Dialing up the Heat on Climate Warmist

Jagadish Shukla
Jagadish Shukla

by James A. Bacon

A recent audit by George Mason University “appears to reveal” that climatologist Dr. Jagadish Shukla engaged in “double dipping” when he paid himself a full salary from the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES) while pocketing a salary from GMU, according to Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

“This practice may have violated GMU’s university policy, his employment contract with the university, and Virginia state law,” wrote Smith in a letter to Alison C. Lerner, inspector general of the National Science Foundation.

Shukla, who served on Governor Terry McAuliffe’s Climate Change and Resiliency Update Commission, attracted national scrutiny when he and co-workers at GMU signed a letter last year urging President Obama to prosecute corporate climate “deniers” under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) law. Shortly thereafter, skeptics of global warming orthodoxy pointed out that Shukla might be violating the law by paying his wife and himself handsome salaries through IGES even while drawing a salary from GMU.

Smith, who has used his committee chairmanship to expose alleged wrong-doings of climate change scientists, then began looking into the Shukla case. Shukla’s institute, IGES, has received $63 million in taxpayer-funded grants since 2001 to conduct work primarily on climate computer modeling.

The main revelation in Smith’s letter is the reference to a GMU audit of Shukla’s financing. Wrote Smith:

According to GMU’s Faculty Handbook, “outside employment and paid consulting cannot exceed the equivalent of one day per week without written authorization from the collegiate dean or institute director.” Dr. Shukla violated this policy five different time periods from 2003 to 2015 because he failed to receive approval for paid consulting services in excess of one day per week. This allowed Dr. Shukla to double dip by receiving his full salary from GMU while receiving an excessive salary for working 28 hours per week at IGES. In another instance, in 2014 Dr. Shukla received $292,688 in compensation from IGES for working 28 hours per weeks while simultaneously receiving 100% of his GMU salary. In total, Dr. Shukla received $511,410 in compensation from IGES and GMU during 2014, without ever receiving the appropriate permission from GMU officials, apparently violating university policy.

Bacon’s bottom line:

If Smith’s letter is an accurate representation of the evidence uncovered by GMU’s audit, one must ask how GMU will respond to Shukla’s double dipping. Shukla is one of the university’s most prestigious scientific faculty members, and he brings in millions of dollars in grants that support the activity of other professors and graduate students. The temptation may be to sweep the controversy under the rug. The question is whether the rules of conduct are to be applied to everyone or overlooked when convenient.

The Shukla controversy is a big test of the integrity of GMU’s governance policies. So far, the media has been asleep to this issue. Maybe it’s time to wake up.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

15 responses to “Dialing up the Heat on Climate Warmist”

  1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    Claims of illegal double-dipping should be investigated irrespective of what the affected person’s position or beliefs on a specific topic. If there is reasonable evidence of a violation, a fair, due process hearing should be given to Dr. Shukla or any other affected person. Based on the investigation and hearing, appropriate action, including dismissal of any charges, should occur.

    1. The Truth Avatar
      The Truth

      Well said and I totally agree.

  2. Rowinguy Avatar
    Rowinguy

    Jim, have you seen the GMU auditor’s report itself? It seems you have not, in posing the question whether Lamar Smith’s letter accurately represents evidence uncovered in that report. If that is the case, do you have plans to seek it through FOIA or other means?

    For instance, it is difficult to tell just who is alleging the “illegal double dipping” here. Is that the GMU auditor doing that, or is that Rep. Smith of Texas’ interpretation of the audit report?

    1. Rowinguy, I have FOIA’s GMU and received very little useful information. The university did subject Shukla and IGES to a conflict-of-interest review, as I recall, and gave him a pass. But the documents I received specified no details of what was actually reviewed. I may go back and take a look.

      I asked Smith’s office if I could see a copy of the GMU audit. They cannot provide me a copy. However, I can see it if I travel to Washington and view it “in camera.” I’ve been advised that the trip probably won’t be worth my time because “we tried our best to characterize the main findings in Smith’s letter.”

