EPA chief brushes off charges as lies
Critics aim to bust Trump agenda, Pruitt tells panel
WASHINGTON — Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt offered lawmakers little contrition Thursday for questionable spending and management decisions that have plunged his agency into scandal, as he accused critics of fabricating stories about him in an effort to undermine President Donald Trump’s agenda.
Pruitt spent a tense day on Capitol Hill fielding pointed questions from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who have grown uncomfortable with mounting allegations against him and his agency. As Pruitt testified in back-to-back budget hearings, at least 10 investigations looking into reports of ethical lapses and mismanagement at the EPA hung overhead.
“I, more than anyone, want to establish the hard facts,” Pruitt said in an opening statement before a House Energy and Commerce Committee panel. “I have nothing to hide.”
Pruitt admitted that “there has been a learning process” for him at the EPA and vowed to take some corrective action. But he mostly expressed defiance.
“Facts are facts, fiction is fiction,” Pruitt said. “A lie does not become truth just because it appears on the front page of a newspaper.”
He accused his critics of twisting a narrative about him to the point where it “does not reflect reality.”
“Those attacking the EPA and attacking me do so because they want to derail the president’s agenda,” he said. “I am simply not going to let that happen.”
But with the unflattering headlines piling up, some of Pruitt’s most steadfast supporters are expressing doubts about whether the hard-charging crusader for deregulation and fossil-fuel interests is any longer the right man for the job.
“I am concerned the good progress being made on the policy front is being undercut by allegations about your management of the agency and use of its resources,” said Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., the energy committee chairman. “These issues are too persistent to ignore.”
During hours of testimony Thursday, Pruitt repeatedly deflected blame for controversial agency actions that have put his job in jeopardy. He said a $43,000 soundproof office phone booth that was built for him — illegally, according to the Government Accountability Office — was not something he signed off on. Pruitt said he merely had asked his staff to get him access to “secure communications.”
Pruitt blamed his chief of staff for large salary hikes given under his authority to two aides from Pruitt’s home state of Oklahoma, even after the White House rejected the raises. But Pruitt contradicted his earlier public assertion that he had no idea the raises were granted until the media reported on them.
“I was aware… one of those individuals was receiving a raise,” he said in response to questioning from Rep. Ryan Costello, R-Pa. He said he was not aware how big the raise was, or that it was made in defiance of White House guidance.
House Democrats admonished Pruitt for ethical failings and called on him to resign. Rep. Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., pointed to an email from one of the two aides in which she wrote that Pruitt specifically authorized the salary hike. When Pruitt said that he hadn’t, Tonko responded, “Then, I am concerned you have no idea what is going on under your name in your agency.”
He accused Pruitt of a “propensity for grift.”
Rep. Frank Pallone, DN.J., called Pruitt “unfit to hold public office.”
“What you have done is generate scandal after scandal,” he said. “When confronted about them you have repeatedly refused to take accountability.”
Republicans proceeded cautiously. Some expressed concern about Pruitt’s stewardship of tax dollars but tempered their comments with praise for his overturning of Obama-era environmental policies.
After a reporter asked press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders why Pruitt still had a job in the administration, she answered with what amounted to a shrug. “We’re evaluating these concerns, and we expect the EPA administrator to answer for them, and we’ll keep you posted,” Sanders said.
Even as Pruitt was finishing his responses to a long list of allegations, a new one arose. The EPA’s office of inspector general said Pruitt’s explanation for why he needed to travel first class and spend so much on security was not accurate.
Pruitt had said that a “threat assessment” written by the inspector general justified the expenses.
The inspector general on Thursday denied issuing any such report, saying the document Pruitt citied was a memo drafted by one employee which was improperly leaked. It did not reflect official findings, the inspector general said.