May 26, 2017
Thank you, Dean Williams, I really appreciate it that you invited me here today. Perhaps more importantly, I want to thank you for giving me a job. And I want to thank the faculty here for allowing me to pretend to be part of the faculty for a few months. It was really cool. It is going to on my resume forever.
I am grateful for the work that has gone on at this institution. But I am not here to talk about the old leaders. I am here to talk about the new ones, class of 2017! Will you clap for yourselves? Congratulations!
I am here to talk to the moms and dads and brothers and sisters and spouses and the partners and the children who are here. Congratulations to you, too. Thank you for putting up with the insufferable “I go to Harvard” as an excuse for being just too damn lazy to take out the trash, or the recyclables, I should say.
I was especially proud to have stood with so many of you a few weeks ago at Boston’s March for Science. I don’t know about you, but I loved all the signs. One of them said: “Society should worry when geeks have to demonstrate.” Couldn’t agree more. Another said: “Got polio? Me neither! Thanks, science!”
It is clever, right?
Well, scientists really do have to be clever these days because they are not just being asked to conduct really important research, but they’re being told that they have to professionally and personally defend that research. Even the way science is conducted is under threat of political interference. So get ready graduates—you will need to be prepared to speak truth to power, as we said in the 60’s and 70’s, or at least you need to speak English as a supplement to science talk. But don’t worry—I have great hope that science as we know it will not only survive but continue to make a positive difference in our world, and I have faith in you, the graduates of 2017, and this great institution, in your ability to shape our future. I have spent some time with some of you and I still have faith—can you believe it?
After all, you are standing on the shoulders of great scientists who came before you. And we have all benefitted from the tremendous contributions that they have made to this country and the world. Wasn’t that really what the science march was all about? That we were gathering not as individuals but as scientists to ensure that our collective voices were heard, about the need for continued investment in science as the foundation of our future progress.
You and I share a love for public health and a passion for the science that defines the challenges we face and designs the solutions as well. After all, the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, is a public health agency, and the work you do underpins so many of EPA’s policies, our programs, our laws, our rules, investments that have saved literally millions of lives and if all goes well we will continue to save those millions as long as those protections are in place. Grads, you can make a positive impact in the world—and you have an absolute obligation to try to do that because that is what a Harvard T.H. Chan education is all about. You don’t just learn but you serve through that learning.
It has become clear to me as I worked at a high level of government that people are desperately looking for trusted independent advisors who can help them understand the world they live in, the risk they may be facing, and how do they keep themselves and their families healthy and safe. Unfortunately, in many ways, government is no longer viewed as that trusted independent advisor that folks can really embrace. Partisan rancor has led people to question what is fact and what is fiction. Us older folks in this audience will remember it is just like the Memorex commercial: “Is it real or is it Memorex? I don’t know!”
But people still value and will increasingly depend on experts like you—scientists who are mission-driven and not special interest-driven. Scientists who are accountable for the transparent, fair and unbiased process that you follow.
Today, social media provides an incredible opportunity to share a wealth of vital information and to bring people together, but far too often it is used to spread alternative facts and drive people apart. It has provided an easy vehicle for nonscientists to call into question science that is absolutely essential to help guide critical decisions that are going to matter about our health and our future—things like climate change science.
For example, when climate scientists have said that climate warming trends over the past century are “extremely likely” due to human activities, climate deniers use this precise language to make the case that scientists really aren’t sure—that it is just some kind of crapshoot. And then when scientists made the extraordinarily interesting point, always that follows, that science is constantly evolving—they say that all the time, I have no idea why the hell one has to say that, of course it is—but when you say it, in the context with that first one, you not only don’t know what you’re talking about, but let’s sit around and wait till science settles out. That’s how it’s used, folks. That’s the challenge that we face. Because we all know that science is constantly evolving. It’s sort of like going up to someone and saying, “So how are you today?” They say “I’m fine. But my cells are constantly changing so I’m not sure what I’m going to be in the next sentence.” Stop talking like that! Of course you know you’re fine! Whatever happens, you could get hit by a car the next day, what do you know!
So here’s an idea: What if we just say that scientists have overwhelmingly concluded that climate change is real, men are causing it, and that’s why women need to run the world. That’s a science statement! I thought you might like that one. OK, maybe I got carried away a little bit—but you do know that anthropogenic emissions technically mean “man-made”—and women, none of us were in charge when all of these stupid decisions were made, so I am not owning it, you don’t have to own it, but we all have to collectively fix it. That’s the way that it works. And until we get equal pay for equal work, that will remain the case.
