Shameless waste of taxpayer money must not be overlooked by legislators

For somebody who talks such a big game on eliminating environmental regulations, reducing the size of government and saving taxpayer money, Scott Pruitt seems awfully allergic to the concept of frugality.

It seems like a week doesn’t pass without a new report of wasteful spending by the Environmental Protection Agency leader and his team, and this week was no different.

This time, the news came out of the EPA’S inspector general, who issued a report saying that the agency had ignored a staggering number of recommendations to cut costs, improve efficiency, boost public health and help consumers save money.

Here are the wince-inducing numbers: According to the report, which covers a sixmonth period beginning Oct. 1, 2017, the EPA has blown off 114 recommendations with potential monetary benefits of $860 million.

Adding insult to injury, the report shows that in the fiscal years stretching back to at least 2008, the EPA failed to implement fewer than 10 recommendations per year.

These aren’t outrageous suggestions, either. They include continuing to develop a 12-year-old program facilitating development of water-efficient products that have already saved consumers billions per year, improving oversight of compliance on benzene levels in gasoline; and nickel-and-dime stuff like improving oversight of the agency’s travel cards in order to maximize rebates.

But the recommendations have fallen on deafears.

Meanwhile, Pruitt’s extravagances were on front-and-center display this month when he received a grilling from Congress. Here’s a list of some of the scandals tied to Pruitt:

The EPA spent $43,000 on a soundproof phone booth for his office, which the Government Accountability Office contended was a violation of a law that required expenditures of more than $5,000 to be approved by Congress. The EPA said the law didn’t apply to the booth. Why did Pruitt need it? To “make and receive calls to discuss sensitive information,” the EPA said.

In a poll released last week by Harrisx, 48 percent of respondents said they weren’t familiar with the EPA leader’s scandals.

See the EPA Inspector General’s report at

epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-05/ documents/semiannual_report_to_congress-march_2018.pdf

Apparently, Pruitt didn’t consider it an option to say, “I need you step outside and close the door while I make this call.”

The EPA spent $5,719 to fly Pruitt on a private plane between Denver and Durango, Colo. — nearly 15 times what it would have cost if he’d popped onto Expedia or Travelocity and booked a ticket on an airline. (We checked: Roundtrip flights were available this month for $383.)

Pruitt has maintained a 24/7 security detail, which has cost $3 million when factoring in overtime and travel. Pruitt defended his security detail, which is three times the size of those for previous EPA administration, by saying he’s received death threats. But Senate Democrats said a confidential security assessment showed there had been no specific, credible, physical threats.

Pruitt took aides on a five-day, $40,000 trip to Morocco in December, and the EPA spent $120,000 last June for two weeks of travel for Pruitt and his posse. His taxpayer-funded travel includes trips home to Oklahoma.

In the most high-profile scandals, he defied the White House in approving large raises to two close aides, and lived for about six months in a Capitol Hill condo owned by the wife of an energy lobbyist. Pruitt paid far below market value in rent for the dwelling.

True, Pruitt can say he’s attempting to gut the EPA’S budget, which would provide huge initial savings for taxpayers. But those savings don’t take into account expenses to defend lawsuits, or the staggering costs of environmental damage and medical costs that would stem from his war on the agency.

In his appearance before Congress, where he fielded questions about ethics complaints, Pruitt followed his boss’s playbook — not apologizing, putting blame on his staff and saying the ethics accusations were lies aimed at defeating Trump’s environmental agenda.

But the heat is still on, and the White House hasn’t been able to ignore the controversies. Pruitt is believed to be on thin ice.

That’s good. The sooner he goes, the better.

Spending taxpayer dollars like play money isn’t the only terrible thing Pruitt has done since Trump put him in charge of the EPA. In fact, it’s not even the worst thing he’s done. His rollback of environmental regulations, attack on science and movements to downsize the EPA have been far worse.

Unfortunately, however, Americans aren’t paying much attention. In a poll released last week by Harrisx, 48 percent of respondents said they weren’t familiar with the EPA leader’s scandals.

Not that people can necessarily be blamed that the Pruitt story isn’t on their radar. With President Donald Trump taking up most of the headlines with his unprecedented levels of self-dealing, hypocrisy, lying and general buffoonery, the revelations about Pruitt have been shoved down the list of the administration’s scandals.

In comparison, remember the 2012 scandal stemming from an extravagant conference for government workers in Las Vegas? In the “no drama Obama” administration, the $823,000 conference was among the most talked-about stories of the year.

That’s not the case with Pruitt — yet. But Congress should keep pressuring him out, with Nevada’s delegates leading the way.