Yesterday the National Research Council released a report on the presidential appointments in areas of science and technology, including the empanelment of science advisory committees.

The report recommends, “It is inappropriate to ask [prospective panelists] to provide nonrelevant information, such as voting record, political-party affiliation, or position on particular policies.” The NRC justifies this position, in part, with the following statement:

” … even for committee member selected for reasons unrelated to expertise, political-party affiliation and voting record do not necessarily predict their position on particular policies and should not be used as a means to balance committee perspectives.”

This is an incredible statement coming from an NRC committee that is obviously carefully selected to maintain a political balance in its membership. Unless the NRC is suggesting that political and policy positions should be considered only in smoky back rooms, they are suggesting that expertise and politics/policy can be cleanly separated, and that the former are “nonrelevant” – a position in all of its dimensions well-understood to be utopian or delusional by those folks who study such things in the STS community.

The NRC recommendation is a recipie for continued politicization of science in the advisory commmittee empanelment process.