U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt told CNBC this week he doesn't believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change, and called for continued debate, review, and analysis. Though Pruitt has previously questioned the science of climate change, views contrary to established climate science coming from an EPA Administrator are still shocking. Pruitt's comments were met with widespread criticism and outrage from scientists, businesses, former EPA administrators, and the public. In an unusual display of furor over the Administrator's comments on climate science, Pruitt's office faced such a deluge of angry calls to his main line that by Friday, the EPA was forced to set up a temporary call center before forwarding calls to a voice mailbox by Saturday, which is also now full and not accepting new messages.

In an attempt to appease different White House factions, the Trump administration is reportedly considering a plan to remain in the Paris Climate Agreement, but reject U.S. commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. Previous reports indicated Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner were instrumental in keeping the United States as part of the Paris Agreement, which was seen as a victory for the moderate faction within the White House, since pulling out of the Agreement could seriously damage U.S. international standing. Other, more hardline factions, however, have advocated for withdrawal from the Agreement.

EPA is also expected to announce soon its intent to reevaluate the fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for car model years 2022 to 2025. Fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards were first finalized in 2010, when the EPA, working with industry, developed a roadmap for standards through 2025. EPA had until April 2018 to decide whether the 2022 to 2025 standards were feasible under a "midterm review," but moved up its decision before Trump took office. The big automakers oppose the rule, arguing that it imposes significant costs and is out of step of consumer purchasing. Low gas prices the last few years have contributed to increasing sales of less fuel efficient vehicles.

The Trump administration is expected to announce plans next week to begin the regulatory process of repealing the carbon dioxide regulations on existing power plants. The Clean Power Plan was projected to reduce power sector emissions 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. This rule was finalized in October 2015, and repealing it would require the administration to start a new rulemaking process, which could take years to complete.

Using the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the Senate voted to nullify the Department of Interior's (DOI) "Planning 2.0" rule, which was created to help modernize federal land management strategies. Congressional Republicans argued the rule gives the federal government too much influence over public land decisions, leaving out state and local input. The bill, passed by the House in February, is now headed to the White House, where the president is expected to sign the measure and kill the rule.

In EPA personnel news, the agency's top environmental justice official resigned last week. In a lengthy resignation letter, Mustafa Ali urged Scott Pruitt to reconsider cutting the environmental justice program. The Trump administration is proposing to eliminate the environmental justice office from EPA's annual budget, and eliminate most grant programs that help low-income and minority communities. Ali, who helped found the office in 1992, spent nearly 25 years working to address the impacts of air, water, and industrial pollution on low-income communities. The Trump administration has no plans to replace his position. Ali has joined the Hip Hop Caucus as Senior Vice President of Climate, Environmental Justice and Community Revitalization.

What You Can Do:

  • Call your Senators to oppose using the CRA to rollback DOI's methane regulations.
  • Call your Member of Congress to express your concerns Trump's EPA budget cuts.

Suggested Questions for your Member of Congress (MOC):

  • Questions for all MOCs
    • Nearly half of EPA's budget goes to state and local grants. These grants pay for the cleanup of pollution like brownfields and abandoned industrial sites. What will you do to protect these grants?
    • Is it acceptable for nominees to lie to Congress? What should happen to those who do?
  • Questions to ask MOCs who may be interested in eliminating/undermining EPA
    • I understand you want to eliminate the EPA and let the states control environmental rules. If you eliminate the federal EPA and leave environmental regulation to individual states, how will those state agencies be funded and who would control pollution that crosses state borders (pollution traveling downwind or downstream, for example)?

- Energy & Environment Policy Working Group, RISE Stronger

Have comments or something to add? Contact the RISE Energy & Environment Policy Working Group at [email protected]