You know, climate science is complicated—I know why you say things the way you do—but despite that fact, we can say with absolute clarity that climate change demands immediate action to avoid what is essentially the most significant existential challenge of our time. So we can’t sit quietly and let language of science like I just articulated be misinterpreted in ways that misrepresent the facts. Graduates, today it’s just not good enough for you to decide what you stand for—you have to decide what you will not stand for. That’s what you have to do!
It’s just not enough to do science, you have to speak for the science in ways that non-scientists—aka real people—can understand. You might even have to march for science—not because you want to get political—but just the opposite. You cannot allow science to be politicized. Period. End of story.
So—as young scientists, take off your lab coats and start practicing this. Go out and talk to people about what you do in the lab, what you learn in the library. Tell them what you know and what it really means to them and to their families. Then see that something remarkable will happen. Because that is what I have done for a living for 37 years. And I think you will be really excited to know that facts actually do matter to people. That people can and want to learn. That by and large people will make good decisions if you arm them with good solid facts. And when people speak with very clear conviction in this country, policy makers and politicians will—albeit many of them reluctantly—they will listen. And when they do, they will once again protect the core values that you and I hold dear—like clean air, clean water, heathy land, and a stable planet. So we need to speak and we need to speak loudly.
Graduates, in my opinion—and this is just me—you are the most informed, tech-savvy generation in history. But the most interesting thing that I see is that you have an inherent sense of equity and social justice that I think is unmatched and I truly hope that it’s unwavering. Because too many people in too many countries around the world, and even in the U.S., they suffer because they have been left behind from the benefits that many of the rest of us enjoy. And that has to change. That’s why you came here—to find out how you can help strengthen the science foundation needed to protect the most vulnerable. That is our job.
So thank you on behalf of all the air breathers and water drinkers out there…especially all those who put a little bit of scotch in their water.
Thanks for taking on the task of helping us stay safe and healthy and thanks to all of you who are fighting against a proposed federal budget that clearly has made absolutely no room for investment in science—because science continues to be the engine that drives American prosperity and innovation and that fuels global progress.
My time at EPA taught me very clearly that science was not just our professor but it was our protector. Today, because of science, much of it produced in the hallowed halls at Harvard, smoking deaths are down, lead in our kids’ blood has plummeted, the ozone layer is healing, and dangerous levels of NOx, SOx, CO, PM—and acid rain—have been declining for decades. But I need only say “Flint, Michigan” to remind you that there is a helluva lot of work left to be done. But I am confident that if you keep providing sound science to guide the way, in the long run, EPA will keep continuing to steer America away from health risk and toward a higher quality of life.
The way I see it, critics on Capitol Hill who have filed bills to stop EPA from considering the very best science and to change the peer review process so that industry can have a deciding voice, well, they are playing a very dangerous game. When they get sick, I bet they run to doctors and hospitals right around here that rely on science from Harvard. I bet they want to hear from scientists, not industry trade groups, about the risks they may be facing from contaminants in their drinking water or pollution in the soil next door to their homes. I bet they even check out the daily air quality forecast from EPA and the National Weather Service because their kids have asthma and they want to know whether they should go out and play or not. And by the way, one in ten kids in this country is suffering from asthma and two out of ten in the Hispanic community are suffering from asthma. That’s called disparity, that can’t continue.
The simple fact is that people in government and businesses depend on agencies across the federal government because our science is reliable, and our world-class scientists are—world-class! And pollution does not discriminate across party lines. In fact, the efforts to protect the environment have, until recent years, been bipartisan. Just think about it: Teddy Roosevelt, national park system; Richard Nixon, creator of the EPA (that’s his best feature); George H.W. Bush, the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990, perhaps the most significant public health law of our time. Well, I worked for five Republican governors and I worked for one Democrat—and many would argue that New England actually doesn’t have any Republicans, and I might agree with that, actually, but they were as Republican as they get—and I can honestly say that in each and every one of those administrations we made tremendous progress because they respected the science. They had the courage to consider it when they made decisions, and they didn’t delay the tough ones.
We have to get back to bipartisan support for science and environmental protection. We cannot allow anyone to reject facts simply because they’re incongruous with what their party politics are supposed to think or say. As Neil deGrasse Tyson has said, “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe it.” I don’t really know what that means, but it’s good and he has a great voice. And it remains fundamental to the protection of public health and our planet that we pay attention.
