GOP's Move to Force Through Trump's EPA Pick Is 'Outrageous'
Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee have suspended their panel's rules to force through Scott Pruitt's nomination to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The maneuver was made only one day after all 10 Democratic members of the committee announced a boycott over President Donald Trump's EPA pick. The boycott was sparked over their serious concerns of the Oklahoma attorney general's stances on climate change, pollution regulation and unanswered requests to provide official documents or emails that would shed light on his ties to the energy industry.
JUST IN: Senate committee approves President Trump's EPA pick Scott Pruitt despite Democratic boycott https://t.co/GTiqiF9VZ0— NBC News (@NBC News)1486050948.0
After temporarily suspending the committee's rules—which requires at least two minority members to meet quorum—committee Republicans unanimously approved Pruitt by a 11-0 vote at a Thursday hearing. This means Pruitt's nomination will go to the full GOP-controlled Senate, where he is likely to be approved.
Committee Democrats have called the move today by their Republican colleagues "irresponsible."
"I am disappointed that our majority has decided to ignore our concerns and those of the American people, and break the committee's rules in an effort to expedite Mr. Pruitt's nomination, but we have to stand our ground in our pursuit of the truth and in fulfillment of our Constitutional duty with respect to nominations," ranking member Tom Carper (D-DE) said in a statement.
So reasonable that my Republican colleagues made the same requests of our last @EPA nominee, who actually worked to… https://t.co/plONFBQ1Mr— Senator Tom Carper (@Senator Tom Carper)1486052001.0
"He's dodged our questions, ignored our letters, and told us go to the back of the line and make open records requests to get the information we are entitled to," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).
The pattern follows a similar move by the GOP members of the Senate Finance Committee, who altered committee rules to approve the nominations of health secretary nominee Tom Price and treasury pick Steven Mnuchin. They also move to the full Senate without a Democratic vote.
"We took this extraordinary step because the minority members of the committee took the extraordinary step of boycotting the business meeting to approve an EPA administrator for an incoming administration," said environment committee Chairman Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) after the vote.
"The minority has put us in this, unchartered waters. Never before in the history of the EPA has a new president's incoming administration nominee been boycotted."
However, as The Hill pointed out, "Barrasso and his Republican colleagues boycotted a 2013 vote to confirm Gina McCarthy as administrator, though they eventually gave in."
Barrasso countered that their boycott was different because Trump deserves special treatment for his first Cabinet.
"Elections have consequences, and a new president is entitled to put in place people who will advance his agenda, the agenda that the people voted for when they elected him president," Barrasso said.
5 Things You Need to Know Trump's EPA Pick Scott Pruitt https://t.co/gASl3w4OuE @HuffPostGreen @greenpeaceusa— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)1483831505.0
Environmental groups have strongly criticized this play by the Senate environment committee Republicans.
"It's outrageous that Republicans jammed Scott Pruitt's nomination through the Environment Committee," said Rhea Suh, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, adding that Pruitt has "blatantly obstructed a thorough review of his record."
Suh urges the full Senate to reject Pruitt's nomination because he's "uniquely unfit for the job."
"Pruitt has spent a career colluding with polluters trying to prevent the EPA from fulfilling its central mission—protecting public health and our environment," she continued. "He has opposed clean air rules that would save thousands of lives, and he embraces discredited, fringe views on climate science. He's dodged and given evasive answers to question after question about his record, one that is rife with conflicts-of-interest."
The Center for Media and Democracy, which has filed six public unfulfilled record requests to Pruitt's office, also spoke out against the vote.
"With today's vote on Scott Pruitt, the Environmental Protection Agency is now one step closer to being placed in the hands of an avowed climate denier with close ties to major fossil fuel companies," said Nick Surgey, a researcher at the center. "Pruitt's track-record as Oklahoma Attorney General and chair of the Republican Attorneys General Association leaves us convinced he has serious conflicts of interest that make him woefully unfit to lead the EPA."
Mr. Pruitt sent woefully inadequate answers to Committee Democrats’ questions following his confirmation hearing:… https://t.co/TXX3U5aTFn— EPW Democrats (@EPW Democrats)1486056000.0
"Pruitt shows contempt for the Senate's responsibility to properly vet President Trump's appointees. He refuses to discuss his deep connections to companies he would oversee as EPA Administrator. And his office has failed to respond to six public record requests filed by the Center for Media and Democracy, including one filed more than two years ago seeking his communications with coal, oil and gas companies," Surgey continued. "His office has identified more than 3,000 documents in response to this request, but has yet to release any. In fact, Pruitt's office appears not to have responded to any record requests filed in the past two years. It increasingly looks like he has something to hide. As families and communities from Flint to Houston to Florida work to reduce pollution and stop damage to the climate, they deserve the facts behind whose interests Pruitt really serves."
Sierra Club's Climate Policy Director Liz Perera criticized the committee's vote as well.
"It is deeply disappointing that the committee that is supposed to put the environment and public first has approved a climate change-denying fossil fuel ally as head of the Environmental Protection Agency," Perera said. "Scott Pruitt is dangerously unfit to lead the EPA and has far too many conflicts of interest that should be a red flag for all Americans. He's collected hundreds of thousands from dirty fuel interests and sued the very agency he now wants to lead eight times, all to weaken public health protections."
"Committee Democrats understandably have questions about Pruitt's troubling conflicts of interest and whether he is committed to putting the public first," she added. "These questions remain unanswered by the nominee and Democrats rightly refused to be complicit in pushing forward such an unacceptable nominee, so Republicans rewrote the rules so that Pruitt can seize control of the EPA and throw critical clean air and water rules out. That is why it is more important than ever that the full Senate must reject Scott Pruitt's confirmation in order to do right by American families."
If Trump's Nominee Scott Pruitt Is Confirmed, 'EPA Would Stand for Every Polluter's Ally' https://t.co/2xuNDgD94N @CeresNews @OccupySandy— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)1483490407.0
Similarly, Greenpeace USA executive director Annie Leonard said the GOP's votes in favor of Pruitt are akin to a "vote for poisoned air, polluted water, and an unstable climate."
"While reassuring to see many Senators resist Pruitt's confirmation, the lawmakers who swung open the doors for the fossil fuel takeover of environmental protection should be ashamed of themselves," Leonard said. "When the next Flint, Michigan crisis happens in the districts of these representatives, they will have themselves to blame. The powerful movement that has risen to stop the worst of the Trump administration, including the nomination of Pruitt, will only grow stronger as we fight to protect what is right."
Lastly, Environmental Working Group president and co-founder Ken Cook said that President Trump has found just the man to carry out his vision of dismantling the EPA.
"By any measure, the president could hardly have found—and the committee could not have approved—a worse nominee to be in charge of public health and environmental protection," Cook said. "As Oklahoma attorney general, Pruitt's crusade of more than a dozen lawsuits filed against the EPA to stop efforts aimed at reducing air and water pollution to protect Americans is unmatched. Time and time again, Pruitt said 'no' when policies were proposed or rules implemented that would save lives, including initiatives specifically intended to protect children."
"Now, Pruitt is poised to take control of the very agency he's repeatedly attacked. If approved by the full Senate, he will start on day one as the worst EPA administrator in history. Mark my words: His record and his evasive testimony to the committee indicate he will move quickly to decimate the agency's ability to protect the health of Americans and our irreplaceable natural resources," he continued.
"Those on the committee who voted for Pruitt have tarnished the legacy of an agency—established by a GOP administration—that for almost 50 years has worked to keep our water pure, our air clean and our families safe. We commend the senators who stood against this disgraceful nominee and pledge to fight any attempt by Pruitt and the Trump administration to return to the days when smog choked our cities, our rivers caught on fire and polluters were free to use our land as toxic waste dumps," Cook concluded.
By Simon Montlake
For more than a decade, Susan Jane Brown has been battling to stop a natural gas pipeline and export terminal from being built in the backcountry of Oregon. As an attorney at the nonprofit Western Environmental Law Center, she has repeatedly argued that the project's environmental, social, and health costs are too high.
All that was before this month's deadly wildfires in Oregon shrouded the skies above her home office in Portland. "It puts a fine point on it. These fossil fuel projects are contributing to global climate change," she says.
Moderates Feeling the Heat<p>If elected, Mr. Biden has vowed to stop new drilling for oil and gas on federal land and in federal waters and to rejoin the 2015 Paris climate accord that President Donald Trump gave notice of quitting. He would reinstate Obama-era regulations of greenhouse gas emissions, including methane, the largest component of natural gas.</p><p>The Biden climate platform also states that all federal infrastructure investments and federal permits would need to be assessed for their climate impacts. Analysts say such a test could impede future LNG plants and pipelines, though not those that already have federal approval. </p><p>Climate change activists who pushed for that language say much depends on who would have oversight of federal agencies that regulate the industry. Some are wary of Biden's reliance on advice from Obama-era officials, including former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, who is now on the board of Southern Company, a utility, and a former Obama environmental aide, Heather Zichal, who has served on the board of Cheniere Energy, an LNG exporter. </p>
The Push for U.S. Fuel Exports<p>As vice president, Biden was part of an administration that pushed hard for global climate action while also promoting U.S. oil and gas exports to its allies and trading partners. As fracking boomed, Obama ended a 40-year ban on crude oil exports. In Europe, LNG was touted both as an alternative to coal and as strategic competition with Russian pipelines.</p><p>That much, at least, continued with President Trump. Under Energy Secretary Rick Perry, the agency referred to liquified U.S. hydrocarbons as "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/freedom-gas-energy-department.html" target="_blank">freedom gas</a>."</p><p>Mr. Trump has also championed the interests of coal, oil, and gas while denigrating the findings of government climate scientists. He rejected the Paris accord as unfair to the U.S. and detrimental to its economy, but has offered no alternative path to emissions cuts. </p><p>Still, Trump's foreign policy has not always served the LNG industry: Tariffs on foreign steel drove up pipeline costs, and a trade war with China stayed the hand of Chinese LNG importers wary of reliance on U.S. suppliers. </p><p>Even his regulatory rollbacks could be a double-edged sword. By relaxing curbs last month on methane leaks, the U.S. has ceded ground to European regulators who are drafting emissions standards that LNG producers are watching closely. "That's a precursor of fights that will be fought in all the rest of the developed world," says Mr. Hutchison. </p><p>Indeed, some oil-and-gas exporters had urged the Trump administration not to abandon the tougher rules, since they undercut their claim to offer a cleaner-burning way of producing heat and electricity. "U.S. LNG is not going to be able to compete in a world that's focused on methane emissions and intensity," says Erin Blanton, a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. </p>
Stepping on the Gas<p>In July, the Department of Energy issued an export license to Jordan Cove's developer, Canada's Pembina Pipeline Corp. In a statement, Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette said the project would provide "reliable, affordable, and cleaner-burning natural gas to our allies around the world."</p><p>As a West Coast terminal, Jordan Cove offers a faster route to Asia where its capacity of 7.8 million tons of LNG a year could serve to heat more than 15 million homes. At its peak, its construction would also create 6,000 jobs, the company says, in a stagnant corner of Oregon.</p><p>But the project still lacks multiple local and state permits, and its biggest asset – a Pacific port – has become its biggest handicap, says Ms. Blanton. "They are putting infrastructure in a state where there's no political support for the pipeline or the terminal, unlike in Louisiana or Texas," she says. </p><p>Ms. Brown, the environmental lawyer, says she wants to see Jordan Cove buried, not just mothballed until natural gas prices recover. But she knows that it's only one among many LNG projects and that others will likely get built, even if Biden is elected in November, despite growing evidence of the harm caused by methane emissions. </p>
- Biden Commits to Banning Fossil Fuel Subsidies After DNC Dropped It ›
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- Biden Announces $2 Trillion Climate and Green Recovery Plan ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
By Grayson Jaggers
The connection between the pandemic and our dietary habits is undeniable. The stress of isolation coupled with a struggling economy has caused many of us to seek comfort with our old friends: Big Mac, Tom Collins, Ben and Jerry. But overindulging in this kind of food and drink might not just be affecting your waistline, but could potentially put you at greater risk of illness by hindering your immune system.
- 15 Indigenous Crops to Boost Your Immune System and Celebrate ... ›
- 15 Supplements to Boost Your Immune System Right Now - EcoWatch ›
- Should I Exercise During the Coronavirus Pandemic? Experts ... ›
- The Immune System's Fight Against the Coronavirus - EcoWatch ›
As the world continues to navigate the line between reopening and maintaining safety protocols to slow the spread of the coronavirus, rapid and accurate diagnostic screening remains critical to control the outbreak. New mobile-phone-based, self-administered COVID-19 tests being developed independently around the world could be a key breakthrough in making testing more widely available, especially in developing nations.
- FDA Approves First In-Home Test for Coronavirus - EcoWatch ›
- When Should You Get a COVID-19 or Antibody Test? - EcoWatch ›
- Trump Plans to End Federal Funding for COVID-19 Testing Sites ... ›
- Trump Insider Embeds Climate Denial Into Agency Reports ... ›
- Climate Denier Is Named to Leadership Role at NOAA - EcoWatch ›
New Jersey is one step closer to passing what environmental advocates say is the strongest anti-plastic legislation in the nation.