Under attack more so with the same
culprits
(Hardcore GOP righties)
The
EPA is under direct attack and mostly from within like reported
on from the NY TIMES, National Geographic (their running list of Trump’s policy changes),
and from the LA
TIMES.
More
recently reported on by the NY TIMES (this update) and a few more headlines below:
My intro: Just
image for a minute that every science denier in the country gets into a powerful
political office. They are ready to axe everything they personally dislike
regardless of what any science (climate,
medical, or other field) along with studies and years of evidence to prove
a case that is not a Rush Limbaugh-based BS line spreading across
GOP-Conservative la-la America.
Well surprise, surprise: They are now in power and doing great policy change
damage. But, the real damage is staring us right in the face as this latest NY
TIMES article underscores about the nutty professor, Donald J. Trump “hoax”
policy pusher – and again at the EPA which happens to be his #1 target. Even
with that nutcase and proven corrupt former EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, now
booted out of office on a string of ethics charges, Trump is the one who still
wields awesome power for damage and boy, is he ever.
What follows relates to
the sustained Trump craziness and it underscores the failure of this all
GOP-run congress to hold him accountable – instead we now apparently have only
two branches of government: Trump’s and the Judicial (but, that may change drastically
in short order thus giving him whole enchilada as they expression says. But that
is a topic for another day).
BACKGROUND:
WASHINGTON — Days after the Senate confirmed him as administrator
of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, appeared
at the CPAC Conference and when he was asked about addressing a group that
probably wanted to eliminate EPA, he responded
this way:
“I
think it’s justified. I think people across the country look at the EPA the way
they look at the IRS.” (The CPAC cheered like crazy).
(I Note: That is a crazy view to hold. Pruitt cannot presume
or pretend to know what people think about the EPA or the IRS — we all hate the
IRS (smile).
In
the days since, Pruitt, the former OK AG, who built a career out of suing the
EPA has moved quickly to stock the top offices of the agency with like-minded
conservatives, many of whom are skeptics about climate change and all of them intent on rolling back
environmental regulations that they see as overly
intrusive and harmful to business.
(I now insert a huge
whoa and WTF moment: “Harmful
to business?” How about harmful to human life)?
Pruitt
has drawn heavily from the staff of his friend and fellow Oklahoma Republican, Sen. James Inhofe, Mr. Science Denier Bigtime, who is also known as Congress’s most
prominent skeptic of climate science. A former Inhofe chief of staff, Ryan Jackson, for example who became
Pruitt’s CofS at EPA.
Another
former Inhofe staff member, Byron Brown,
will serve as Jackson’s deputy.
(I Note: Nice and cozy, um?).
Andrew Wheeler, a fossil fuel lobbyist and a former Inhofe chief of
staff, is a finalist to be Pruitt’s deputy administrator, although he requires
confirmation to the position by the Senate
Now
sprinkle in Mr. Climate Change is a Hoax himself, Donald J. Trump, who is
making these appointments and his first budget proposal to Congress, wherein he
plans to cut the EPA and under his axe: Cut their overall budget by some 31% (to
$5.7 billion from $8.1 billion), and eliminate a quarter of the agency’s 15,000
jobs.
(Yeah,
that Donald J. Trump – “Mr. Job Creator”)…!!!
Some
Specific Areas in the Trump Budget Proposal to go bye, bye or their missions
reduced:
1.
Federal vehicle and fuels standards: It has been barely a year since Volkswagen agreed to pay as much as
$14.7 billion to settle claims stemming from its diesel emissions cheating
scandal, and the EPA has accused a second automaker, Fiat Chrysler, of evading
emissions standards. But the proposed budget cuts would all but eliminate the
$48.7 million federal budget for vehicle tests and certification. The Trump budget
foresees getting automakers themselves to pay for testing through fees.
(I Note: Getting those potentially guilty likes the VW
cheating to pay vs the EPA, well isn’t that like hiring Fox to guard the hen
house or known bank robbers to act as bank security guard – hey just asking.)
