Sierra Club launches television ad calling on Trump to fire Scott Pruitt

  • Sierra Club launches television ad calling on Trump to fire Scott Pruitt

Sierra Club launches television ad calling on Trump to fire Scott Pruitt

Environment Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt declined an offer from the White House to help him prepare for what could be a marathon day of testimony before Congress Thursday, electing instead to prepare with a team of the loyal advisors he brought to Washington from Oklahoma, sources tell ABC News.

The proposed rule that will be published in the Federal Register appears to get around this obstacle for industry studies by granting Pruitt the power to personally to decide what exemptions can be made.

The EPA's critics "are forever trying to cut this data and saying the broad scientific community aren't giving them all the information they need to disprove this data", says Dan Costa, former director of the EPA's Air, Climate, and Energy Research Program, who recently retired.

Geophysicist Marcia McNutt, who is president of the National Academy of Sciences, said Tuesday that she is concerned the rule would prevent the EPA from relying on the best available scientific evidence. Scientists will have trouble recruiting study participants if the rule is enacted, she predicted, even if they pledge to redact private information before handing it over to the government. But, the scientists wrote, "many public health studies can not be replicated, as doing so would require intentionally and unethically exposing people and the environment to harmful contaminants or recreating one-time events". "I can't say anything any clearer than that", Pruitt said in the interview that aired earlier this month. A series of studies has shown that fine particulate matter, often referred to as soot, enters the lungs and bloodstream and can cause illnesses such as asthma as well as premature death. "It's written very prescriptively, focused on getting down to the inconvenient studies for those being regulated".

And while there is no estimate yet for how much it would cost EPA to obtain and disseminate studies' underlying data, the Congressional Budget Office has projected that Smith's measure, if enacted, would cost the agency $250 million for initial compliance and then between $1 million and $100 million annually. Though the EPA proposal is not as far-reaching, applying to economically significant regulations only, it is still burdensome for a cash-strapped agency.

Forbes started with the headline "EPA Chief Scott Pruitt: Delete Decades of Science In the Name of "Transparency" and went on from there. And he's taken aim at science in other ways, as he highlighted in Tuesday's speech, such as changing the composition of the agency's independent science advisory boards.

"The critics of this move understand that the Endangerment Finding and other over-reaching regulations are based on black box "secret science" that can not stand up to prudent review", she said.

Tuesday's move advances that goal. "Americans deserve to assess the legitimacy of the science underpinning EPA decisions that may impact their lives". The process was breached by individuals here at this agency and there's going to be accountability there.

"After throwing out any science that contains personal information, what is left to keep Scott Pruitt from allowing industries to deregulate their commitment to operate under safe practices?" "He's changing the internal rules of the game by which EPA plays in order to rig it".