Disclosure Obtained by ATI Environmental Law Center Shows the Wealth Keeps Flowing for Dr. James Hansen
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, October 3, 2011
Contact: Paul Chesser, Executive Director, paul.chesser@atinstitute.org
As it waits for the resolution of its Freedom of Information Act lawsuit ( http://bit.ly/nnKpxS ) against the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which seeks the outside employment permission records of global warming activist Dr. James Hansen, American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center has received the belatedly filed 2010 public financial disclosure of the renowned director of the NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
ATI obtained Dr. Hansen’s Form SF 278, which is required to be filed annually, also under the Freedom of Information Act. The disclosure revealed that Dr. Hansen received between $236,000 and $1,232,500 in outside income in 2010 relating to his taxpayer-funded employment, which included:
• Between $26,008 and $72,500 in honoraria for speeches;
• Between $150,001 and $1.1 million in prizes;
• Just under $60,000 in the form of in-kind income for travel to his many outside-income generating activities
The travel reporting marked the first time Hansen detailed such “in-kind” benefits, which included apparent first-class travel for him and his wife on trips to Australia, Japan, and Norway. The new detail raises the question of whether Dr. Hansen wrongly submitted forms in previous years, which he left blank and attested “none” in the space where he is required to report travel expenses taken as part of his outside employment, all in years in which he was busy with numerous paid outside activities of the same sort as he was in 2010.
“Now that Dr. Hansen’s outside income has come under scrutiny, we see a newfound attention to detail on forms where he reports about these sources,” said Christopher Horner, ATI’s director of litigation. “It also shows that Dr. Hansen continues to enjoy a healthy level of earnings that supplement – and for his curious exploitation of – the taxpayer-funded position he holds.”
As ATI detailed in its current lawsuit against NASA in federal court in Washington, Dr. Hansen admits this income began after he escalated his public – and often political – global warming advocacy, for which outside parties have spectacularly rewarded him.
ATI sued NASA because the agency refuses to make public any forms 17-60 – the application for permission for outside employment – by invoking the Privacy Act and calling their release “a clearly unwarranted violation’ of Hansen’s privacy.” These forms would demonstrate to the public and Congress whether NASA has signed off on Hansen’s lucrative activities, even though they raise serious questions under Ethics in Government Act rules. NASA’s withholding of the 17-60s is improper because Dr. Hansen, like other federal employees of the highest levels of pay and responsibility, waives certain privacy interests as a condition of his employment. Dr. Hansen is required to file the permission forms before most or all of his outside employment activities.
These requirements that cover Dr. Hansen include annual public financial disclosure that is vastly more detailed and personal than the one-page application for permission for outside employment and other activities. This is also true of senior government officials including Members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices, the President and Vice President.
ATI expects the media will share its curiosity about Dr. Hansen’s records at NASA, considering they have shown similar recent interest in others’ disclosures. For example:
• The Wall Street Journal‘s recent coverage ( http://on.wsj.com/oqypvi ) about Congress members’ public financial disclosures
• The Huffington Post on Thursday reported that some Democrats demand ( http://huff.to/oBI82s ) an investigation of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s filings and the propriety of his wife’s income
• The New York Times‘ recently published a (serially corrected) 2700-word piece ( http://nyti.ms/pbIpcC ) that highlighted how public servants are “restricted from using their positions ‘for personal gain’ or on matters in which they have a direct financial interest,” and how they “must avoid outside work that can pose a ‘time conflict,’ and ‘detract from [the employee’s] full time and attention to his official duties,’” as those rules “were designed to promote the notion of a full-time [employee].”
“That Dr. Hansen very well may be the country’s first millionaire bureaucrat — thanks to this flood of outside income since 2006 all clearly related to his public employment – raises similar questions,” Horner said. “Given his high profile and the significant role attributed to him in the climate debate, his and NASA’s own record on this front should generate at least as much interest.”
See Dr. James Hansen’s 2010 SF 278 disclosure form here: http://bit.ly/oVJX1e
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
D Marshall says:
“If I had access and friends in high places, I would dig and report on all concerned. As I’ve stated numerous times, I want to see all the cards of all the players on the table and an end to innuendo, speculation and hearsay…”
Lack of transparency is the problem, isn’t it? It’s always been the central problem in the ongoing coverup. The money is just a symptom. It’s the smoke, and that means there’s a fire.
Scientific skeptics are willing to debate, and to share their data, methodologies, code and metadata. But the “Team” hides out from debate and refuses to share their data and methods, because they cannot be replicated and arrive at the same scary results. They refuse to follow the scientific method because it would expose their mendacity. The Climategate emails exposed them for the true scoundrels they are.
The only way transparency can be forced is through legal action, because the alarmist crowd hides out, with Algore, James Hansen and Michael Mann setting the cowardly example. They take pot shots from tightly scripted interviews, but they never put themselves in the position of having to answer unscripted questions, or having to share information requested by other scientists. What does that tell you?
