“Keep calm and enjoy nature.”
That slogan should be printed on t-shirts and given to every protestor who comes to disrupt the confirmation hearing for Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Appearing before Congress in 2015 in his capacity as a state attorney general, Pruitt noted how the EPA is an important agency that plays a vital role in protecting our environment. His testimony provides an early indication that he fully intends to restore the EPA’s mission focus: responsibly protecting our air, land and water resources. Defending the environment while remaining sensitive to humans’ livelihoods and showing respect for the Constitution is no easy task. Pruitt’s commitment to clean air, clean water, and properly enforcing environmental laws make him ideally suited to restoring public confidence in the EPA.
For the past eight years, the EPA has become more of a political tool, reflecting the Obama administration’s political agenda and go-it-alone strategy. Working in relative isolation rather than in concert with environmental experts in the states, the EPA has meted out a never-ending cascade of top-down, one-size-size-fits-all mandates. In all, more than 4,000 new regulations were imposed with complete indifference to the accompanying compliance costs, legal fees, diminished productivity, job losses and stifled economic recovery they would inflict upon families.
According to its own figures, the EPA has imposed costs of $37.6 billion to $45.4 billion per year over the last decade. That’s more than the costs of all other federal agency regulations combined. But in more than statistics or dollar amounts, policies this destructive can be measured in terms of real people and their everyday lives.
Take the case of Andy Johnson, a rancher in Fort Bridger, Wyo. Federal authorities told him he failed to get their permission prior to building a stock pond on his property to improve his cattle’s access to water. What Johnson may not have known is that the EPA had expanded its lawful jurisdiction over “navigable waters” to include nearly every drop of water that fell from the sky, from prairie potholes to irrigation ditches and even intermittently-filled puddles. He was given 30 days to return it to the way it was, which in addition to being beyond reason, was beyond physical possibility.
Fines topped the $16 million mark when Johnson finally took the agency to federal court. This past spring, the court told Johnson what he and his lawyers already knew: President Obama’s EPA overreached its authority.
Unfortunately, Johnson’s case is far from isolated. Merlin Martin heard from federal authorities after he cleared some trees on his property to expand his tree farming operation. The EPA claimed his activity destroyed a drainage channel. As it turns out, the accusation was purely speculative and chiefly built around soil samples and Google Earth photos.
A respected constitutional expert, Pruitt filed suit against the EPA claiming that its jurisdictional expansion over water threatened the rule of law. In all, 25 states have called on the federal government to walk back the unconstitutional EPA power grab. While the legal question has been rendered moot by the election of a new administration, Pruitt’s actions offer evidence that under his stewardship, the EPA will not ignore the states or the Constitution.
In contrast to Obama’s EPA, Pruitt’s approach to conservation has favored constructive engagement and bi-partisan collaboration. One illustrative example was his use of negotiating skills to help reduce phosphate levels in the Illinois River. For a decade, Arkansas and Oklahoma officials were at an impasse over a politically-contentious agreement. Yet Pruitt defied the pundits when he reached across the political aisle to his Democratic counterpart in Arkansas in order to successfully hammer out a mutually-binding solution that is today reducing pollution throughout the Illinois River watershed. As his state’s attorney general, he won bipartisan praise for taking legal action against oil and gas companies that were profiting from pollution and defrauding taxpayers.
It’s time for a pragmatic, fair-handed administrator to lead the EPA. Pruitt’s solid record of accomplishment and reasoned approach make him the ideal person to re-direct this government agency gone rogue. He has earned a reputation as a scholarly constitutionalist and a highly-effective public servant. The Senate should move swiftly to confirm him.
David Avella is chairman of GOPAC and a veteran Republican strategist. Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.
