Trump’s EPA nominee upsets power monopoly of environmental extreme

 

President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency has sent many liberals diving off the deep end, rhetorically.

Pruitt has a record of opposing EPA action meant to cripple the fossil fuel industry, the leftists sputter. As attorney general, he participated in a multi-state lawsuit against the agency.

Pruitt is wrong, wrong, wrong for the post simply because of his firm convictions on environmental regulations, his opponents say.

Really?

Earlier this year, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said this: “… I think most people … want climate action, and they want us to regulate the fossil industry for carbon pollution.”

One of McCarthy’s predecessors, Lisa Jackson, said this in 2012: “What we’ve done at EPA … and it’s long overdue in my opinion, is deal with pollution from coal-fired power plants.”

Daniel P. Schrag, a member of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, told the New York Times, ” … a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.”

President Barack Obama himself bragged he would make it financially impossible to build coal-fired power plants in the United States.

And throughout his tenure, President Obama consistently favored alternative energy projects over pipelines.

Democrats rushed to support Hillary Clinton for president, even after she pledged to put “a lot” of coal miners out of work.

So, because Pruitt has preconceived notions, he is unacceptable, environmental radicals insist.

But when such opinions are rabidly against coal and other fossil fuels … well, that’s just fine with the liberals.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


eleven − nine =