It seems esteemed NASA astronomer turned climatologist turned paid activist Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has not been reporting some income that he is required by law to do. How long will NASA continue to look the other way? Chris Horner explains. – Anthony
A Summary of James E. Hansen’s NASA Ethics File
By Christopher Horner
NASA records released to resolve litigation filed by the American Tradition Institute reveal that Dr. James E. Hansen, an astronomer, received approximately $1.6 million in outside, direct cash income in the past five years for work related to — and, according to his benefactors, often expressly for — his public service as a global warming activist within NASA.
This does not include six-figure income over that period in travel expenses to fly around the world to receive money from outside interests. As specifically detailed below, Hansen failed to report tens of thousands of dollars in global travel provided to him by outside parties — including to London, Paris, Rome, Oslo, Tokyo, the Austrian Alps, Bilbao, California, Australia and elsewhere, often business or first-class and also often paying for his wife as well — to receive honoraria to speak about the topic of his taxpayer-funded employment, or get cash awards for his activism and even for his past testimony and other work for NASA.
Ethics laws require that such payments or gifts be reported on an SF278 public financial disclosure form. As detailed, below, Hansen nonetheless regularly refused to report this income.
Also, he seems to have inappropriately taken between $10,000 and $26,000 for speeches unlawfully promoting him as a NASA employee. This is despite NASA ordering him to return at least some of the money, with the rest apparently unnoticed by NASA. This raises troubling issues about Hansen’s, and NASA’s, compliance with ethics rules, the general prohibition on not privately benefitting from public service, and even the criminal code prohibition on not having one’s public employment income supplemented. All of this lucrative activity followed Hansen ratcheting up his global warming alarmism and activism to be more political which, now to his possible detriment, he has insisted is part of his job. As he cannot receive outside income for doing his job, he has placed himself in peril, assuming the Department of Justice can find a way to be interested in these revelations.
The following summarizes records produced by the Department of Justice to resolve litigation against the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for refusing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request regarding the required financial disclosures Dr. James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
These records are his applications for outside employment or other activity (form 17-60), approvals and accompanying documents, and public financial disclosure (form SF 278).
As detailed in the American Tradition Institute’s lawsuit which yielded these records, Hansen suddenly became the recipient of many, often lucrative offers of outside employment and awards after he escalated his political activism — using his NASA position as a platform, and springboard. This began with a strident “60 Minutes” interview in early 2006, alleging political interference by the Bush administration in climate science.
Hansen acknowledged this timing on his website, noting that first he was offered an award of “a moderate amount of cash– $10,000″ by an outside activist group. He claims to have turned this down because of the nominating process (without elaborating what that meant), and because of the impropriety of appearing to be financially rewarded for his outspokenness (“I was concerned that it may create the appearance that I had spoken out about government censorship [sic] for the sake of the $”).
Given that Hansen makes no bones about his (often outrageous) outspokenness and activism being, in his view, part of his job, this surely is also another way of saying it would look as if he were having his NASA salary supplemented by appreciative activists and others. That would violate the criminal code, 18 U.S.C. 209.
Yet, as the offers soon became larger, Hansen changed his mind.
The records reveal that NASA initially was very direct in warning Hansen of his responsibilities and prohibitions relating to these activities, which covered the subject of his public employment. Later, after Hansen gained much media attention and condemnation of his NASA superiors for (falsely) claiming he had been “muzzled” (the second president named Bush he claimed had muzzled him), certain clear restatements of the law were dropped from the approval letters responding to his applications for outside employment.
NASA oversight of Hansen’s compliance with ethics-related reporting requirements similarly waned. At no point did they seek reconciliation of his serially conflicting attestations detailed here.