Even
if automakers agree to that, it takes time to set up, and any funding shortfall
in the meantime would mean a significant paring back of the work at EPA’s
emissions testing labs that now work to catch cheaters.
2.
Tap water: Case in point: Flint,
MI – still reeling from its tainted water crisis, and unsafe levels of lead
have turned up in tap water in others places: city after city. Still, the EPA is
looking to decrease grants that help states monitor public water systems by
almost a third, to $71 million from $102 million, according to an internal
agency memo first obtained by The Washington Post.
The
Public Water System Supervision Grant Program has been critical in making sure
communities have access to safe drinking water.
In
Texas, for example, state-contracted workers collect drinking water samples
across the state, an effort funded in part by federal grants.
Much
of the risk to the country’s water supply stems from its crumbling public water
infrastructure: a networks of pipes, treatment plants and other facilities
built decades ago. Although Congress banned lead pipes in 1986, between 3.3
million and 10 million older ones remain, primed to leach lead into tap water.
3.
Criminal and civil enforcement: Sharp
cuts in the agency’s enforcement programs could curtail its ability to police
environmental offenders and impose penalties. The budget proposal reduces
spending on civil and criminal enforcement by almost 60 percent, to $4 million
from a combined $10 million. It also eliminates 200 jobs.
Recently,
the EPA fined Sunoco Pipeline, a subsidiary of the operator behind the Dakota
Access pipeline, nearly $1 million over a 2012 spill. The spill sent 1,950
barrels of gasoline into two waterways near Wellington, OH forcing the
evacuation of 70 people.
One
activity that could get an increase is the security for Pruitt, EPA administrator
(which partly would later cost him the job) who seeks 10 additional full-time
staff members for a round-the-clock security detail — a first for an EPA chief, who usually has only door-to-door protection,
thus more than doubling infrastructure and operations staff.
Story
continues on the proposed cuts here.
Trump
later said his mention of China’s role a joke, but he has a lengthy record of
using the word “hoax” to describe climate change. (FYI: Politifact in 2014 rated his
claim that climate change is a “hoax as Pants on
Fire.)
Back on December 30, 2015, Trump told the crowd at a rally in Hilton
Head, SC, “Obama's talking about all of
this with the global warming and … a lot of it's a hoax. It's a hoax. I mean,
it's a money-making industry, okay? It's a hoax, a lot of it.”
That’s three times using “hoax” in one sentence.
Trump has also used the word on Twitter since his 2012 tweet.
On Jan. 25, 2014, Trump tweeted,
“NBC News just called it the great freeze
— coldest weather in years. Is our country still spending money on the GLOBAL
WARMING HOAX?”
Now it's my honor to recognize the “Deniers Wall of Shame” (more will be added later I am sure):
My 2 cents: The
real hoax, if any at all is Donald J. Trump. He may in fact be kind of “draining
the swamp” (but, in most of the cases he had no choice with some of firings and
resignations for serious ethical and financial malfeasance and such), but the
problem is Trump keeps refilling the swamp with the same kind of scummy
officials. Harsh statement you say? Not as harsh as the crazy policy Trump is leveling on all of us – except of course the big GOP PAC contributors and their special interest
BFF’s.
It’s
time to wake up America – next month in the 2018 mid-terms would be a great
starting point. Think about it – if not things I guarantee you will get worse
under Trump Empire, Inc.
As
a parting reference, note this from CNN – a story related
to the subject of science deniers hitting the CDC: According to the Washington
Post, policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
have been told by others in
the Trump administration that the use of seven specific words and phrases would
be prohibited (and, no, not George Carlin’s banned 7 words you can’t say on
TV).
This list of those 7 Trump words to be
banned are: “Vulnerable, Diversity,
Entitlement, Transgender, Fetus, Evidence-based, and Science-based.”
The decision has not only been
deemed as reckless and dangerous, but an offense to the scientific
community. This goes far beyond an attack on lexicon or word-choice.
A ban on words not only creates barriers for scientists who need to
communicate, but also breaks public trust in the areas they are meant to
investigate and research.
Thanks for stopping by.
No comments:
Post a Comment