Trump’s EPA pick: Who is Scott Pruitt?

The choice of Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt for administrator of the agency charged with protecting human health and the environment raises major concerns for clean drinking water and rivers nationwide.

Scott Pruitt - wrong choice for protecting our nation's rivers

President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to lead the Environmental Protection Agency is someone who has fought consistently to block environmental protections.

The choice of Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt for administrator of the agency charged with protecting human health and the environment raises major concerns for clean drinking water and rivers nationwide.

“This appointment raises serious alarms for all Americans who value rivers and the clean water they provide,” said American Rivers President Bob Irvin.

Scott Pruitt was elected Attorney General of Oklahoma in 2010 and served as an Oklahoma State Senator from 1998 to 2006.

As Oklahoma’s Attorney General, Scott Pruitt sued to block the Clean Water Rule, issued by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which restored federal protection under the Clean Water Act to headwater streams and wetlands. Pruitt has also sued to block EPA’s Clean Power Plan which would reduce pollution that causes climate change and harms rivers.

“Every family in the United States deserves clean, safe drinking water flowing from their taps,” said Irvin.

“Rivers provide drinking water for 2/3 of Americans. By filing suit to overturn the Clean Water Rule, Scott Pruitt called into question his commitment to protecting clean water for every American.”

Pruitt received more than $300,000 from fossil fuel industries as a candidate for state office in Oklahoma. He has made a career of defending polluters over people, fighting to undermine protections for land, water and wildlife.

Is this the kind of person we want heading the EPA? The person in charge of defending our clean water supplies from pollution, and making sure the air our kids breathe is healthy?

On the campaign trail, President-elect Trump boasted about how he’d roll back clean water protections and other environmental safeguards. But Trump recently said he wants to uphold the conservation legacy of Teddy Roosevelt. So the question is, which Trump will it be? Unfortunately, his selection of Scott Pruitt to run EPA is an answer that would make Teddy spin in his grave.

We need your support so we can be a strong voice for rivers and clean water in the fights ahead. Please make a donation today.

10 responses to “Trump’s EPA pick: Who is Scott Pruitt?

  1. Sorry people, but there is little hope of Trump being even a hint of what TR stood for in his time. His cabinet choices show his true colors! We must always judge Trump on what he does, not what he says! His appointments are a line-up of billionaires that have no intention of protecting our water, the greatest resource known to man, or our air or environment. Extraction of dirty energy is their motive and it will line the pockets of the dirty energy companies that are willing to risk our health and sell us out for their greed. Short term jobs will result from their action, of course the Keystone Pipeline will create some jobs while it is being built but mostly computers will take over after it is built, and it will raise havoc on the environment and like any pipeline it will have breaks, it is not a matter of if, but when. Hundreds of thousands of jobs could be lost due to laws and attitudes to ignore clean energy sources like wind, solar and geothermal. China, I dare say will beat us to new technology in clean energy and will put themselves in a position to sell such technology to the rest of the world, while we are destroying our land and water for old dirty energy! Can you say welcome “dirty tar sands” oil? Trump surely can and will do everything he can to make that happen. I applaud American Rivers, Sierra Club, League for Conservation Voters, etc…for their work and their plan to resist Trump and company and work on environment issues at the local level! It will take a lot of work and money to keep the dirty energy people in check or minimize the damage they will cause as we are getting very close to putting enough carbon in our atmosphere to effect climate change to the point of no return. The earth will survive, as it has over time when there has been mass ice or little ice, this experiment of changing the carbon in the short term has never been tested, that is why scientist describe the graph for recent climate change as a “hockey stick”. Many species will not be able to adapt to this short rise in temperature change. Our coastal areas will be destroyed, mass populations will have to relocate inland, drought will deplete our food supply, clean water will be at a premium, and yes because of this turmoil wall street and our economy will suffer as will your individual wealth. You don’t have to believe Green Peace or the Sierra Club to check out anthropogenic climate change, just take a look at the major investment firms websites, check out Blackrock or UBS (who has a 50+ page report on climate change concern for their investors). Just go to their website and search “climate change”. We putting our children and grandchildren in a position that has a 80% to 90% chance of disaster. The cost in lives and survival will be immense. We must fight with every weapon we have to try and stop this, donate what you can to AR or other environmental organizations, we will need a lot of dollars to fight them in court, VOTE, but also vote with your wallet, stop supporting companies willing to pollute or support polluters, write your representatives often, try to spread the word to your family and friends, maybe this will be enough to move us in the right direction to turn this around before it is too late!