Those old, worn-out and unsupported arguments that science-driven policies of EPA have come with unbearable economic costs—well, they’re as empty as the expertise of those who are shouting those words into the wind. The truth is: when you follow the science and the law, history has shown that it’s good for the planet and our pocketbooks…it’s good for consumers and it’s good for companies.
The point is—we will not sacrifice a healthy environment for a healthy economy. We don’t have to, and we won’t. That’s what you bring to the table. That’s what you have to talk about. And today, the excellent thing is that even though we may all be disappointed in this administration, with the advent of markets where you win if you [use] renewable energy and energy efficiency—you market win—then we know that the clean energy train in this country has left the station, and no one person, not even the president of the United States, can turn it around. We know that “it’s the economy, stupid” when we do it right.
So that’s why many states who are actually suing us on the Clean Power Plan are doing better than we asked them to do in 2022. So get over it. We can take a big step forward on climate change. We can make it work. We can combine it with great standards on air, we can make our lives better and keep our planet stable and protect our kids’ future. This is what happens when you do sound science, when you communicate it effectively, and when leaders actually listen.
So grads—keep your foot on the gas. Put your faith in American ingenuity and entrepreneurship. That is what we do best. That is how we roll in this country. And this four years is never going to change that. You can’t let it and I won’t let it.
Because a clean, healthy environment is not window dressing. It’s a basic human right and it’s the foundation of our economy.
So at times like these, when public officials consider bills that undermine the science, budgets that eliminate critical investments, throw snowballs on the Senate floor to disprove global warming—that was a good one—or take other steps to undermine public health for personal gains, it just has to be a stark reminder of the importance of our obligation to clearly and persistently convey what science tells us, why it matters, and what we can do about it.
But you know what? I’m not getting discouraged so you have no right to get discouraged. You can’t get discouraged and you can’t not engage. Just the opposite. It is not hopeless. It is far from it. These science bills are on the radar screen of good senators, we’ll keep fighting on the budget even though it remains a significant issue. Executive orders don’t trump rules—pun intended. But it’s true. They have to do a rule to replace a rule, and that is not going to be easy for [this] administration since they don’t seem particularly enamored by environmental laws and [they have] a little bit of attention deficit disorder when it comes to science. Instead what’s happening in D.C. has to be a rallying cry.
It has to be time for you to do what my dad always told me to do: You have to fight the good fight and you have to pull up your big girl and big boy pants, you have to stop whining, and you have to start acting—because if you do, we will win. We will maintain these protections and we will continue to move forward.
Now I’ve seen the work that can happen at T.H. Chan. I am so incredibly hopeful because of people like Dr. Jeff Vogel—he’s a Harvard MPH from just last year—he created an app called RecoverMe to better aid people suffering from workplace injuries.
And there are so many others. I have hope because of Catlin Powers. She was a Harvard MPH from 2011 who created a solar cooker to address the deadly challenge of indoor air pollution in the developing world.
And I have hope thanks to Karima Ladhani—a Harvard MPH from 2013—who launched a baby box initiative in South Asia, helping to save infants’ and mothers’ lives.
There are so many small and large stories like these, including breakthroughs like the Six Cities Study, that give me hope. And should give you energy as you move forward.
So let me thank you again, personally, for doing this work … for being an inspiration as to what can be when you’re fed up with what is … for thinking about health not as an individual luxury, but as a public necessity…one that calls on the best and the brightest minds…one that deserves to be defended at all cost.
There’s another sign that stuck with me at the science march…it simply said: “Science needs heroes.” So lastly let me ask you to be that hero. Be someone’s trusted independent advisor. Be what President Kennedy once said: a public servant who really cares and cherishes the people that they serve. He also once said, “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” You didn’t come to Harvard because it was easy—you came here because you wanted to do something special with your lives.
So live the rest of your life as if you were still here at T.H. Chan learning and discovering. Because our world just might depend on it.
Congratulations, everyone. And best of luck.
photo: J.D. Levine
Additional coverage
Harvard Chan graduates urged to ‘speak truth to power’
Commencement day photo gallery
Commencement eve photo gallery
Commencement slideshow
Storify, a collection of photos taken by students, families, and friends
Student, faculty, and staff award winners
Dean Michelle Williams address
Watch a webcast of Gina McCarthy’s address
Student speaker William Seligman address
Alumni Council President Sameh El-Saharty address