1-13-25 Senate Letter on Nominee Qualifications with Signatures

A group of organizations, including the Union of Concerned Scientists, has sent a letter to U.S. Senators requesting that they reject nominees for federal leadership positions who lack necessary academic or professional credentials, possess disqualifying conflicts of interest, or disregard scientific consensus. The letter emphasizes that scientific integrity—defined as adherence to professional practices and objectivity free from political interference—is essential for managing threats such as pandemics and cyberattacks. The authors provide specific criteria for voting against nominees and suggest a set of four commitment-based questions for Senators to use during confirmation hearings to ensure appointees will use the best available scientific evidence to inform public policy.

• The authors argue that federal agency leaders must value science and evidence to effectively respond to threats including pandemics, hurricanes, and cyberattacks.
• The coalition urges Senators to vote against nominees who lack appropriate academic degrees, relevant work experience, or respect for the mission of the agency they are nominated to lead.
• Nominees should be rejected if they have conflicts of interest that either undermine public trust in their ability to represent the public interest or would require frequent recusals from substantial agency work.
• The letter defines scientific integrity as the use of professional practices, honesty, and objectivity in science, which must remain free from political interference to maintain public trust.
• The authors warn that ignoring or misrepresenting scientific evidence—such as cherry-picking data based on ideology—could lead to deadly results, specifically citing the risk of decreased vaccine uptake for pandemic responses or childhood diseases like polio.
• The coalition recommends that Senators ask nominees for explicit commitments to uphold scientific integrity, ensure scientists can work according to professional standards, communicate research findings accurately, and use the best available evidence for policy decisions.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (2025). 1-13-25 Senate Letter on Nominee Qualifications with Signatures. https://ucs-documents.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/science-and-democracy/Organizations_Letter_to_Senators_on_Nominees.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. 1-13-25 Senate Letter on Nominee Qualifications with Signatures. 2025. https://ucs-documents.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/science-and-democracy/Organizations_Letter_to_Senators_on_Nominees.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=1-13-25 Senate Letter on Nominee Qualifications with Signatures |date=13 January 2025 |url=https://ucs-documents.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/science-and-democracy/Organizations_Letter_to_Senators_on_Nominees.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{unionofconcernedscientists202511325, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{1-13-25 Senate Letter on Nominee Qualifications with Signatures}}, publisher = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2025}, month = jan, url = {https://ucs-documents.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/science-and-democracy/Organizations_Letter_to_Senators_on_Nominees.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }