I've harped on #3 here before. One Bush appointee to an EPA task force on childhood lead poisioning prevention does not believe leaded paint is a risk to children. He is very open about this. He has testified as an expert witness in cases to that effect. Why? He is a pediatrician. Hasn't seen any lead poisioning cases in years, ergo it doesn't happen. He's not a scientist, he's a doctor (MD not PhD). He doesn't do medical research, never has. There are no medical researchers, expert in lead poisioning, who say what he is saying.
One can virtually always find scientists (reserachers) opposing anything. Look at global warming. In physics, the big bang and the underpinnings of quantum mechanics are questioned (see continuous creation, EPR paradox, respectively). Maybe medical research is different and their researchers heard like sheep not house cats, but in my experince you get noticed for being different in science. Were there solid evidence for safely putting lead right back into paint I think we'd have someone advocating it.
Every president does this, but the Bush administration has taken it to an extreme. Sure, you can stack these committees with people who agree with you, but historically they are actually researchers.
Personally, I feel if they do this they should be held legally responsible. If children die of lead poisioning due to a change in the regulations these people are neglegent. It's manslaughter.