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
A new interpretation of the Clean Water Rule was sent to the White House by the EPA on Friday. Administrator Scott Pruitt is expected to scale back protections for wetlands and streams. (Photo: Varanos/Flickr/cc)
Forget His Fancy Lotion and Chick-Fil-A, Pruitt's Gutting of EPA Rule Threatens Drinking Water of 117 Million Americans
"Don't let Scott Pruitt's ethics scandals distract you, because they're not distracting him from executing his agenda of dismantling even the most basic public health protections."
Jun 15, 2018
As Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt faces mounting ethics controversies, his agency on Friday advanced a proposal to roll back a rule designed to limit pollution in the drinking water of about 117 million Americans.
\u201cDon\u2019t let Scott Pruitt\u2019s ethics scandals distract you, because they\u2019re not distracting him from executing his agenda of dismantling even the most basic public health protections like keeping antifreeze chemicals & paint strippers out of our drinking water.\nhttps://t.co/OYkZuCWeGU\u201d— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1528835522
A new interpretation of the Clean Water Rule, also known as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS), was sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, after which the proposal can be released to the public for comment.
As President Barack Obama's EPA wrote the rule in 2015, it extended pollution safeguards to two million miles of streams and 20 million acres of wetland. Previously, only larger public water bodies like the Chesapeake Bay and the Puget Sound had been protected from pollution from fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals used by farmers and developers.
As requested by President Donald Trump last year, the new rule is expected to stipulate that only large public bodies of water and the rivers and streams that flow into them should be protected--a rollback that critics say threatens public health and continues the administration's deregulation agenda.
In addition, this narrow interpretation of the Clean Water Rule could directly benefit the president and his business, noted Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW).
\u201cGuess who benefits from Scott Pruitt\u2019s decision to revoke the Clean Water Rule? Trump and his golf courses. Because of course it comes back to Trump\u2019s businesses.\nhttps://t.co/SkHwtssei3\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1529078420
Some Pruitt and Trump critics noted that the proposal was sent to the OMB as Pruitt faces criticism over a number of alleged ethics violations--including his use of EPA resources to search Washington, D.C. for a specific lotion, his demand that an aide set up a call to secure his wife a franchising opportunity with Chick-fil-A, and his use of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to buy personalized journals and pens. The scandals have led some Republicans to call for Pruitt's resignation.
\u201cScott Pruitt has a plan to save his job https://t.co/7hGLj98CDc\u201d— Brian Kahn (@Brian Kahn) 1529027880
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
barack obamacenters for disease control (cdc)environmentepapollutionpublic healthscott pruitttrumpismwater
As Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt faces mounting ethics controversies, his agency on Friday advanced a proposal to roll back a rule designed to limit pollution in the drinking water of about 117 million Americans.
\u201cDon\u2019t let Scott Pruitt\u2019s ethics scandals distract you, because they\u2019re not distracting him from executing his agenda of dismantling even the most basic public health protections like keeping antifreeze chemicals & paint strippers out of our drinking water.\nhttps://t.co/OYkZuCWeGU\u201d— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1528835522
A new interpretation of the Clean Water Rule, also known as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS), was sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, after which the proposal can be released to the public for comment.
As President Barack Obama's EPA wrote the rule in 2015, it extended pollution safeguards to two million miles of streams and 20 million acres of wetland. Previously, only larger public water bodies like the Chesapeake Bay and the Puget Sound had been protected from pollution from fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals used by farmers and developers.
As requested by President Donald Trump last year, the new rule is expected to stipulate that only large public bodies of water and the rivers and streams that flow into them should be protected--a rollback that critics say threatens public health and continues the administration's deregulation agenda.
In addition, this narrow interpretation of the Clean Water Rule could directly benefit the president and his business, noted Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW).
\u201cGuess who benefits from Scott Pruitt\u2019s decision to revoke the Clean Water Rule? Trump and his golf courses. Because of course it comes back to Trump\u2019s businesses.\nhttps://t.co/SkHwtssei3\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1529078420
Some Pruitt and Trump critics noted that the proposal was sent to the OMB as Pruitt faces criticism over a number of alleged ethics violations--including his use of EPA resources to search Washington, D.C. for a specific lotion, his demand that an aide set up a call to secure his wife a franchising opportunity with Chick-fil-A, and his use of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to buy personalized journals and pens. The scandals have led some Republicans to call for Pruitt's resignation.
\u201cScott Pruitt has a plan to save his job https://t.co/7hGLj98CDc\u201d— Brian Kahn (@Brian Kahn) 1529027880
As Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt faces mounting ethics controversies, his agency on Friday advanced a proposal to roll back a rule designed to limit pollution in the drinking water of about 117 million Americans.
\u201cDon\u2019t let Scott Pruitt\u2019s ethics scandals distract you, because they\u2019re not distracting him from executing his agenda of dismantling even the most basic public health protections like keeping antifreeze chemicals & paint strippers out of our drinking water.\nhttps://t.co/OYkZuCWeGU\u201d— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1528835522
A new interpretation of the Clean Water Rule, also known as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS), was sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, after which the proposal can be released to the public for comment.
As President Barack Obama's EPA wrote the rule in 2015, it extended pollution safeguards to two million miles of streams and 20 million acres of wetland. Previously, only larger public water bodies like the Chesapeake Bay and the Puget Sound had been protected from pollution from fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals used by farmers and developers.
As requested by President Donald Trump last year, the new rule is expected to stipulate that only large public bodies of water and the rivers and streams that flow into them should be protected--a rollback that critics say threatens public health and continues the administration's deregulation agenda.
In addition, this narrow interpretation of the Clean Water Rule could directly benefit the president and his business, noted Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW).
\u201cGuess who benefits from Scott Pruitt\u2019s decision to revoke the Clean Water Rule? Trump and his golf courses. Because of course it comes back to Trump\u2019s businesses.\nhttps://t.co/SkHwtssei3\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1529078420
Some Pruitt and Trump critics noted that the proposal was sent to the OMB as Pruitt faces criticism over a number of alleged ethics violations--including his use of EPA resources to search Washington, D.C. for a specific lotion, his demand that an aide set up a call to secure his wife a franchising opportunity with Chick-fil-A, and his use of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to buy personalized journals and pens. The scandals have led some Republicans to call for Pruitt's resignation.
\u201cScott Pruitt has a plan to save his job https://t.co/7hGLj98CDc\u201d— Brian Kahn (@Brian Kahn) 1529027880
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.