The Editorial Board

USA TODAY

Barry Myers just might be the most controversial choice ever nominated to run the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

A 75-year-old businessman without formal scientific training, Myers would be in charge of one of the federal government's premier scientific agencies, tasked with predicting the weather and monitoring the oceans and atmosphere.

Unlike other members of the Trump administration, Myers isn't a climate change denier. But his nomination raises significant conflict-of-interest questions. And his tenure as chief executive of AccuWeather, a for-profit forecasting company based in Pennsylvania, is marred by allegations of workplace sexual harassment.

All this helps explain why Myers' nomination has languished, leaving NOAA under temporary leadership for an extended period. His name was first put forward in 2017. The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, voting along party lines, sent it to the Senate floor, where it stalled throughout last year. And now, in the new Congress, the committee has rushed it through again, without holding another confirmation hearing. No floor vote is yet scheduled.

OPPOSING VIEW:Former AccuWeather CEO has managerial skills NOAA needs

Much of the controversy revolves around AccuWeather, which repackages and profits from data provided by a network of satellites and sensors operated by NOAA's National Weather Service. (Gannett Co., which owns USA TODAY, is an AccuWeather customer.)

For years, Myers unsuccessfully lobbied Congress to limit free public dissemination of weather service information, so as not to take business from private weather concerns. Then he got picked to run NOAA.

In a bid to deal with the conflict-of-interest questions, Myers resigned as AccuWeather CEO in January, selling stock to his family or the family-owned business for $15.9 million, significantly less than its previously estimated value.

Was the transaction structured to help him avoid capital gains taxes? Would he be able to buy back the shares after he leaves NOAA? Would his family, which still owns AccuWeather, benefit financially from any of his decisions as NOAA admininstrator?

These are all good questions, ones that ought to be explored at a new confirmation hearing, along with recently revealed information about Myers' management track record.

A federal labor investigation last year found AccuWeather's work environment rife with sexual harassment under Myers' leadership. According to an investigative report, women were groped and kissed without consent, female subordinates who engaged in sexual relationships with male managers received perks and career boosts, and upper management failed to act on complaints. AccuWeather denied the allegations but paid $290,000 to settle the issue.

Members of the Commerce Committee, particularly its nine female members (including two Democrats and two Republicans new to the panel), might want to ask a thing or two about the settlement if they had the chance. But that isn't happening.

In the rush to get the nomination to the Senate floor without vetting these troubling new issues, senators are abdicating their constitutional responsibilities to advise and consent on presidential nominees.

NOAA employees, and all the people who depend on their research and weather forecasts, deserve better.

If you can't see this reader poll, please refresh your page.