![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tanaqui posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
thisfinecrewHearing on Nomination of Attorney General Scott Pruitt to be Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
When: Wednesday 18 January from 10:00am
Committee Members: (as at 13 Jan) Chairman: Senator John Barrasso (R – WY), Senator James M. Inhofe (R – OK), Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R – WV), Senator John Boozman, (R – AR), Senator Roger F. Wicker (R - MS), Senator Deb Fischer (R - NE), Senator Jeff Sessions (R – AL), Senator Jerry Moran (R – KS), Senator Mike Rounds (R – SD), Senator Joni Ernst (R - IA), Senator Dan Sullivan (R – AK),Ernst, Ranking Member: Senator Thomas R. Carper (D – DE), Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D - MD), Senator Bernard Sanders (D – VT), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D - RI), Senator Jeff Merkley (D - OR), Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, (D – NY), Senator Cory A. Booker (D - NJ), Senator Edward J. Markey (D – MA), Senator Tammy Duckworth (D – IL), Senator Kamala D, Harris (D - CA)
What the committee should be concerned about: Scott Pruitt is the (Republican) Oklahoma Attorney General and a "key architect" -- as one of a group of Republican attorneys general who formed an alliance with some of the nation’s top energy producers -- of the legal battle against the Obama administration’s climate change policies and regulatory agenda. If he is appointed, he would become "the most hostile E.P.A. administrator toward clean air and safe drinking water in history."
It is clear from Pruitt's actions and statements while Oklahoma attorney general that he shares the views expressed by Trump during the campaign that climate change is a hoax, that the U.S. should cancel the Paris Accords and that the Clean Power Plan is a "war on coal". He ran for attorney general in 2010 on a platform of opposing the E.P.A. and when, once elected, created a “federalism unit” in his office, explicitly designed to fight President Obama’s healthcare law and environmental regulations on the grounds that they infringed on states' rights. The efforts of the unit resulted in a 28-state lawsuit against the current climate rules which is awaiting a decision in federal court but widely expected to advance to the Supreme Court. Pruitt has brought several other cases on similar "states' rights" grounds and lost the only case so far settled, when it reached the Supreme Court. In addition, he has sought and accepted substantial funds from the energy industry for his own campaigns and other Republican causes, and sent out letters on state stationery to the E.P.A., the Interior Department, the Office of Management and Budget and President Obama that were drafted by energy lobbyists.
It is likely that, if appointed, he will make good on the threats regularly made by Trump while campaigning to dismantle the E.P.A. and roll back many of the regulations that have reduced Americans’ exposures to industrial pollution.
Suggested script for calling representatives:"Hi, my name is ________, and I'm a constituent of the Senator. I want to let the Senator know that I object to Scott Pruitt as the next Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mr Pruitt is on record as a climate change denier and anti-regulation mouthpiece of the energy industry, and has brought several cases as Oklahoma Attorney General aimed at overturning E.P.A. regulations. The poor quality of Mr Pruitt's legal and environmental arguments is shown by him losing the only case so far settled. Mr Pruitt's repeated rejection of the vital work done by the E.P.A. to protect Americans from the effects of environmental damage makes him unsuited to leading an agency playing a key role in protecting our health and quality of life. He should therefore not be our next Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Please use the comments to suggest more reasons why the committee should reject the nomination and to suggest amendments to the calling script.
When: Wednesday 18 January from 10:00am
Committee Members: (as at 13 Jan) Chairman: Senator John Barrasso (R – WY), Senator James M. Inhofe (R – OK), Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R – WV), Senator John Boozman, (R – AR), Senator Roger F. Wicker (R - MS), Senator Deb Fischer (R - NE), Senator Jeff Sessions (R – AL), Senator Jerry Moran (R – KS), Senator Mike Rounds (R – SD), Senator Joni Ernst (R - IA), Senator Dan Sullivan (R – AK),Ernst, Ranking Member: Senator Thomas R. Carper (D – DE), Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D - MD), Senator Bernard Sanders (D – VT), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D - RI), Senator Jeff Merkley (D - OR), Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, (D – NY), Senator Cory A. Booker (D - NJ), Senator Edward J. Markey (D – MA), Senator Tammy Duckworth (D – IL), Senator Kamala D, Harris (D - CA)
What the committee should be concerned about: Scott Pruitt is the (Republican) Oklahoma Attorney General and a "key architect" -- as one of a group of Republican attorneys general who formed an alliance with some of the nation’s top energy producers -- of the legal battle against the Obama administration’s climate change policies and regulatory agenda. If he is appointed, he would become "the most hostile E.P.A. administrator toward clean air and safe drinking water in history."
It is clear from Pruitt's actions and statements while Oklahoma attorney general that he shares the views expressed by Trump during the campaign that climate change is a hoax, that the U.S. should cancel the Paris Accords and that the Clean Power Plan is a "war on coal". He ran for attorney general in 2010 on a platform of opposing the E.P.A. and when, once elected, created a “federalism unit” in his office, explicitly designed to fight President Obama’s healthcare law and environmental regulations on the grounds that they infringed on states' rights. The efforts of the unit resulted in a 28-state lawsuit against the current climate rules which is awaiting a decision in federal court but widely expected to advance to the Supreme Court. Pruitt has brought several other cases on similar "states' rights" grounds and lost the only case so far settled, when it reached the Supreme Court. In addition, he has sought and accepted substantial funds from the energy industry for his own campaigns and other Republican causes, and sent out letters on state stationery to the E.P.A., the Interior Department, the Office of Management and Budget and President Obama that were drafted by energy lobbyists.
It is likely that, if appointed, he will make good on the threats regularly made by Trump while campaigning to dismantle the E.P.A. and roll back many of the regulations that have reduced Americans’ exposures to industrial pollution.
Suggested script for calling representatives:"Hi, my name is ________, and I'm a constituent of the Senator. I want to let the Senator know that I object to Scott Pruitt as the next Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mr Pruitt is on record as a climate change denier and anti-regulation mouthpiece of the energy industry, and has brought several cases as Oklahoma Attorney General aimed at overturning E.P.A. regulations. The poor quality of Mr Pruitt's legal and environmental arguments is shown by him losing the only case so far settled. Mr Pruitt's repeated rejection of the vital work done by the E.P.A. to protect Americans from the effects of environmental damage makes him unsuited to leading an agency playing a key role in protecting our health and quality of life. He should therefore not be our next Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Please use the comments to suggest more reasons why the committee should reject the nomination and to suggest amendments to the calling script.
no subject
Date: 2017-01-17 05:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-01-17 12:37 pm (UTC)It's a toss up for me between him and Price as to which is worse after Sessions. (At least Price may be a decent surgeon. Pruitt is evidently not even a very good lawyer, given he keeps bringing cases based on essentially the same argument he lost on in the first case to be settled.)