Right backatcha, Fuzzy. Your perceptions and feelings (about me) interferes with your ability to read (my) posts objectively.
Who provides policy-makers with statistical evidence, how it's been collected, and how it's used, is a legitimate issue. It's been debated for years if those
meaningful evaluations are actually taking place in political circles, or if they cherry-pick 'evidence' that favors their agenda and work backward. I don't mean just groups like ALEC, Freedom Works, or economic or policy 'institutes' with Right-or-Left leaning tendencies...but also those refuting/challenging data from agencies like BLS, OBM, CBO, CDC, NIH, even US Census.
The adversarial 'elements' in policy/politics is not
meaningless. It matters when science-deniers or flat-earthers are members of congressional committees dealing with science, technology, agriculture, environment, etc. It's meaningful when legislators want to create laws with a religious or 'biblical' basis, and manipulate or distort
statistical data to support their claims (particularly where sexual behavior, birth control, and marriage are concerned). It's important when policy-makers debate math models used to determine inflation and CPI, or accounting methods used to calculate taxes....and both sides rely on
statistical evidence to support their policy position.
My opinion is based on these facts, not feelings.