Improper Receipt of Outside Income Without Obtaining Advance Permission
Hansen’s 2009 speech at Dartmouth University for a $5,000 honorarium and up to $1,000 in expenses came in violation of the clear rule against promoting his appearances as, or emphasizing his job with, NASA. It also had not been approved. NASA’s Deputy Chief Counsel Laura Giza, after admonishing these violations, demanded he return the improperly obtained money:
“[Y]ou may not accept the offered honorarium and travel expenses. If you’ve already received this money, you need to return it to Dartmouth.
“Also, in the future, if you have not received word that one of your outside activity requests has been approved, or at least that the legal office has concurred in the request, you should contact the Goddard legal office about the request before engaging in that activity. NASA regulations require that you obtain approval for certain outside activities…prior to engaging in that activity. 5 CFR 6901.103(d).”
If there were further correspondence about this demand it would be in NASA’s document production, but there are no such records. The only lawful scenario, therefore, is that Hansen quietly agreed to the demand, but did not inform NASA whether he complied. Otherwise, NASA, Hansen, or both have violated the ethics and/or transparency statutes and regulation.
Yet subsequent financial disclosure forms show Hansen attesting to accepting even more money, between $5,001 and $15,000, for a 2008 speech at Illinois Wesleyan University for which his file, according to NASA, contains no request for permission to engage in this outside employment, or approval to do so (each a condition precedent to lawfully engage in the activity, and to accepting the money).
There is no correspondence about these two glaring discrepancies in his filings reflecting more apparently improperly accepted outside income than most federal employees will ever see in their careers.
In order to continue his employment Hansen would therefore be required to bring himself back in compliance with the ethics rules by returning the money, between somewhere more than $10,000, and $26,000.
Although Hansen reported the income from both honoraria, he did not report receipt of travel expenses for him to get there. This omission is a pattern in his filings, to the tune of surely tens of thousands of dollars for airfare, meals and lodging to locations all around the country and Europe, all required by ethics laws to be reported.
For example, consider these failures to report often elegant air and hotel/resort accommodations received on his SF278 as required by law (the amount of direct cash income received from the party providing him travel, as well, is in parentheses):
- Blue Planet Prize ($500,000), travel for Hansen and his wife to Tokyo, Japan, 2010
- Dan David Prize ($500,000), travel to Paris, 2007
- Sophie Prize ($100,000), Oslo Norway, travel for Hansen and his wife, 2010
- WWF Duke of Edinburgh Award, Travel for Hansen and his wife, London, 2006
- Alpbach, Austria (alpine resort)(“business class”, with wife), 2007
- Shell Oil UK ($10,000), London, 2009
- FORO Cluster de Energia, travel for Hansen and wife (“business class”), Bilbao, Spain, 2008
- ACT Coalition, travel for Hansen and wife to London, 2007
- Progressive Forum ($10,000)(“first class”), to Houston, 2006
- Progressive Forum ($10,000), to Houston, 2009
- UCSB ($10,000), to Santa Barbara, CA
- Nierenberg Prize ($25,000), to San Diego, 2008
- Nevada Medal ($20,000), to Las Vegas, Reno, 2008
- EarthWorks Expos, to Denver, 2006
- California Academy of Science ($1,500), to San Francisco, 2009
- CalTech ($2,000), travel to Pasadena, CA for Hansen and his wife, 2007
The following is an incomplete list of other travel apparently accepted to make paid speeches and/or receive cash awards but not reported on SF278 financial disclosures:
Boston, Washington, DC (twice); Columbus, OH; Omaha, NE; Wilmington, DE; Ithaca, NY (business class); Chapel Hill, NC; Deerfield, IL (Sierra Club “No Coal” campaign); Dartmouth, NH; Alberta, Canada (as consultant to a law firm helping run an anti-oil sands campaign), Stanford; Minneapolis; Missoula, MT
Other travel apparently accepted but not reported, to provide expert testimony including on cases involving federal policy:
California (Central Valley Chrysler-Jeep v. Witherspoon), Vermont (Green Mountain Chrysler Plymouth etc v. Torti)
Failing to Report Gifts
World Wildlife Fund gave Hansen an engraved Montres Rolex watch, which typically run $8,000 and up (2006), but which was not reported by Hansen on his SF 278 under “gifts”, which must be reported if valued at more than $260.
