THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY

Is Criticism Of Scott Pruitt’s EPA Warranted?

Pruitt is doing a terrible job

The criticism is highly partisan

 Getty: Pete Marovich / Stringer

Before Scott Pruitt the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) stood for protecting the environment and human health. He has pulled the brakes on efforts to improve both of these areas, reversing progress. He is a terrible EPA administrator and should go, writes Gerry Connolly in The Hill. Pruitt has disavowed climate change, railed against the Paris Climate Agreement and generally made America less clean and more polluted. He has wasted taxpayer money, giving himself lavish traveling conditions. In an age where pollution and global warming are rising threats, Pruitt has fought science at every step in order to benefit his own interests.

Keep on reading at The Hill

The criticism of EPA chief Scott Pruitt is laced with partisan anger, suggests Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist. He has been doing a good job but gets attacked for going against left-wing values. For many years the EPA has enacted policy, based on environmentalist ideals rather than hard science. Overly harsh regulations of key American industries are one example. Pruitt’s popularity has suffered because he has dismantled these restrictions that are a burden on US businesses. He has fought for clean drinking water in places like Flint, Michigan. He is doing what is best for all aspects of the country’s health.

Keep on reading at The Federalist
66.7%
Where do you stand?
33.3%
SHOW COMMENTS
Write a response...
See what else you’re missing
single