WASHINGTON D.C. – Doctors, scientists and professional organizations are suing EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt for replacing publicly-funded scientists with others who advocate for polluting industries.

According to the lawsuit, of Pruitt's 18 new appointees to the EPA's Science Advisory Board, seven are now employed by industries the EPA regulates, four have a history of taking money from polluters and five have histories of rejecting mainstream science in favor of industry talking points.

Neil Gormley, staff attorney at the environmental law firm Earthjustice, says ironically, Pruitt claims the academic scientists are being removed because they have financial ties to the EPA.

"By barring people just because they've received competitive research grants from the agency, they're pushing out some of the most qualified experts," he says.

The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., calls the policy an illegal override of federal ethics rules that will introduce a pro-polluter bias in EPA decisions.

Environmentalists fear that the new appointees also will undermine the integrity of EPA science. Gormley points out that some of the replacements on the advisory board have espoused opinions that fall into the category of junk science.

"Claiming that air pollution is good for you or denying that smog causes asthma - ideas that are way outside the scientific mainstream and that just serve a corporate agenda," he explains.

He says the scientists being removed from the board are experts in fields such as cancer, children's health, respiratory diseases and the risks of chemicals in the home.

Gormley says the lawsuit asks the court to rule that the new policy is unlawful and arbitrary, and to halt the discharge of scientists on the basis of having received agency funding for their work.

"We're also asking for the reinstatement of discharged scientists to these science boards to restore their ability to render objective, high-quality scientific advice to the agency," he adds.


get more stories like this via email

As North Carolina communities continue to pick up the pieces after Hurricane Helene, they have faced a new obstacle: A surge of misinformation is slowing down crucial relief efforts and leaving residents uncertain about where to turn.

David Kieve, president of EDF Action, the advocacy partner of the Environmental Defense Fund, said the misleading claims are creating confusion, adding another layer of difficulty to an already challenging recovery.

"They're having a really hard time doing it, because of lies that Donald Trump and others are spreading about where relief efforts are focused," Kieve asserted. "I'm sure you saw, but FEMA had to pause their relief work because they were worried that their workers would be subject to attack from militias."

The misinformation has caused widespread anxiety, particularly over claims FEMA's $750 emergency checks, intended to help with immediate food and shelter needs, would make recipients ineligible for future aid. Despite being proven false, Kieve observed the rumor has discouraged some families from seeking essential support.

The challenge is not limited to North Carolina. Kieve pointed out similar issues in other states, where false information about disaster relief and clean energy policy could threaten future economic growth in some communities.

He stressed moving away from clean energy policies would have stark consequences, especially in states like North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

"If we were to move in the opposite direction and take a step back from the successful clean energy policies that we've advanced over the past couple of years, that would cost both states jobs," Kieve contended. "It would cause both states' economies to go in the wrong direction and it would cost families higher energy bills."

Kieve encouraged people to look closely at the facts, to question which candidates are being truthful and to recognize the potential for things like job growth from clean energy. He noted communities already benefiting from the investments are seeing positive changes, from new factories to improved public health.


get more stories like this via email

With Election Day near, the League of Conservation Voters is pushing for Michigan legislation to protect democracy, air, land and waterways across the Great Lakes State.

League members said the election carries high stakes for Michigan, particularly in the House and Supreme Court races. In addition to backing the Clean Energy and Jobs Act, the League is focused on a critical policy they believe is at risk, Michigan's septic legislation.

Nick Occhipinti, director of state government affairs for the league, pointed out Michigan remains the only state without a program to oversee septic systems.

"In certain cases we have septic systems failing or connected directly to drains and creeks," Occhipinti explained. "Every time you flush the toilet, for those illicitly connected septic systems, you know you have human waste going directly into Michigan surface water bodies."

The League of Conservation Voters' annual National Environmental Scorecard rated members of Congress on their votes related to the environment, helping hold them accountable and informing voters about their stance on conservation and climate policies.

Occhipinti reminded voters not to overlook crucial down-ballot issues like the Supreme Court and State House races, which often fly under the radar. He encouraged everyone to follow their ballot all the way to the end, remembering to flip it over.

"A lot of folks don't often recognize those running for state Supreme Court. They don't recognize their names," Occhipinti observed. "You gotta get out there and learn who's running, do the research, find out what their values are and do your best to learn about what the candidates stand for."

Michigan's Democratic-led legislature recently passed laws on environmental policies, making down-ballot races vital for either supporting or opposing the changes.

Advocates of electric vehicles are countering what they call misleading claims about the effects of EV production in Michigan.

Critics of electric vehicles argued prioritizing EV production could harm traditional auto manufacturing jobs, and said the focus should be on safeguarding such roles and strengthening U.S. control within the auto industry.

David Kieve, president of EDF Action, the advocacy partner of the Environmental Defense Fund, said EV policies have already generated billions in investments and promise to create more high-paying jobs in Michigan.

"I think one of the things that we've been particularly focused on is the GM Lansing Grand River Plant," Kieve pointed out. "These aren't jobs that might come at some point in the future, these are current jobs that are here right now."

Opponents of the electric vehicle trend also warn more EV projects risk making the Great Lakes State reliant on foreign investments tied to China, raising economic and security issues.

Kieve emphasized Michigan, known for "putting the world on wheels," should not view EV production as a lost cause because China has a head start. He called that view "defeatist," among other things.

"It sells short Michigan autoworkers' ability to compete against the rest of the world, including against China," Kieve argued.

He also noted traditional vehicle pollution affects lower-income and minority communities the most, giving them the most to gain from EVs, in terms of cleaner air and reduced health and vehicle maintenance costs. Michigan has about 43,000 registered EVs on the road, fewer than the 60,000 originally projected by this time by state officials.