Failure to Report Receipt of Free Legal Services
On his website Hansen said he began accepting free legal services in 2006. These are not reported on his financial disclosures, as they should be.
Also, NASA’s document production shows him attesting to receiving more, separate free legal services in the form of an amicus brief drafted for he and a few others to intervene before the Supreme Court in Massachusetts v. EPA. This was not reported on his SF278, as required.
These lapses on both Hansen’s part and NASA demand scrutiny to determine how laws designed to protect the taxpayer are, or are not, being respected.
###
This story has been updated to correct some small errors and formatting issues@ 8:15AM and 9:50AM PST 11/19/11
This would be a crime if there was actually anybody was in charge of this “do nothing” Administration
Anyone that takes issue with this article is an apologist?
Chris Horner has laid out a trove of accusations and provided not one document to back it up. Not one link appears in the article, nor even a facsimile in the body of the text. A real skeptic would ask for some corroboration, but real skeptics are very thin on the ground around these parts.
I’m not convinced there is a case here, as there are provisions for government employees to do private work if it does not interfere with their duties. Horner’s ‘case’ is unclear – is Hansen liable for $26 000 or $1.6 million? In what capacity was this work done? There are a lot of awards ceremonies on the list – did Hansen speak at these or just attend?
An article full of allegations, listed but not well detailed, and the author has a record of filing mischievous complaints and misrepresenting the truth*.
* As I have provided no corroborating evidence for my claim, I trust the commenters here will enthusiastically accept it. I look forward to pats on the back, sarcastic affirmations and outraged extensions on my theme.
California Angel says:
November 19, 2011 at 10:36 am
I do not speak for all, but I think you will find that majority of people who post here do not dispute that humans have to be good stewards of the environment. Stick around and do some reading of this site. You may be surprised how informed the posters here are. Better bring your “A” game, as unsubstantiated claims are ripped to shreds. If you are honest with yourself, that is as it should be. Hint: The Guardian is perhaps not the most unbiased source of information. You have to make sure their information is solid before posting. In other words, do your homework and you will find this site an unending source of information and perspective. Sometimes it is a difficult pill to swallow when you find what you thought were “facts” are merely assertions that have no basis in fact. I am thinking about your “species extinction” claim in particular.
Let me guess, Hansen, who is clearly part of the 1%, is probably taking part in Occupy.
What is it with socialists and made up biased awards and medals, I wonder? Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pot?, jung, Castro, . . . They all granted awards and medals but only to those who saw it their ways and furthered their respective causes.
So why is it lefties never can have objective and unbiased awards and medals, well more or less at the very least, like OS, or the pulitzer or even the nobel prizes (excepting the ludicrous nobel high jacked socialist peace prize that even hitler was nominated for.)
Why is it that lefties never wants to include everyone?
Reply to NW,
NW says:
November 18, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Some of this seems trivial. I get flown lots of places to give papers and spend a day with faculty. It has almost always been economy class, though for some international flights they pay for premium economy, a slightly less exhausting option. When I’m there, wherever it is, my host picks up hotels and meals. I really don’t think any academic or scientific home institution should get excited about that kind of thing. They WANT their employees to have national and international influence.
NW this is actually a huge deal. Dr. Hansen is a government official. NASA isn’t a acedemic institution it’s a government agency. When I was a Marine I spent my last tour in an R&D facility dealing with far less consequential matters yet my collegues and I were held to far stricter standards than this government official blatantly violated on a regular basis. NASA doesn’t hire scientists to have ANY influence. They hire them to conduct research and write reports period. The only influence any government scientist should have on the political process is providing the facts as best as can be determiend in a completely unbiased nature. Anything else is a conflict of interest. If he wants to get rich and lead a rock star lifestyle that’s fine as long as he resigns and does it as a private citizen. Using his position as a government official to enrich himself while pushing a partisan political agenda is a serious crime which has resulted in firings and even jail time for others who did far less than what this “scientist” has freely and openly admitted to.
