Michigan Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell has been an outspoken advocate for the reinstatement of Toxic Air pollution protections that were rolled back by EPA Chief Scott Pruitt. Pruitt is on Capitol Hill today, fielding questions ranging from his insane department spending to his anti-science philosophy, to his overall awful performance as the head of an agency that is supposed to protect the environment. In February it was reported that Pruitt would be closing the EPA office that protects children from environmental threats. Rep. Dingell wanted to ask if Scott Pruitt even pretended to look into whether or not children might be adversely affected by his sweeping rollbacks on regulations against the industries that historically—when unregulated—poison our water and air.
Dingell began an exchange with Pruitt asking, in effect, if his department did any meaningful studies he could point to that would support the guidelines he oversaw, and their affects on human beings in the United States. After a bit of wobbly back and forth, these two questions and their non-answers are the most illuminating.
Dingell: Yes or no. Did E.P.A. Conduct an analysis of the health effects, including the potential increased risk of cancer of this decision before releasing the January 25 guidance memo.
Pruitt: That's something we have to provide.
Dingell: Did you provide an analysis on the effects on children, babies, or pregnant women?
Pruitt: That's something we have to assess and provide.
How is that something that still needs to be “assessed?” The answer Pruitt is looking for here is “no.” No, he and his department did none of these things because these guidelines and decisions have been written like a note to Santa Claus from the industries most affected by environmental regulations.