      1. Rowinguy Avatar
        Rowinguy

        Well, thanks for trying. As Reed F notes below, GMU seems to have a very “entrepreneurial” staff. They used to, and may still have, something called the Mercatus Center that issued various policy proclamations from time to time back in the 1990s and was, if I recall correctly, involved the the experiment with electric deregulation here in the Commonwealth.

        1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
          Reed Fawell 3rd

          Yes, and they have long put out demographic and other studies on regional growth patterns and the like that facilitate or inform real estate markets and growth, a related matters, including those relevant for example to Dulles Airport, including as I recall air freight issues.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          how is the Mercatus center funded and what is it’ relationship to GMU?

  3. CrazyJD Avatar

    Jim,

    You partisan-hacking, right-veering, climate-denying, Peter-and-Larry-opposing, conspiracy believer, you.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      And he probably doesn’t change his socks everyday either!

      1. CrazyJD Avatar

        So we’ll call him Skunk Bacon, after a famous guitar player who received the moniker for the same reason.

  4. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    CrazyJD,
    That about sums it up.
    Peter

  5. JOHN BR Avatar

    Even if you ignore the double-dipping.
    Aren’t you concerned about a professor setting up a “non-profit” solely to gleam government funds and paying himself and his wife huge salaries for little work?
    In an honest world, that would be fraud. In the professor’s world, that is business as usual.

    And for those of you saying he is doing all this (fraud) for a “good cause” (global warming), his scientific conclusions are probably as ethical as his scamming the taxpayers.

  6. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
    Reed Fawell 3rd

    Does not George Mason and its professors and departments have a long history of working closely with private business and government on a wide array of issues private and public?

    Indeed, is this not a exploding trend within all major universities, including UVA recent wild plunge into the game?

    Given the dysfunction, nonsense, vanishing teaching workloads, and consequent spare time that professors enjoy for outside moonlighting, I suspect this is a rich field of inquiry, particularly so given the vast sums of public monies that now keep these institutions growing to the proportions of Jabba the Hutt.

  7. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    Here is a link to GMU’s policy on outside employment and embedded links to other important documents. http://universitypolicy.gmu.edu/policies/outside-employment/

  8. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: ” according to Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.”

    ” Jim, have you seen the GMU auditor’s report itself? It seems you have not, in posing the question whether Lamar Smith’s letter accurately represents evidence uncovered in that report. If that is the case, do you have plans to seek it through FOIA or other means?

    For instance, it is difficult to tell just who is alleging the “illegal double dipping” here. Is that the GMU auditor doing that, or is that Rep. Smith of Texas’ interpretation of the audit report?

    James A. Bacon | March 2, 2016 at 12:24 pm | Reply
    Rowinguy, I have FOIA’s GMU and received very little useful information. The university did subject Shukla and IGES to a conflict-of-interest review, as I recall, and gave him a pass. But the documents I received specified no details of what was actually reviewed. I may go back and take a look.

    I asked Smith’s office if I could see a copy of the GMU audit. They cannot provide me a copy. However, I can see it if I travel to Washington and view it “in camera.” I’ve been advised that the trip probably won’t be worth my time because “we tried our best to characterize the main findings in Smith’s letter.”

    Alexander – a partisan on Global Warming – makes what boils down to – unsubstantiated accusations – that he himself cannot provide the evidence that supports those accusations.

    and it then gets printed here with this:

    ” Dialing up the Heat on Climate Warmist

    A recent audit by George Mason University “appears to reveal” that climatologist Dr. Jagadish Shukla engaged in “double dipping” when he paid himself a full salary from the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES) while pocketing a salary from GMU, ”

    does anyone else see this as really questionable journalism that borders on impugning one’s character with almost no evidence what-so-ever other than accusations?

    Is it really true that Va law and the National Science Foundation prohibits professors at colleges from engaging in other business activities?

    that would seem to preclude what appears to me to be a fairly common arrangement these days between academic folks and business start-ups and actual consultant work for industry like Exxon and others..

    I don’t know the rules for involvement of professors in outside business but it seems fairly common – but the soundbite portrayal here of what is and is not – in the context of clearly partisan inquiry on a controversial subject just seems totally illegitimate because he very things it seems to be based on – are not provided … no evidence, just conjecture and innuendo .

    why are we doing this kind of thing ?

Leave a Reply