Green Group Starts Campaign Against EPA Nominee Scott Pruitt
Apparently, Pruitt doesn’t care about children.
The Clean Air Moms Action, part of the Environmental Defense Action Fund, has started a $100,000 campaign against President-elect Donald Trump’s EPA nominee Scott Pruitt.
The campaign will use children’s health concerns in ads in Washington, D.C. and six states that have “senators who could swing the confirmation vote.”
What an original technique! Using children to attack your opponent because you don’t hate children, do you? Yeah, well, evidence has shown that Pruitt embraces science. Also, the EPA has done a stellar job with environment disasters, haven’t they?
Their ads will talk about Pruitt fighting against President Barack Obama over a rule “limiting mercury and other air toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants.” They will also cite research that says Pruitt doubted research that proved mercury harms children’s health.
Leslie pointed out in December that Pruitt’s nomination would cause the left’s heads to explode. It appears she predicted correctly because to spend that much money on a nominee is a lot!
Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma, has remained close to the fossil fuel industry and battled against Obama’s climate change policies. He joined other state attorneys to sue to EPA over the Clean Power Plan.
Former Florida Governor and GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush wrote an op-ed at CNN that disputes Pruitt as the anti-science man as the left portrays him:
Unlike liberals who want to shut down any rational debate about climate change, Pruitt has acknowledged human impact on the climate and supports a robust discussion about its effects and what the government should and shouldn’t do to address it.
In a 2013 speech, Pruitt demonstrated that he understood the proper role of the EPA, completely repudiating Democrats’ ludicrous claims about how he would lead the agency:
“May I say this to you and please hear my heart on this. … It’s not good for us to say that the EPA doesn’t have any role. Because just think about it, you have a power plant in Arkansas that’s burning coal irresponsibly or inconsistent with the statue, and it comes over to Oklahoma and Texas. So there is a role for the EPA, it’s just that they assert themselves in ways that are above that role.”
Bush wrote that Pruitt can turn around the EPA because he “understands how to rein in an out-of-control bureaucracy and ensure that Washington focuses solely on its core functions.” Pruitt also wants to empower “the states” and limit “the intrusion of the federal government in every area of our lives.”
FreedomWorks’ Adam Brandon has applauded the pick:
“Under his leadership at the EPA, Americans can have safe air and water and protection from government overreach through rules and regulations,” Adam Brandon, the group’s president, said in a post.
“Attorney General Pruitt is a staunch believer in federalism and Article I of the Constitution, which charges the legislative branch with the power to make laws, not executive-level regulatory agencies. He has also seen the negative impact regulation has on businesses and consumers,” Brandon wrote.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I see defeat after defeat after defeat for all these lib orgs.
These “environmental” groups are fighting for their existence because the current EPA has given them billions in fake settlements and for fake research to support the EPA agenda.
They are fighting for the green – money, not the environment.
Of course the rent seekers are fighting for their place at the trough.
What does a 100k campaign fund buy? 10 seconds of airtime??
It’s kind of funny – $100,000 sounds like a lot, but in terms of political campaigns that’s chump change.
It looks like the kind of thing they feel they have to do to keep the donations from their base coming in. (hello, Tom Steyer!)
The EPA did such a great job in flint, MI. they knew there were issues but the Obama appointee said nothing.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s top Midwest official said her department knew as early as April about the lack of corrosion controls in Flint’s water supply — a situation that likely put residents at risk for lead contamination — but said her hands were tied in bringing the information to the public.
Starting with inquiries made in February, the federal agency battled Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality behind the scenes for at least six months over whether Flint needed to use chemical treatments to keep lead lines and plumbing connections from leaching into drinking water. The EPA did not publicize its concern that Flint residents’ health was jeopardized by the state’s insistence that such controls were not required by law.
Instead of moving quickly to verify the concerns or take preventative measures, federal officials opted to prod the DEQ to act, EPA Region 5 Administrator Susan Hedman told The Detroit News this week. Hedman said she sought a legal opinion on whether the EPA could force action, but it wasn’t completed until November.