If you know anything at all about human nature, you know that those are the actions of devious charlatans, not honest scientists. So yes, let’s get it all out in the open. In pre-trial depositions and discovery – which is why that dishonest gang doesn’t actually file lawsuits over their trashed reputations, they merely threaten. In a trial, the truth would come out.
So let’s get everything out on the table. The “Team” has plenty to hide, and I want to have folks see what they’re so desperately hiding.
Wow – can’t believe the support of Hansen by certain folks.
Comments like this one: “Oh, you mean civil disobedience like Rosa Parks did, and those gentlemen of the Enllightenment known as the Founding Fathers. Looks like Hansen’s in good company.” are they type of statement terrorists and anarchists use to justify their deeds. Maybe the writer believes the US should still be a British Colony?
There are lots of parallels in history. This is not a road we should examine too deeply and even my comment on it perhaps is deserving of being snipped.
There is a fine line between civil disobedience and insurrection. Arab spring to AGW winter.
Rosa Parks was being ethical. Maybe, but only maybe, Hansen thinks he is, but history will make the final judgement.
Kind of like David Suzuki. He has certain ethics, but in interviews and his autobiography he says he only stayed in Canada because of the money for certain work or he would have moved to the US.
As always, follow the money.
@Smokey Absolutely, lack of transparency is the problem but I don’t support a witch hunt against one “Team” or the other. It’s all in for all of them. And, I’m not limiting this to the researchers, as I want this of the politicians and the movers and shakers behind the curtains.
There was a point made further up the discussion about Hansen being the “top dog” climatologist.
That may be true but his influence is quite limited compared to a member of Congress. He can’t sponsor a bill nor filibuster one and his supposed wealth is a rounding error on the balance sheets of the truly wealthy people and corporations whose lobbyists deck the halls of power.
From here is this hilarious statement:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/03/hansen-rakes-it-in/#comment-758523
“He is a private citizen, your public exposure of what he earns is disgraceful and is nothing more than an admission of failure on your behalf that you have lost the debate on Science and are now moving into attacking the person. epic fail.”
bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
He is the DIRECTOR of Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)
He had made several testable temperature predictions from 1988 onward and has been wrong EVERY TIME!
He is an adviser to Al $$$ Gore.Who has made incredibly stupid statements.Some that has been attributed to James Hansen.
He has been involved in leftist politics and environmentalist causes.Sometimes they are strongly intertwined.
He has tried to ferment violent protests.Writes a fear mongering book.
Here is but one example of his overt activism.That is based on overt and stupid propaganda.
Hansen of NASA Arrested in Coal Protest
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/hansen-of-nasa-arrested-in-coal-country/
He has definitely benefited from his activities.
You can’t deal with the likes of Hansen without taking some drastic action. Several organizations are well beyond the hope of reform so they should no longer be funded by the US federal government. Here is my prioritized list:
1. The United Nations.
2. The EPA.
3. The US Department of Education.
4. The Food and Drug Administration
5. The Department of Agriculture.
6. The Goddard Institute of Space Studies.
Most likely some of you could make a better list, so let’s hear from you.
Rosa parks was arrested for something that was illegal but constitutional. Hansen’s antics aren’t in the same category.
Jeez. 🙄
Has a psychological evaluation been done on James Hansen yet?
Wonder if Hansen received any ” awards” for getting arrested several times?
And to J. Bowers, who equated Hansen with Rosa Parks, your analogy is about as pathetic as Gore’s when he compared Global Warming sceptics to people who don’t think smoking causes cancer.
It’s well known Great Global Gruesome Greasum have many different grades of lubricants like their Big Oil synthetic and now they gush out with The Good Oil. Well not exactly a gusher, sometimes you have to extract it by putting it under the pump of course.
Shame on Hansen.
mpaul says: October 3, 2011 at 5:00 pm “I think what you are missing is that the money is awarded by the foundation of a commercial solar company who has given the award to scientists whose work directly or indirectly advances the commercial interests of the commercial solar company (Asahi Glass Company). ”
You seem to misunderstand completely. Please read:
http://www.af-info.or.jp/en/blueplanet/doc/prof/2010profile-eng.pdf
Yes, the “examples” – with an “S” on the entry above applies to two lines. Never seen example responses embedded in the replies on a form it that way. My bad.
Who knows perhaps Hansen really earned that money? I mean a lot of complaints are pouring in but have we also asked ourselves if “are we there to know what really happened?” And he is the scientist who predicted global warning in an early stage. We must also remember the benefits of that.
Dr. Hansen has started to receive cash awards and prizes in significant amounts only in the last decade or so. He has been studying climate change for getting on to 40 years. When he first started to publish his findings, he was met with skepticism on the part of his colleagues — not hostile skepticism, but the true kind, the kind that actually “looks” at a thing — and the novelty of his findings was not such as to attract grant money. His government research budget, in fact, was slashed several times, by administrations that did not like where his research was going. To argue that his views — which took their general form early in his research — were shaped by the munificence of the dispensers of grant money and the allocators of budgets is nonsense.