California Angel
Nice so got owt else for proof but a link to a bankrupt hack rag that is totally behind the religion ?or are you hiding the good stuff deliberately ?
David Ball,
“California Angel says:
November 19, 2011 at 10:36 am
I do not speak for all, but I think you will find that majority of people who post here do not dispute that humans have to be good stewards of the environment. Stick around and do some reading of this site. You may be surprised how informed the posters here are.”
You are wasting your time trying to rationalize with CA, David. CA doesn’t even present an argument which can be rebutted. Reading the post, it sounds like the regurgitations of climate advocacy groups such as WWF and Greenpeace. Some peoples minds will never open, and the misinformation is so ingrained it would take an entire book to cover all of it.
Gary Mount says:
November 19, 2011 at 2:26 am
“You misunderstand me.”
No sir. I understand the risks. I’ve worked a variety of aircraft, missile, and launch to orbit systems, both single use and return vehicles. I had several bits of hardware on the shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System and I am very proud of my contributions to that program and all the others I have contributed to and continue to work on. With each success… and each failure, we push back the darkness of ignorance and superstition, color in a few more pixels on the ever expanding map of human knowledge, learn from our mistakes and set off once more, to push the boundaries back yet again.
Some of us die in these endeavors. We HONOR their memories and would never sneer at the sacrifices made by them and their families! I don’t expect you to understand that, given your dismissively disrespectful comments about those who strive, fail, and perish in the human imperative of direct human exploration of this planet and solar system.
When the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria set out from Spain in 1492, I’m sure there were protesters on the quay, much like you, upset with the costs of Queen Isabella’s expedition.and sneering that “They’re just gonna get themselves killed and waste all that money! We need it for the bambinos…” Still, they set sail. The Santa Maria was driven ashore in a storm and destroyed. People died. New knowledge was acquired, unexplored new lands were tentatively sketched into the areas of the world maps, where previously had been written only ‘Here Be Dragons’. An entirely new history was written and is still being written today. New knowledge! New experience! New joy!
We recognize the risks and accept the possible consequences. We ride motor cycles, build and fly our own personal airplanes, solo hunt and hike back country areas. When the coyotes howling in one canyon and the wolves howling from another disturb our solo sleeping bag slumber on a hard freeze, back country night, we know a joy that can only come from ‘being there’! We prepare ourselves in body and spirit, to minimize the known risks and provide contingencies for the unknowns, and then we set out in person to embrace and truly ‘know’ that new experience. Our place and our paths will never be circumscribed by the orbits around home, office, a monitor and a joy stick, and the pallid pleasures of vicarious remote viewing and sensing. We want, we need, we MUST ‘be there’, to see and feel and hear and taste and manipulate that new environment. That is how we fully embrace it! That is how we understand it! That is how we revel in sheer joy for each new discovery.
Do not denigrate the human courage, sacrifice, and deaths of explorers across the span of human history, that your current knowledge base and sheltered existence rests on!
California Angel says: November 19, 2011 at 10:36 am
…millions starve from food shortages caused by drought, flood, fire and increased ocean salinity/acidity. Millions lose their homes and livelihoods, suffer terrible losses. Wars ensue. In the animal world, mass extinctions over the next 30 years are predicted… Warm air holds MORE moisture….more torrential rains and floods ahead. Rising sea levels will make some Pacific islands disappear and lots of coastline will recede…
Look darling, you’ve just snorted some strong stuff. It’ll take a while and perhaps some cold turkey to come down from all that fantasy-science. But in the long run it’s not good for you. Truth matters for your health. Believe me because I’ve been there myself and so have lots of us here. In your own time, read my own story, learn how to check evidence. Click my name. Hang in here, and listen.
