What former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman thinks about Scott Pruitt’s disgrace.
On Thursday, the Trump White House pressured Scott Pruitt into resigning from his job as head of the Environmental Protection Agency. Pruitt had kept his position for nearly 18 months despite a staggering number of scandals and, in the end, even criticism from Republicans. Pruitt’s deregulatory agenda, however, was cheered on by the president, and will almost certainly be continued by his deputy now running the EPA, Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist. One of the Republicans who criticized Pruitt was Christine Todd Whitman, the former governor of New Jersey who ran the agency during part of George W. Bush’s first term. In an op-ed last September, she wrote that she considered some of Pruitt’s moves to end regulations “legally questionable,” posing “real and lasting threats to the nation’s land, air, water, and public health.”
I recently spoke by phone with Whitman, the founder of the energy and environmental consulting firm Whitman Strategy Group. During the course of our conversation, which has been edited and condensed for clarity, we discussed the effect Scott Pruitt had on EPA morale, the Bush administration’s role in undermining faith in the science of climate change, and the myth that environmental protection and a good economy cannot go hand in hand.
Isaac Chotiner: What is Scott Pruitt’s EPA legacy?
AdvertisementChristine Todd Whitman:I think unfortunately that his legacy is one of one scandal after another. He has had more investigations than anyone else I can think of. And dismantling the agency. But that is going to be a legacy of the Trump administration as much as Scott Pruitt. He was just carrying out the wishes of the president.
What did you hear about Pruitt from people at the EPA?
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementThey were discouraged, they were frustrated, they felt as if he had no trust in them. He didn’t talk to anybody except a very few, and the morale was extremely low.
What is the effect of having someone like that at the top of an agency? How does low morale manifest itself?
AdvertisementThe effect is that people lose momentum, they are frustrated because they don’t dare raise issues, because if they raise issues that might be contrary, or have an opinion that might differ even slightly from what the administrator wants to hear, they will be assigned to someplace they don’t want to be, or some part of the agency where they have no experience. Getting sent out to Slobbovia is the sort of thing they worry about. What they told me is, “You don’t take on a new issue. You don’t bring up something that might require more regulation if you think it is a danger to health or the environment. Just stay quiet, and you are careful with what you say and how you say it and where you say it.”
Do you know Andrew Wheeler?
AdvertisementNot really. I have met him and our paths have crossed, but I do not know him personally.
AdvertisementWhat have you heard about his time at the EPA so far?
He is very different from Scott Pruitt, and he is much more low-key. He will get along better. The issue I have is that because of that, and because he knows the agency much better than Scott Pruitt did—and Scott Pruitt didn’t really know the agency at all except to hate it and sue it every five minutes when he was attorney general [of Oklahoma]. He didn’t really understand how it worked, and the complications of it. Andrew Wheeler does, which means he can be more effective at rolling back regulations. And from my perspective, that is much more problematic. Scott Pruitt was more about bluster than he was about actual achievement.
Advertisement AdvertisementAre there specific policies or rollbacks you are particularly worried about right now?
“[Protecting the environment] is not bad for business. It’s bad for politics. This is all about politics.” — Christine Todd WhitmanClean water, clean air. I worry very much about those continuing to be rolled back. They are being attacked in a way to favor the coal industry, and with Andrew Wheeler, you are going to get more than that. The problem is that by rolling back some of these restrictions—particularly as they apply to water—it is not going to bring back coal [as Trump has repeatedly promised to do]. Coal is dying not because of these regulations, but because of the low cost of natural gas. If you allow coal companies to dump tailings near water supplies, you are endangering the lives—the life—of all those who live downstream from them. Coal tailings have arsenic, they have lead, they have mercury in them. It’s not good. And it’s not going to bring back coal. And that worries me.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementRolling back the tailpipe emissions. We know between 200,000 and 300,000 people in the United States die every year from dirty airborne-related causes. Tailpipes are one of the largest sources of emissions, and yet now all of a sudden we are pulling back on regulations that the car companies have anticipated and built up for. Now the car companies are saying, do we go ahead of this? Do we not go ahead with it? What do we do? That, again, is not good for human health. In the long term, we are the ones who pay the price.
Do you have any hope for the GOP becoming more of an environmentally friendly party?
There are certainly a lot of Republicans who are fighting for that, and several very active groups of Republicans working on solving problems like climate change, and trying to re-establish in people’s minds the importance of science, and that we need to listen to science, which is something that Scott Pruitt and this administration was dismissing in many circumstances. So they are there, but right now it’s clear that Donald Trump and Trump supporters control the apparatus of the Republican Party. And that’s not going to change fast.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementI know you were considered one of the more environmentally-friendly members of the Bush administration, but what role do you think that administration played in the relationship between the GOP and science? George W. Bush did not speak up about climate change, for instance.
Unfortunately, we started down this path where we weren’t going to recognize climate change. But there was no war on science the way there was in this administration. The Bush administration at least recognized the importance. When we had science advisory boards, it was a regulation aimed at a particular industry, that industry would have a representative on the science advisory panel, but they were not the dominant members. Scientists were. There was a skepticism about climate change, but actually, interestingly enough, the president himself wasn’t as skeptical as some members of the administration and the Hill, and you pick the battles you are going to fight and that just wasn’t one of the ones that they chose to take on. And the vice president was clearly a strong influence in that as well.
