Half of U.S. doctors wrongly believe nicotine causes cancer. That’s not just a mistake, it’s a government-fueled failure of transparency that distorts health policy, weakens trust in public institutions, and undermines the very marketplace of ideas our democracy depends on.
The American economy is fueled by information. Without it, people can’t decide what to eat, where to travel, or even how to invest their money. That’s why our Founders enshrined free speech and a free press in the First Amendment. History shows what happens when the public is misled: Oprah Winfrey’s remarks on Mad Cow Disease helped tank beef prices in the 1990s, while Senator Chuck Schumer’s letter about IndyMac Bank contributed to a run that hastened the bank’s collapse in 2008.
Information drives markets and bad information drives them into the ground.
But here’s the difference: when a celebrity or politician misleads, the fallout is damaging but limited. When government agencies mislead, especially under the authority of regulation, the consequences are deeper and longer lasting, because the public presumes their statements are both truthful and authoritative.
Consider nicotine. For decades, federal and state governments lumped nicotine together with tar, arsenic, and formaldehyde as if it were itself a cancer-causing agent. That belief fueled multibillion-dollar lawsuits, landmark settlements, and decades of stigma. Yet science is clear: nicotine does not cause cancer. Even New York State’s own health website admits, “It’s the other nasty stuff in cigarettes…that’s to blame.” Still, nearly 50 percent of health care professionals continue to believe nicotine is carcinogenic. When even doctors are misinformed, the public never had a chance.
This isn’t just a scientific footnote, it’s a warning. If Washington can’t get the facts straight on something as basic as nicotine, how can Americans trust its pronouncements on banking, energy, or artificial intelligence? Regulatory misinformation corrodes the foundation of governance itself.
That’s why reforms are urgent. First, transparency must be mandatory. Every step of the regulatory process, from the evidence that triggers investigations to the consultants paid with taxpayer dollars, should be open to public inspection. Regulators often boast about being “open,” but in practice, citizen oversight is harder to navigate than Mount Everest. Until the public can see the data, the contracts, and the decisionmakers, “trust us” is not enough.
Second, the process must be inclusive. Regulators, the regulated, and the public they serve should all have a seat at the table. That means more than perfunctory public comment periods, it means genuinely weighing outside evidence and, when wrong, admitting it and moving on. Washington should not have the last word simply because it has the loudest microphone.
These reforms would do more than correct the record on nicotine. They would restore trust in the institutions that shape our lives and livelihoods. Without transparency and accountability, government will continue to strong-arm industries with threats of lawsuits and regulatory fiat. With them, we can rebuild a policy process that respects science, empowers citizens, and strengthens democracy.
The question is simple: if Washington insists on speaking with authority, will it finally accept the responsibility of speaking with accuracy? Americans deserve nothing less.
Read Full Article »
