Here’s a story we have been following from time to time because weather forecasts are such an essential element of our lives on the water. NOAA is at the epicenter of those forecasts.
This week, the U.S. Senate confirmed Dr, Neil Jacobs to be the new Administrator of NOAA, the umbrella agency that supervises the National Weather Service, the National Hurricane Center and dozens of other agencies dedicated to earth science, weather and climate issues.
Dr. Jacobs is eminently qualified for the position as a scientist and a veteran of NOAA. Under Trump 1.0, he served as the acting administrator, so he knows how the agency operates and is rooted in the culture of scientific impartiality and excellence NOAA is known for.
But there is a question mark that became very clear during the Senate confirmation hearings that could be of concern to all of us who depend upon NOAA for accurate, impartial and non-political data, data that drives the weather models which in turn provides weather agencies around the world with the raw stuff of forecasting.
That question mark stems from what the press calls “Sharpiegate” or the instance during the first Trump term when the president took his Sharpie and altered a hurricane tracking map to show the storm moving across Florida and into Alabama. This impromptu doodle by Trump had nothing to do with the actual forecast and was simply one of his whims.
But, Dr. Jacobs, as acting administrator, was cowed by Trump aids to issue a false report that supported Trump’s Sharpie doodle. While the whole episode might seem silly at best, the question is whether or not Dr. Jacobs can be trusted to provide the American people and the world scientific data and forecasts that are not politicized and misleading? He has already walked that road once.
In his defense, during the hearings he was emphatic that the false report was a mistake and that he would never do such a thing again. And, he testified that if confirmed he would rebuild the decimated agency’s staff and build a culture dedicated to the highest levels of science and integrity.
The larger problem Dr. Jacobs will face will be the proposed 27% reduction in the 2026 NOAA budget that will in turn create a wave of political pressure to determine how the agency will focus its limited resources. It is worth noting that in his opening remarks, Dr. Jacobs did not mention climate change once, a concept banned in the Trump administration.