  2. I would like to see our federal, state and local government disaster-relief agencies offer higher disaster-relief compensation….for people who choose to MOVE OUT OF FLOODPLAINS after damaging flood events….and also higher government disaster-relief compensation for people who choose to rebuild their flood damaged homes on elevated stilts/pylons…..if they choose to remain in floodplains after damaging flood events. This would permanently solve the problem of large/recurring government payouts to flood victims…while protecting American floodplains.

    Private flood insurance companies could offer similar compensation incentives to get people to permanently move out of floodplains…..or to rebuild on stilts/pylons if they choose to rebuild in floodplains.

    The U.S. government pays out billions in disaster relief compensation each year. During years when there is heavy flooding and hurricane damage…..this can balloon to hundreds of billions.

    Rivers have been flooding over their banks in the springtime for millions of years…and this is completely healthy and natural for wildlife and riverside floodplain ecosystems.

    There are various primitive/indigenous tribes around the world who have managed to live year round in floodplains….for many generations….through building on elevated stilts/pylons.

    You would think that in wealthy/high-tech America…..we could develop similar strategies to live in harmony with river floodplains, river deltas and wildlife.

  3. Folks, Yes, it looks bad for the future. Let’s Focus. EPA does not mean “Environmental Plunder Agency.” Now we must look ahead to the struggle for saving our Planet / Countries / locales. Maybe the Enviro groups should bear down on the coming appointments. Get active by engaging with the leaders. Write actual letters and send them certified, return receipt. ‘Social Media’ is an excellent tool for shaming the miscreants.

    With respect for American Rivers and others, check out Sea Shepherd Australia for current actions against whale poaching in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. Sea Shepherd US for the struggle to save the almost extinct Vaquita porpoise in the Gulf of California.

    Please get involved somehow. As the saying goes: Think Globally, Act Locally.

  4. For 20+ years I’ve been an avid paddler, as well as advocate & volunteer – in the work for healthy streams & watersheds. And now we’re on the verge of seeing the fruits of all that work, advocacy, lobbying & activism swept away in a few short years. It’s heartbreaking, but it has been a tragedy foretold.

    Considering all that was at stake in this election, & the peril that the incoming administration presents to clean air & water, to river systems, to dam removal, to riparian habitat restoration, to wildlife, & to conservation efforts broadly, the silence of advocacy organizations like American Rivers & American Whitewater has truly baffled me. We’re about to get a butt-kicking the likes of which we haven’t seen in generations, but far be it from any of these groups to sound the alarm when it could’ve made a difference. Rather there was only complacency & silence, or at most some mealy-mouth exhortations to “exercise your right to vote” uncoupled from any explanation of the choice that the vote presented on the issues that purportedly matter most to us.

  5. I’m a strong proponent of clean water and rivers. However, I am NOT on board with the Clean Power Plan jimmied up by the current inept and corrupt administration. It would behoove the average reader to go ahead and do some research as to what the goals and objectives are for the plan. It stinks. It’ll put millions out of work, increase energy costs, and do practically nothing to help our precious rivers. If millions are put out of work, then less people will be able to have leisure dollars for river adventures. Same thing with energy costs. When the electric bills go up again, then that is a couple less trips to the river.

    1. Where do you get this stuff? This comment is so full of falsehoods that I don’t know where to begin. First, the current administration has been arguably the least corrupt in living memory. In any case it’s been far more functional, competent & environmentally friendly than the administration it replaced. Second, the notion that clean-power initiatives & current clean-water regulations have or would “put millions out of work” is demonstrably untrue. And yes, they do much – critically much – to help our precious rivers. Then you follow with a parade of hypothetical horribles based on this false premise. All of which might lead one to conclude that your initial statement – that you are a “strong proponent of clean water and rivers” – is insincere & nothing but rhetorical posturing.

  6. I support clean rivers and clean water in every way, except money….Im retired and living on very little…so sorry. It worries me about Trumps’ choices I’m in the same situation. I’ll be active in cleaning our waters and responsible with garbage

  7. I support clean rivers and clean water in every way, except money….Im retired and living on very little…so sorry. It worries me about Trumps’ choices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *