|
WickedsDesire -> RE: Time to roll back the clock (6/28/2017 12:58:15 PM)
|
Another victory for Team Toxifying Trump
You go Scott Pruitt
EPA Head's Plan to Gut Popular Water Rule Condemned as Gift to Polluters
Scott Pruitt seems like the kind of guy who would dunk his first born in toxic waste just to demonstrate that it would survive. Still, his decision to reject a ban on a popular pesticide that’s been shown to harm children’s brains was a little surprising. On Tuesday, we found out that a cozy relationship with the pesticide’s manufacturer may have influenced his thinking.
On March 29th, the EPA administrator rejected a petition from the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) and the Natural Resources Defense Council to ban chlorpyrifos. The organophosphate pesticide has been in use since 1965 and in recent years, scientists have demonstrated repeatedly that it has negative effects on the development of children’s brains.
Scientists at the EPA concluded that even in tiny doses chlorpyrifos can interfere with the development of children’s brains and the levels in food were higher than they consider safe. Despite some interagency debate about conclusions by the chemical safety staff, a revised study still found that the pesticide should be banned. When Pruitt announced that he would deny the ban, he said, “By reversing the previous administration’s steps to ban one of the most widely used pesticides in the world, we are returning to using sound science in decision-making — rather than predetermined results.”
The EPA released Pruitt’s March meeting schedule earlier this month following multiple FOIA requests and the Associated Press noticed something interesting. Just 20 days prior to rejecting the ban, Pruitt met with Dow CEO Andrew Liveris. Dow manufactures chlorpyrifos and it also spent $13.6 million on lobbying in 2016. From the Associated Press report:
Dow also donated $1 million to Trump’s underattended inauguration.
Gut the rivers, Gut the Drinking Water Gut the fishee, Gut the children
Pruitt rejects the scientific consensus on climate change.[76][77][9][78] Pruitt has also falsely asserted that there is no scientific consensus on climate change.[79][28][80][81] During his January 18, 2017, confirmation hearing to be EPA Administrator, he said that "the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that in some manner".[82] In March 2017, Pruitt said that he does not believe that human activities, specifically carbon dioxide emissions, are a primary contributor to climate change, a view which is in contradiction with the scientific consensus.[65][83] On June 2, 2017, Scott Pruitt acknowledged that global warming is occurring, and that “human activity contributes to it in some manner." However he added “Measuring with precision, from my perspective, the degree of human contribution is very challenging.”[84]
In May 2016, Pruitt and Luther Strange authored an op-ed in the National Review criticizing other state attorneys general for "acting like George III" regarding the ExxonMobil (tooo Exxon again - no shit guffaws) climate change controversy, writing ".
A May 2017 study in Nature Scientific Reports examined Pruitt's claim that "over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming."[87][88] The study found that the claim was false: "Satellite temperature measurements do not support the claim of a “leveling off of warming” over the past two decades"
As Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt sued the EPA at least 14 times. Regulated industry companies or trade associations who were financial donors to Pruitt's political causes were co-parties in 13 of these 14 cases. These cases included suing to block the anti-climate change Clean Power Plan four times, challenging mercury pollution limits twice, ozone pollution limits once, fighting the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and the Clean Water Rule,[92] as well as fighting regulations on methane emissions.[23] Pruitt stated at his Senate confirmation hearing in January 2017 that the EPA has an "obligation" to regulate carbon dioxide in accordance with a 2007 Supreme Court case and 2009 EPA decision establishing carbon emissions as a threat to public health.[93]
Under Pruitt, Oklahoma sued the EPA and lost on challenges to the EPA’s regulatory authority over mercury and other toxins, as well as pollutants responsible for creating regional atmospheric haze. It challenged the manner in which EPA sued unrelated entities and for what Pruitt termed the agency's "sue and settle" practices. Oklahoma further sued and lost after the EPA declined to provide extensive records in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, a request the federal judge hearing the case found to be overly broad and economically burdensome.[94]
Looking a-okay totally fuked Americashire
Heh will i need one of em hazard suits when i come visit to bag me a couple niggers? Still, look on the bright side i can shit in the rivers. Glass of tap water toxic sludge one lump of ice and 3 of shit guffaws pretty tap water its all silvery Mercury deelicious guffaws guffaws
That reminds me has anyone heard from anyone from Flint? Or have they corpses been incorporated chemically disposed off into radiation shields and gasoline.
|
|
|
|