I’m stunned that some would defend a full-time government employee’s ability at generating extra income, principally off the back of his government job. This is something you would expect to happen in Greece.
Years ago I was involved in research with the Geological Survey of Canada. Some of those researchers have retired now and have a very decent pension (which they should). I would be upset to learn that they too were double dipping into the private trough while being paid full-time by the public trough while here I was, working my butt off and no pension and the end of the road.
This turns public service into a complete joke. Fire the guy I say. It is unethical – full stop.
Hey if the guy made $1 million playing the piano at an after hours bars there wouldn’t be a case.
Steve from Rockwood,
The first question is whether Hansen has violated any NASA regulations in accepting the awards that he has. If he has, it’s an issue between him and his employer. It’s worth noting that he has accepted nothing sub rosa, unlike a number of “disinterested scientific experts” whose bills are being paid by the fossil fuel industry.
But, to say that his scientific research was, from the beginning, conducted in anticipation of cash awards from environmental groups at some time decades in the future – this is quite a stretch.
Hansen is both a scientist and an idealist. Let’s argue about whether his science is sound or his ideals are reasonable and humane.
But his motivation, IMHO, is above reproach. A guy nearly 70 years old who goes out and gets himself arrested because he thinks that the kind of world his grandchildren will spend most of their lives in is at stake — this guy is for real.
I guess it all depends upon your tolerance for public corruption, or tolerance for the appearance of public corruption. IMO, if this isn’t illegal or unethical, it should be.
It’s true that money usually flows to somebody who already supports the cause. But you missed the point entirely. Hansen is not a low-level employee at GISS. He leveraged his official position for personal profit.
More Soylent Green,
How did Hansen “leverage his position for personnel profit”? Did he make the rounds of environmental groups soliciting awards, etc? It’s calumny to say that he did without proof.
@Jesse Fell:
Is Hansen a policy-maker at GISS, or have influence on policy?
That’s a rhetorical question. The answer is ‘yes’ and ‘yes’ again. And that’s why he shouldn’t accept gifts or be wined and dined while he is still a public employee. This isn’t even ethical behavior for Congress.
If Hansen’s behavior is not illegal or unethical, it should be.
What’s with the error bars in this post?
• Between $26,008 and $72,500 in honoraria for speeches;
• Between $150,001 and $1.1 million in prizes;
Sounds like the IPCC!
Jesse Fell says:
October 4, 2011 at 6:19 am
Hansen’s motivation is not the question here, and his motivation does not determine whether he did anything wrong.
Since Hansen is a public employee and I am a tax-paying American citizen, this is not just between Hansen and his employer.
If Hansen were a private citizen or privately employed, there would be no conflict.
Whether or not other scientists have received gifts or funding from other sources does not matter, but is a common excuse used by children and law-breakers the world over.
Kim Pierce says:
October 4, 2011 at 1:28 am
Who knows perhaps Hansen really earned that money? I mean a lot of complaints are pouring in but have we also asked ourselves if “are we there to know what really happened?” And he is the scientist who predicted global warning in an early stage. We must also remember the benefits of that.
=====================================================================
Some of would say look at the waste that it caused – sucking funds from real projects for third world countries that could have provided safe drinking water, sanitation, housing, health aids, education and actual pollution control that would actually help people instead of funneling billions down a rat hole. My company worked in third world countries for years and the “global warming” business has sucked tremendous amounts of resources out of the system that could have been used much more effectively in the other areas noted. He selfishly looked after himself and his pet project to the detriment to everything else. Send him to Somalia or Ethiopia and have him live in hut made of manure and sticks for a week, where he has to walk 30 km to get clean water as see if his priorities change. You don’t care about pretty satellite pictures and unproven theories when you are struggling to live.
Wayne Delbeke,
Hansen IS worried about the people in the mud huts. It’s precisely people like that who will are being hurt the most by climate change. They don’t have a margin of security to fall back on when the droughts come, or the floods.
The idea that billions of dollars have been diverted from aid to such people, in order to fund Dr. Hansen’s research, is in need of substantiation, shall we say.
I added up the numbers. My eyes aren’t want it used to be but I got 730,395.00 * in speeches and prizes and 54,643.00 in travel expenses including 25,800.00 for either his spouse or somebody “to accompany me”. One of the travel expenses was to travel to the UK to testify in court on those arrested vandalizing the coal plant.
Honestly I’m not sure there is anything wrong with this but I’m saving the link for the next time I get the argument that Big Oil is funding the skeptics. I suggest you do the same.
http://www.atinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ATI-NASA-Hansen-SF-278-2010.pdf
* He included 75.00 in expenses here. I don’t know why they aren’t on the expense sheet but it’s not enough to worry about.