Limited Substantive Role
        2. Public Trust and Political Accountability
        3. Altering the Terms of Judicial Review
        4. Changing the Decision-Making Process
V.   MAKING THE BEST OF THE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE MANDATE
     A. Openly Acknowledge the Limits of Science
     B. Increase the Knowledge Base
     C. Build Public Trust
VI.  CONCLUSION

Would the "best available science mandate" mean, for instance, that we would NOT have to suffer though another so-called study where a small bunch of bureaucrats, along with their "stakeholders,"  claim to REVIEW other studies - like the one written about in the New York Times just the other day?  Where was the science in that?

The most disappointing article I found on the subject talks about the two lawsuits against federal agencies that failed to force the agencies to change their so-called science.  The courts, so far, have decided that they, the courts, do not have jurisdiction to enforce the DQA.  Too bad.

However, I read, carefully, the appeals court decisions - and sooner or later some law firm is going to get the argument formula exactly right, and that will be the day that federal agencies will be forced to comply.  Agencie, I think, from my reading, know this is coming, and are complying more, and more, with the DQA requirements.

So, to me, now is the time to start hammering certain agencies with compliance demands.

Attorney Paul S. Weiland, of Nossman LLP,  I thinks says it best in his article "Data Quality Act Provides Under-utilized Tool to Challenge Federal Agency Use of Faulty Information; Four Years After its Enactment Effect of Act Remains Unclear."

He says:

"Irrespective of the ultimate view of the courts regarding judicial review of agency responses to requests for correction of information, the administrative procedure mandated by Congress in the DQA and implemented by OMB and the federal agencies provides stakeholders with a formalized opportunity to ask agencies to evaluate the quality of information they disseminate.  Whereas existing administrative and environmental laws provide stakeholders with an opportunity to engage agencies at prescribed intervals during agency decision-making processes (for example, the Administrative Procedure Act, Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and National Forest Management Act), the DQA provides stakeholders with an opportunity to seek correction of information at any time along the decision-making continuum.  This supplemental opportunity to establish a dialog with federal agencies may prove a valuable procedural device to individuals and organizations that are affected by agency activities."

 

Paul Weiland has litigated environmental matters in trial and appellate courts under a variety of statutes, including the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Environmental Policy Act. 

And, Guess What?  The US State Department Has an Established DQA Program...

You can read it by clicking here.

One more thing.

You can reach Ken Stoller MD at 8:30 PM, or even later, by clicking here, or here.

Stay tuned. 

Tim Bolen - Consumer Advocate

 

 
About Bolen Report Contact News Library Newsletter Signup Search this site Back to Home Page
             

Tags: Mark Geier MD, David Geier, Ken Stoller MD, Tim Bolen, Data Quality Act, Health Freedom, Autism Community"

  Copyright 2005-2011 by Jurimed Public Relations & Research Group  |  All Rights Reserved