Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Data Quality Act

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the not-quantity dept.

The New York Times has a heads-up about a little-noticed add-on to a massive appropriations bill, signed into law by Clinton but taking effect in October. The amendment allows anyone to challenge data published by the Federal government and have it changed or deleted. The main proponents of the law are pro-business groups seeking to tie up environmental and similar regulations by challenging the government's data.

4 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Eyeballs by valentyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given enough eyeballs, all your documents are shallow.

    --
    my other sig is a 500 page novel
  2. Change or Delete the Data? by Angry+Toad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fabulous. Now lawyers will be the final framers of the scientific and technical truth. They've done such a spectacular job with the concept of "justice" that this is only the next logical step.

    Lots of things have been described as "Orwellian" lately, and this just follows the trend...

  3. Final Framers of Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So it is OK that political power groups would remain the final framers of scientific and technical truth?

    I'm usually the last to defend lawyers, but in this case I have no problem with lawyers getting involved in damaging the power of the ruling class to control our lives and create whatever "truth" it wants to perpetuate its own power.

  4. End the War On (Some) Drugs by Patrick+May · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This could be a powerful tool for those of us interested in eliminating the costly, futile, foolish, and evil War On (Some) Drugs. The vast majority of respectable research demonstrates that the harm caused by drug use is far less than the government would have you believe and the harm caused by the drug warriors is much greater. Providing a means for us to challenge the bogus information currently used to support this travesty of justice could result in finally bringing some sanity to the discussion.

    Then again, as the man said, "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal."