SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Scott Pruitt Advances, But Is Trump Planning to Abolish EPA Entirely?
"Pruitt's record gives us no reason to believe that he will vigorously hold polluters accountable or enforce the law. Senators need to vote no"
Feb 02, 2017
Scott Pruitt, the pick to head up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has advanced closer to his confirmation vote, after Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved his nomination on Thursday.
And while that should leave any Obama-era EPA officials "very worried," as White House adviser and climate change denier Myron Ebell told the Guardian, the agency may be facing an even grimmer prospect--because President Donald Trump is reportedly taking steps to abolish the EPA entirely.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian on Thursday, Ebell, who headed up Trump's EPA transition team, said the president may start incrementally dismantling the EPA, as he determines what to do with the agency's various functions as assigned by Congress.
Research, reports, and data would not be removed from the EPA's website, but climate education material might be "withdrawn," Ebell said.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight."
--May Boeve, 350.org
"To abolish an agency requires not only thought but time because you have to decide what to do with certain functions that Congress has assigned to that agency," he said. "President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA or 'leave a little bit'. It is a goal he has and sometimes it takes a long time to achieve goals. You can't abolish the EPA by waving a magic wand."
Whether the agency is dismantled entirely, left as a shell of itself, or set to operate under Pruitt's leadership, its future looks dire.
The environmental panel advanced Pruitt's nomination after the Republican chairman, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, suspended committee rules amid an ongoing Democratic boycott. The rules required at least two Democrats' presence to move forward with a vote. The Finance Committee employed a similar approach on Wednesday.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said the opposing lawmakers were "wasting their lives" by boycotting.
Senate Democrats and environmental organizations waged a massive opposition campaign against the Oklahoma attorney general, who has had a major role in 14 lawsuits aimed at dismantling environmental regulations nationwide.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight," said May Boeve, executive director of the climate group 350.org, in response to the vote. "It's despicable but not surprising that members of Trump's party want a climate denier running the EPA."
But the fight is not over. Groups are now urging the full Senate to reject Pruitt's nomination.
Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), warned that "Pruitt will not carry out the job of EPA administrator to robustly enforce our environmental laws and ensure the clean air, clean water, and pristine lands that all Americans deserve. When the EPA doesn't do its job, American lives are put at risk."
"Pruitt's record gives us no reason to believe that he will vigorously hold polluters accountable or enforce the law," Kimmell said. "Senators need to vote no."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Scott Pruitt, the pick to head up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has advanced closer to his confirmation vote, after Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved his nomination on Thursday.
And while that should leave any Obama-era EPA officials "very worried," as White House adviser and climate change denier Myron Ebell told the Guardian, the agency may be facing an even grimmer prospect--because President Donald Trump is reportedly taking steps to abolish the EPA entirely.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian on Thursday, Ebell, who headed up Trump's EPA transition team, said the president may start incrementally dismantling the EPA, as he determines what to do with the agency's various functions as assigned by Congress.
Research, reports, and data would not be removed from the EPA's website, but climate education material might be "withdrawn," Ebell said.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight."
--May Boeve, 350.org
"To abolish an agency requires not only thought but time because you have to decide what to do with certain functions that Congress has assigned to that agency," he said. "President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA or 'leave a little bit'. It is a goal he has and sometimes it takes a long time to achieve goals. You can't abolish the EPA by waving a magic wand."
Whether the agency is dismantled entirely, left as a shell of itself, or set to operate under Pruitt's leadership, its future looks dire.
The environmental panel advanced Pruitt's nomination after the Republican chairman, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, suspended committee rules amid an ongoing Democratic boycott. The rules required at least two Democrats' presence to move forward with a vote. The Finance Committee employed a similar approach on Wednesday.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said the opposing lawmakers were "wasting their lives" by boycotting.
Senate Democrats and environmental organizations waged a massive opposition campaign against the Oklahoma attorney general, who has had a major role in 14 lawsuits aimed at dismantling environmental regulations nationwide.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight," said May Boeve, executive director of the climate group 350.org, in response to the vote. "It's despicable but not surprising that members of Trump's party want a climate denier running the EPA."
But the fight is not over. Groups are now urging the full Senate to reject Pruitt's nomination.
Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), warned that "Pruitt will not carry out the job of EPA administrator to robustly enforce our environmental laws and ensure the clean air, clean water, and pristine lands that all Americans deserve. When the EPA doesn't do its job, American lives are put at risk."
"Pruitt's record gives us no reason to believe that he will vigorously hold polluters accountable or enforce the law," Kimmell said. "Senators need to vote no."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Scott Pruitt, the pick to head up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has advanced closer to his confirmation vote, after Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved his nomination on Thursday.
And while that should leave any Obama-era EPA officials "very worried," as White House adviser and climate change denier Myron Ebell told the Guardian, the agency may be facing an even grimmer prospect--because President Donald Trump is reportedly taking steps to abolish the EPA entirely.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian on Thursday, Ebell, who headed up Trump's EPA transition team, said the president may start incrementally dismantling the EPA, as he determines what to do with the agency's various functions as assigned by Congress.
Research, reports, and data would not be removed from the EPA's website, but climate education material might be "withdrawn," Ebell said.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight."
--May Boeve, 350.org
"To abolish an agency requires not only thought but time because you have to decide what to do with certain functions that Congress has assigned to that agency," he said. "President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA or 'leave a little bit'. It is a goal he has and sometimes it takes a long time to achieve goals. You can't abolish the EPA by waving a magic wand."
Whether the agency is dismantled entirely, left as a shell of itself, or set to operate under Pruitt's leadership, its future looks dire.
The environmental panel advanced Pruitt's nomination after the Republican chairman, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, suspended committee rules amid an ongoing Democratic boycott. The rules required at least two Democrats' presence to move forward with a vote. The Finance Committee employed a similar approach on Wednesday.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said the opposing lawmakers were "wasting their lives" by boycotting.
Senate Democrats and environmental organizations waged a massive opposition campaign against the Oklahoma attorney general, who has had a major role in 14 lawsuits aimed at dismantling environmental regulations nationwide.
"The Trump administration has let the fossil fuel industry hijack the EPA in broad daylight," said May Boeve, executive director of the climate group 350.org, in response to the vote. "It's despicable but not surprising that members of Trump's party want a climate denier running the EPA."
But the fight is not over. Groups are now urging the full Senate to reject Pruitt's nomination.
Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), warned that "Pruitt will not carry out the job of EPA administrator to robustly enforce our environmental laws and ensure the clean air, clean water, and pristine lands that all Americans deserve. When the EPA doesn't do its job, American lives are put at risk."
"Pruitt's record gives us no reason to believe that he will vigorously hold polluters accountable or enforce the law," Kimmell said. "Senators need to vote no."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.