Mac the Knife says:
November 19, 2011 at 1:13 am “….We do these things, not because they are easy, but because they ARE HARD! Those of us with a spine and sufficient reproductive orbs will always be sailing towards that new horizon…”
Amen.
As soon as a people stop seeking truth, and would rather cling to wealth and privalege and power irregardless of the falsehood involved, the rot starts to set in. Over and over, if you study history, you see their stagnation overwhelmed by fresh breezes of truth, often taking a form they fear the most. They are sitting pretty, living high off the hog, and along comes some sort of invasion of Visigoths or Huns or Ghengis Khan, if not literally then figuratively. Then they either shape up their act at the last minute, or they see too late what they thought mattered doesn’t.
As far as Hansen is concerned, I don’t think treason is too harsh a word to consider using, when you also consider the harm he has done to our nation. He knows by now his theory was not correct, but rather than confessing his error he seemingly takes money to persist with a farce, which only benefits a few and may very well, if unchecked, bring untold misery to millions, including, in all likelihood, his grandchildren.
I am a now-retired civil servant. I know just how inflexible Government rules are.
After reading this article I must confess that words fail me.
Hansen should be in gaol already, for corruption if nothing else.
He probably wants to be fired so he can run to the media again with tall tales about evil “deniers” attacking him since they can’t attack the science.
He’ll be able to triple his speech fees, get more prizes and a hefty salary at the Center for American Progress.
Unless, of course, he goes to prison.
Tom says:
November 19, 2011 at 6:59 am
“Wow, in my capacity as an oil industry scientist, if I go to a professional convention I can’t so much as buy a beer for a government scientist or state university professor. If I did, it would be presumed to be corruption.”
Same here, Tom! As an engineer employed in the astro/aerospace industry, we cannot accept anything more than a simple company logo coffee cup or inexpensive baseball style cap, without having to fully disclose the gift and turn it over to our corporation for disposal. We avoid the potential reality of being ethically compromised or giving the appearance of ‘pay to play’ corruption. I do not understand how an employee of a government agency can so flagrantly flaunt and violate their own agency’s alternate income, gift, and honoraria requirements and still be employed there! It sure smells of officially condoned corruption….
Caleb says:
November 19, 2011 at 1:01 pm
“As far as Hansen is concerned, I don’t think treason is too harsh a word to consider using, when you also consider the harm he has done to our nation. ”
I agree, Friend! The gut wrenching waste of time, effort, and taxpayer dollars associated with the refuted AGW hypothesis is criminal. Equally as important, what new wonders could have been embraced or dinosaur killing threat been discovered and averted, had this monumental waste of human treasure been applied to real hazards to our existence?
I want to see Hansen’s ill-earned dosh going as compensation money to Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Tim Ball, David Deming. Probably many others too I don’t even know of or remember.
Hansen typifies why NASA has no manned space launch capability. Clowns like this caused America to loose the space race.
Lest we forget, Dr Theon’s critique of his employee Hansen as reported at WUWT Jan 2009 – before Climategate. See Dr Theon at ICCC 2009 – scroll down page about 6 “layers”.
Paul Hull: You’re correct about the ET foam, but NASA changed two things: The blowing agent for the foam (which used to be Freon), and the solvent used to prepare the surface (used to be Trichloroetylene). Were you also aware that in addition to the bad launch decision, the environmentalists were partly responsible for the loss of the Challenger (and two Titan expendables)?
Source: Did risk reduction backfire in space? By Malcolm Ross, Washington Times January 28, 1996
Gail Combs says:
November 19, 2011 at 6:29 am
Sorry, Anthony…Gail is very seldom incorrect but here it is.
However, no amount of Big Oil money could exchange for the truth WUWT proffers, not even the entire reserves of the Middle East.
(OBVIOUSLY Big Oil’s contributions to such a nefarious scoundrel as “Dr.” James Hansen speaks volumes about their lack of ethics in this debate.)
Go Jim go.
See Jim run,
Run Jim run.
