To say that there are issues with Scott Pruitt’s nomination to lead the EPA would be an understatement (check out EWG’s top ten reasons why he’s unfit for the job). One of Pruitt’s main issues is something that Trump and his supporters seem to a whole lot about: emails. During his hearing, Pruitt was pressed on his exceptionally cozy relationship with the fossil fuel industry, and senators requested Pruitt produce the documentation that could better illustrate his intentions. Instead of proving himself innocent and free of conflicts of interest by turning over the evidence in question, Pruitt’s attitude was more along the lines of telling the senate to go FOIA themselves.
Turns out, that’s exactly what the Center for Media and Democracy has been doing --suing to demand Pruitt turn over emails they FOIA’d two years ago. He finally complied, sort of. The Oklahoma Attorney General’s office turned over only 411 emails, but CMD knows this isn’t the full scope of what they asked, because they already know there were over 3,000 emails relevant to their request. And the released messages don’t include those between Pruitt and his ghost writers in the fossil fuel industry, which are what CMD is seeking. So they will be back in court tomorrow to try and do exactly what Pruitt suggested- FOIA his emails.
Also tomorrow, the Senate will likely be going through the debate process on whether or not to confirm Pruitt, unless McConnell delays the vote to let CMD’s court case go forward like Senate Dems are asking. (EPW Chair John Barrasso said Pruitt will get a vote this week.)
With the only hope of rejecting Pruitt resting on the votes of GOP Senators, the days of EPA enforcing environmental regulations are likely numbered. Similarly, we shouldn’t be surprised to see water protection responsibilities shift to states, where industry can more easily apply pressure to soften regulations.
To be fair, it might not really matter at this point. Industry is already doing a fine job of convincing Congress to do its bidding, particularly with the use of the Congressional Review Act to overturn regulations. And it doesn’t seem all that pricey for them either. The Center for American Progress took a look at who’s funding the lawmakers who sponsored CRA resolutions. To no one’s surprise, CAP found “industries that have succeeded in having Congress overturn an environmental rule have donated an average of $2.3 million to the sponsors of the CRA resolutions in both chambers.”
Yesterday President Trump signed the first industry-friendly CRA revoking a SEC anti-corruption rule that forced energy and extraction companies to disclose their payments to foreign governments. The rule was designed to prevent bribery by making sure we could see how much money the lucrative contracts give governments in exchange for mining. With the rule gone, oily energy companies can “grease the wheels” of despotic regimes without any concern of the public finding out.
That way, authoritarians are free to embezzle funds from the mineral resources that ostensibly belong to the people they govern. Fun!
By the way, before he was Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson was heavily opposed this rule. Also, this overturning of an anti-bribery regulation is the very first CRA President Drain the Swamp signed.
Consider it a Valentine’s Day gift to Trump’s fossil fuel friends.
Top Climate and Clean Energy Stories:
India’s Air Pollution Rivals China’s as World’s Deadliest - India has registered an alarming increase of nearly 50 percent in premature deaths from particulate matter between 1990 and 2015, the report says.