<p>The other day a Virginia State Court judge essentially put Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s lawsuit against UVirginia on hold. The AG is demanding documents concerning a former university professor’s work on global warming. The university is resisting the litigation. Shouldn’t this be an administrative matter better left to university officials and the academic community for investigation? I fear that the AG is using the lawsuit as a sword rather than a shield [to protect the public], as they say in law school.</p>
<p>The AG has an axe to grind because of the subject matter of the research. I’d refer you to a few articles in the Cavalier Daily (the university newspaper) but their site has been down for a couple of days. 
You are correct in your depiction of the sword vs the shield. Cuccinelli is a pretty scary guy with a lot of personal agenda’s. (and I say this as someone who considers themselves a conservative person…it’s not about politics AT ALL). Ironically, he’s a UVa alumni.</p>
<p>For others who might be interested, here’s an article from the Washington Post:
<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/judge-delays-decision-on-cuccinellis-demand-for-records-from-u-va/2011/09/09/gIQAXsFOFK_blog.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/judge-delays-decision-on-cuccinellis-demand-for-records-from-u-va/2011/09/09/gIQAXsFOFK_blog.html</a></p>
<p>Budgets are tight in this ecomomy. The people of the commonwealth have a right to know if fraud was committed to gain access to grant money. Mann’s peers in England have made some serious allegations. The lawyer for the taxpayers, the AG, has an obligation to investigate these allegations.</p>
<p>Many politicians assert that there is no Global Warming. Therefore any research supporting a contrary conclusion must, by definition, be fraudulent.</p>
<p>Still, it’s a challenge to ignore this (from the above-listed URL):
“Mann’s work has long been under attack by global warming skeptics … Some of his methodologies have been criticized by other scientists, but several inquires have concluded that there was no evidence that Mann engaged in efforts to falsify or suppress data.”</p>
<p>Glido, it’s because budgets are tight in this economy that Cuccinelli should not be wasting the taxpayer’s and the University’s money “investigating” via an expensive fishing expedition a small grant Mann got about a decade ago. Nobody, including Cuccinelli, is asserting that Mann used the funds for non-research purposes–say, to take his family to Disneyland–so the only way he could have committed fraud is if he knowingly falsified data. However, a couple of scientific panels, including one at Penn State where Mann now teaches, have already completely exonerated Mann of this charge.</p>
<p>That may be true, but the people of the commonwealth did not elect Penn State to be their lawyer. I think the allegation is that he manipulated a computer model. The scientists who made the allegations are not climate change deniers, but climatologist who believe that global climate change is caused by fossil fuel emmissions. If the guy phonied up the research for the purpose of getting a grant, that is a serious charge. I think the fear is that an elected lawyer inquiring into the validity of academic grants may cause a chilling effect on academic research. That may be a legitimate concern, but using public funds is always going to be attached to government accountability. It is not a perfect system, but it is better than no public money for research.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The irony is that most of them are political conservatives. Since “conserve” is the root word of “conservative”, and reducing CO2 production is done by conserving energy resources, shouldn’t conservatives’ ideology be naturally aligned with that? Also, conserving energy conserves money, something that seems dear to a lot of conservatives’ hearts.</p>
<p>To keep this thread from heading into the overtly political, I’ll re-state my question; shouldn’t question’s about this professor’s research been left to an academic panel, or to the agency that bestowed the funds?</p>
<p>Six major studies by expert panels have determined that Professor Mann did nothing seriously wrong, other than use some poorly chosen words in some emails that were stolen from a private account. Those include several investigations by experts at Penn State University. </p>
<p>Cucci is trying to use an old $7,000 state grant (which was probably .00001% of his research budget) to make a claim of fraud. He is trying to raise millions from rightwingnuts so he can run for Governor or Senate. </p>
<p>Cucci is also trying to claim that he has the legal authority to stop public universities in Virginia from deciding to offer health benefits to same sex couples.</p>
<p>This country is racing to the bottom so fast. Instead of focusing on what’s really important, like becoming competitive in the global marketplace and fixing the world’s problems such as global warming and energy dependence, our politicians and would-be politicians are praying for rain to stop drought-fueled wildfires and confusing anecdotal stories with scientific evidence. Grant money is carefully vetted these days for the most part. Grant recipients have to turn in mountains of paperwork. Let’s pick on academic instead of the massive abuses of Blackwater and ilk in Iraq. Meanwhile China is taking our technology, undercutting us like crazy and laughing all the way to the bank.</p>
<p>This is a black mark on the Commonwealth, and not a positive for UVa.</p>
<p>We are one of the few states where elections for statewide office are in a complete off year - not even a congressional election. This tends to mean lower turnout, especially of the young, of blacks and hispanics, and of lower income people. I believe this impacts who is able to win statewide office here. I am not sure if Larry Sabato, a political scientist at UVa who studies elections, has discussed this. NotLarrySabato, a Virginia politics blogger who finds Sabato notable enough to mock, but who disagrees with him on many things, may also have discussed it.</p>
<p>So Virginia not only has a political scientist named Larry Sabato, it also has a negation of him who sometimes covers the same material? That’s odd.</p>
<p>I think Cuccinelli is grandstanding at least a little bit. It’s one of the drawbacks to having elected law enforcement; on one hand, it helps maintain accountability with the public but on the other, you get prosecutors and sheriffs who use their investigative and prosecutorial powers to campaign. It’s not exclusively a right-wing problem; it’s something that you have to cope with whenever you have a non-professionalized system like that. The only real remedy we have is an independent judiciary that can reign in overzealous and grandstanding lawyers when they try to move without just cause.</p>