So as a government employee for like 40 years, and being 70 years of age, and being director of GISS since 1981 through to whenever HE chooses to retire, I’m thinking he has to be SES class (for all those 30 years and counting);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_Executive_Service_(United_States)
So I’d peg his SES salary at somewhere’s between $180K and $230K (high end same as the VP).
And if he is still in CSRS (he’d have to be really stupid not to be), in about a year, or two maximum, he’d max that one out at 80% of his high three year average in retirement pay. In other words, full retirement at like $144K/year. Awesome.
Note, this is a major backfire for the ATI, specifically because of ATI’s frivolous harassment, I’d expect Hansen to collect even more cash prizes, even more travel expenses (which he won’t report, in your face ATI), even more speaking engagements, even more Rolex watches, even more gold, and even more diamonds.
Are you hopping mad yet? Because you all should be, and there isn’t a damn thing you all can do about it either.
I found a new word today;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry
“Barratry, in criminal and civil law, is the act or practice of bringing repeated legal actions solely to harass. This action is a crime in some jurisdictions.”
“Barratry also refers to persistently inciting others to engage in litigation or other disputes or quarrels outside of the courts.”
Now as to the 2nd definition quoted above, I think it would be wise, at this time, for WUWT? to seek legal counsel and/or advice. Seriously.
Go Jim go.
See Jim run,
Run Jim run.
RockyRoad says:
November 19, 2011 at 2:50 pm
Sorry, Anthony…Gail is very seldom incorrect but here it is.
However, no amount of Big Oil money could exchange for the truth WUWT proffers, not even the entire reserves of the Middle East…..
______________________________
I very humbly beg your pardon Anthony, I must of had a brain-dead moment due to advancing age.
Thank you for the correction RockyRoad.
John Cooper says:
November 19, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Paul Hull: You’re correct about the ET foam, but NASA changed two things:>>>
Things always change, for many reasons. In the case of the Challenger disaster however, the changes you detail were ultimately not the problem. The problem was that the engineers who designed those seals recommended against launching because they were of the opinion that there was a substantive risk of failure. They were over ruled by management on the astounding premise that since testing had not been done at the temperature range in question (on the launch day), the engineers could not “prove” that there was a safety risk. So the launch went ahead because management subsituted their opinion for the opinion of the people who actually designed the seals. While you may be correct that the older types of putty used may not have resulted in a failure, the fact of the matter is that the design engineers were over ridden by beauracrats that were keen on meeting a time table and decided that reality was what they wanted it to be.
The disaster is a lesson of history that is being repeated before our eyes, but on a scale that is global and affects billions of people. The substitution of political opinion over that of actual science. It is unortunate that NASA has so soon forgotten the folly of making decisions based on the way you would like the world to be instead of how it actually is.
Here’s one of the most detailed and well documented accounts of what happened that I’ve seen:
http://ethics.tamu.edu/ethics/shuttle/shuttle1.htm
It’s “Dartmouth College” on Hanover NH; not “Dartmouth University.”. It is a small school, but there are those who love it. And who are appalled that it would something as dumb and university-like as pay the likes of James Hansen any amount, ever, for anything.
Otherwise the article is my new favorite and I applaud the hard work of the ATI in prying loose records that should be part of the public file. These activists are all about transparency until it comes to revealing the very handsome perquisites of their position. The US taxpayer has paid at least four times for every dollar that Hansen takes home. First in his GS salary and benefits and expenses. Second in similar salary and benefits for the other nameless guy(s) who have to do his work because he’s so busy getting arrested and collecting awards. Third for the tax deductibility on the contributions to the NGO’s that were then funneled into his awards. Fourth for the carbon taxes and fees and subsidized boondoggles for green energy that Hansen’s work has forced upon us.
Further suggestions on how to calculate the true cost of this creature, would be welcomed.
Calling Nick Stokes, calling Nick Stokes… you’re urgently wanted in this thread for some damage control.