AdvertisementIs your sense that on issues like climate change, people in Republican politics really don’t believe the science, or do but think it will hurt the economy or whatever?
Advertisement AdvertisementThe general public, in every poll I have ever seen, shows that a majority of the American people, including Republicans, believe that the climate is changing and that humans have an impact. And they are also prepared to have some actions taken if they think it can be sensible. In general, if you ask an open-ended question about what are the most important issues, science is not one of the ones listed, and that’s primarily not because people don’t care about clean air and water and a healthy lifestyle, but because, they wonder, “What can I do about it? This is a such a huge issue. I am going to leave that to the experts.” And trying to get people to understand the cumulative impact of human behavior is difficult. It’s not impossible, but it’s difficult.
Advertisement AdvertisementOK, but in terms of Republican politicians and leaders, do you think they really doubt the science, or just think it’s bad for business?
It’s not bad for business. It’s bad for politics. This is all about politics. On both sides. It’s not about solving a problem or addressing a real issue. It’s about what is going to get me another vote in my caucus. This is an easy issue to grandstand because it involves some form of regulation, and regulations are easy to hate because they cause people to have to change behavior or spend money on a problem they may not see [as existing].
AdvertisementWe know this idea that you cannot have a thriving economy and a clean and green economy is just not true. Between 1985 and 2012, we saw the population in the United States increase by over 20 percent. We saw energy demands increase by over 30 percent. We saw our real GDP almost double. And yet we were able to reduce the six “criteria air pollutants” by over 67 percent. So, you had more people demanding more energy while growing the economy and reducing pollution. We have done it. We can do it. Do some industries get dislocated for a period of time? Yes, that happens. But does that stop economic growth? No. It doesn’t and it hasn’t. So, it’s really just politics. It seems to be scare tactics that are the ones people use the most these days.
Tweet Share Share Comment(责任编辑:产品中心)
- Apple finally sends out payments for MacBook's butterfly keyboard settlement
- People are using face
- Moon seeks to send envoy to North Korea next week
- A mince pie sandwich now exists and honestly it looks kind of delicious
- 50 Years Later: The Revolutionary 8008 Microprocessor
- Google Search tries new tactics for limiting explicit deepfakes
- 二郎山喇叭河景区荣获“四川生态休闲旅游目的地”称号
- 'Incredible' Iheanacho profiting from Vardy partnership: Rodgers
- Man United fuelled by semi
- Pakistan Cricket at crossroads after shock defeat at Pindi
- Moon says Koreas remain on peace path despite temporary difficulty
- Arsenal owner Kroenke rules out sale of the club
- Elon Musk offers assistance from Tesla for the California wildfires
-
A global problem is preventing the wars in Ukraine and Gaza from coming to an end.
Why do the wars in Ukraine and Gaza grind on, ferociously, relentlessly, with no end in sight and th ...[详细] -
雅安日报/北纬网讯8月25日,由四川省商务厅牵头组织的“川货全国行—长春站”活动在吉林省长春市巴蜀映巷特色商业街开幕。借助“川货全国行”的平台,市商务和粮食局组织了我市西康藏茶、雅安茶厂、五丰黎红、永 ...[详细]
-
Trump urges Putin to keep pressure on Pyongyang
This combination of file photos created on January 16, 2017, shows US President-elect Donald Trump o ...[详细] -
Moon seeks to send envoy to North Korea next week
A man reads a newspaper showing photos, from left of U.S. President Donald Trump, South Korean Presi ...[详细] -
NYT Strands hints, answers for August 29
If you're reading this, you're looking for a little help playing Strands, the New York Times' elevat ...[详细] -
雅安日报/北纬网讯27日20时至28日10时,我市普降中到大雨,局部大暴雨。受降雨影响,市区西门车站、旅游车站分别于早上9时左右和10时左右,停运发往天全、宝兴及康定方向的客车。在发出客车停运通知后, ...[详细]
-
Conservative activist Tony Perkins reportedly covered up sexual assault against teenager.
The head of the Family Research Council allegedly kept quiet about claims that an Ohio Republican la ...[详细] -
1日,2017年秋季新学期迎来开学第一天,雨城四小教育集团汉碑校区以下简称“四小汉碑校区”)精心策划了开学典礼暨新生入学仪式活动,欢迎一、四年级从新华校区转入)新同学的到来。“亲爱的一年级新同学,从现 ...[详细]
-
Apple Watch bands: 5 favorites to consider as Apple Watch 10 looms
It's almost new Apple Watch season, which means it's potentially almost time for you to pick out whi ...[详细] -
Blinken says US looking for ways to move N. Korea denuclearization forward
This AFP photo shows US Secretary of State Antony Blinken holding a press conference at the State De ...[详细]
SpaceX Polaris Dawn mission: How to watch the launch
Apple TV+ sucks you in with star power on 'The Morning Show': Review
- Webb scientists haven't found a rocky world with air. But now they have a plan.
- Amazon's Alexa is now available for Windows 10 PCs everywhere
- Amazon's Alexa is now available for Windows 10 PCs everywhere
- Rose McGowan opens up about Harvey Weinstein and Twitter
- Best Labor Day headphones deals: Apple, Bose, Beats, and more on sale
- Amazon's Alexa is now available for Windows 10 PCs everywhere
- “川货全国行”长春站今日开幕 我市12家企业组团参展