E.P.A. Chief Doubts Consensus View of Climate Change
from The New York Times,
Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said on Thursday that carbon dioxide was not a primary contributor to global warming, a statement at odds with the established scientific consensus on climate change.
Asked his views on the role of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping gas produced by burning fossil fuels, in increasing global warming, Mr. Pruitt said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so, no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”
“But we don’t know that yet,” he added. “We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”
Mr. Pruitt’s statement contradicts decades of research and analysis by international scientific institutions and federal agencies, including the E.P.A. His remarks on Thursday, which were more categorical than similar testimony before the Senate, may also put him in conflict with laws and regulations that the E.P.A. is charged with enforcing.
New EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt's, speech and interview at CPAC.
Anyone, from the left or the right, who honestly listened to this speech and interview should feel good about Scott Pruitt with regard to the environment. You might not agree with him on other issues he is excited about like the changes to the Supreme Court, ObamaCare, regulations, border security & Immigration, but you have to agree with him when he said we should be hopeful and excited about the future.
His tag line was "the future ain't what it used to be" at the EPA!
executive agencies only have the power Congress has given them, they can't make it up.
1. process matters -Don't use courts to regulate.
2. rule of law matters-The law is above the king.
3. federalism matters- Pay attention to the states. States around the country (Cal, Tx, Ok, In, Oh, NY) are concerned about the air they breathe. Partner with the states, not be adversarial.
Republicans don't have to be apologetic about the environment- we believe you can grow the economy & jobs while being a good steward of the environment.
We are living in a time that will positively impact future generations, like the WWI generation, the Reagan administration did.
-no more managed liberty
-believe in the Constitution
-roll back the regulatory state
-eliminate regulatory certainty- Business people say regulatory uncertainty is the biggest impediment to growth.
-If it is ok to say that underestimating climate change is a problem, then shouldn't over estimating climate change be a problem also?
will Pruitt make the EPA go away?
-he believes the idea is justified based on how the previous administration has used the agency
-he hopes to be able to change that
-he wants to get the laws right first, not just cut budgets or cut the agency.
As AG in Oklahoma, he sued the EPA 14 times!
-deservedly, he said; because the EPA acted inconsistent with the statue, disregarding the authority of the states. There have been 56 Federal Implementation Plan regulations forced on states under the Obama Administration. (previous 3 administrations did it 3 times). Not only sued, we won!
Millennials bought an argument that we cannot be pro energy and pro environment- but we can. I'd like to change that. We are better than that. We take care of water and air and the future for our children.
He agreed that a lot of this is messaging! He said he will visit and consult with each state. We need to restore trust with states! That we will do what's best for environment.
Unless you love dictating from the on high what everyone should think and do, you have to love this speech and direction!