[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 24, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S422-S423]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NOMINATION OF SCOTT PRUITT
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the question I bring to the floor
today is what is Scott Pruitt hiding? Last week, the Environment and
Public Works Committee held a hearing on President Trump's nominee to
the Environmental Protection Agency. Today, for my 155th ``Time to Wake
Up'' speech, I have unanswered questions about Mr. Pruitt's fitness for
that role. His evasiveness at his hearing signaled nothing good about
his ties to the industry he would regulate if confirmed, and the lack
of curiosity about these industry ties from my Republican colleagues
speaks volumes about the political clout of that industry.
One question stood out. Our new chairman, Senator Barrasso, posed the
standard question of nominees to Mr. Pruitt in our hearing: ``Do you
know of any matters, which you may or may not have disclosed, that
might place you in any conflict of interest if you are confirmed?''
Mr. Pruitt answered: ``No.''
Scott Pruitt crawls with conflict of interest. He has conflicts of
interest with the fossil fuel industry from his political fundraising.
We just don't know how bad. He likely has conflicts of interest from
confidential private meetings with fossil fuel companies at Republican
Attorneys General Association get-togethers, but we just don't know how
bad. There is almost certainly evidence of conflict of interest in his
undisclosed emails with fossil fuel companies, but again we don't know
how bad. He came clean on none of this in his confirmation hearing.
This chart is a simple, and a likely incomplete, representation of
the many financial links reported between Pruitt and the fossil fuel
industry. At the top are the companies and the entities that have
supported Mr. Pruitt with political funding. Down below are the
political organizations for which he has raised money.
Pruitt for Attorney General was his reelection campaign. The
polluters gave to Pruitt for Attorney General. Oklahoma's Strong PAC
was his leadership PAC, a separate political fundraising vehicle. The
polluters gave to Oklahoma Strong.
There was another one here called Liberty 2.0, Mr. Pruitt's super
PAC, but he closed it down so we don't list it. While it existed, his
super PAC took nearly $200,000 in fossil fuel industry contributions.
Mr. Pruitt served as the chair of the Republican Attorneys General
Association in 2012 and 2013 and was a member of RAGA's executive
committee through 2015. Between 2014 and 2016, RAGA received $530,000
from Koch Industries. It received $350,000 from Murray Energy. It
received $160,000 from ExxonMobil, and it received $125,000 from Devon
Energy.
Devon Energy, by the way, is the company whose letter Mr. Pruitt
transposed virtually verbatim onto his official letterhead to send to
the EPA as the official position of the Oklahoma attorney general.
During his hearing, Mr. Pruitt refused to provide details about any
solicitations he made from regulated industries for the Republican
Attorneys General Association. We know they got special attention from
RAGA. Here is a confidential 2015 meeting agenda from RAGA when Pruitt
was on its executive committee. I ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the Record the meeting agenda page.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
RAGA Summer National Meeting 2015, The Greenbrier, West Virginia
MEETING AGENDA
The Greenbrier; 300 West Main Street, White Sulphur
Springs, WV; (855) 616-2441.
Saturday, August 1, 2015
A Cyber Lounge and Hospitality Suite are provided all day
for your convenience by Rent-A-Center in the Chesapeake Bay
Room,
5:40 PM--Lead Shuttles for West Virginia Host Committee
Dinner. Location: Front Main Entrance of the Hotel.
6:00 PM-8:00 PM--West Virginia Host Committee Reception &
Dinner; Location: Kate's Mountain Lodge; Special Guest: Homer
Hickam--American author; Vietnam veteran, and a former NASA
engineer. His autobiographical novel Rocket Boys: A Memoir,
was a No. 1 New York Times Best Seller, and was the basis for
the 1999 film October Sky.
Sunday, August 2, 2015
A Cyber Lounge and Hospitality Suite are provided all day
for your convenience by Rent-A-Center in the Chesapeake Bay
Room
7:00 AM-10:30 AM--Breakfast (on your own); Location: Main
Dining Room; *Breakfast is included, please provide your room
key to the waiter. Please note: denim and exercise attire are
not permitted.
11:00 AM-12:30 PM--AG Business Meeting; *Attorneys General
and Staff Only; Location: Eisenhower A & B.
12:30 PM-2:00 PM--RAGA ERC & Capital Club Lunch: What
Difference Does It Make? Measuring the Success of Republican
AGs; Location: Chesapeake Room; Speaker: Attorney General Pam
Bondi, Florida.
2:00 PM-5:30 PM--Private Meetings with Attorneys General
and Staff; *Attorneys General and Staff Only; Location:
Eisenhower A & B.
2:00 PM-2:40 PM--Private meeting with Murray Energy:
*Attorneys General and Staff Only; Location: Eisenhower A &
B.
2:50 PM-3:10 PM--Private meeting with Microsoft; *Attorneys
General and Staff Only; Location: Eisenhower A & B.
3:15 PM-3:35 PM--Private meeting with Southern Company;
*Attorneys General and Staff Only; Location: Eisenhower A &
B.
3:40 PM-4:00 PM--Private meeting with American Fuel
Petrochemical Manufacturers; *Attorneys General and Staff
Only; Location: Eisenhower A & B.
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. This confidential agenda mentions a private meeting
[[Page S423]]
with Murray Energy. It mentions a private meeting with Southern
Company, and it mentions a private meeting with American Fuel
Petrochemical Manufacturers, which represents a lot of these
characters. Murray Energy, of course, is right there. Southern Company
is right there, and the American Fuel Petrochemical Manufacturers
organization, I am sure, represents the others.
This confidential meeting agenda is all we have about what took place
in those private meetings. I asked Mr. Pruitt in our hearings about the
content of these private meetings, and he wouldn't answer any
questions. He doesn't want us to know what was discussed there with the
big fossil fuel polluters--companies whose pollution he will oversee as
EPA Administrator.
Pruitt was also a chairman of the Rule of Law Defense Fund. The so-
called Rule of Law Defense Fund is a dark money political operation
that launders the identity of donors giving money to the Republican
Attorneys General Association. As the New York Times said, the fund is
a ``legal entity that allows companies benefiting from the actions of
Mr. Pruitt and other Republican attorneys general to make anonymous
donations, in unlimited amounts.'' It is a complete black hole of
political cash.
In the hearing, Pruitt refused to shine any light into the dark money
he solicited or received from these fossil fuel polluters or others for
the Rule of Law Defense Fund--not whom he asked for money, not who gave
money, not what they gave, nothing. This is an organization that
appears to have a million-dollar-a-year budget so someone was busy
raising a lot of money. How much exactly, from whom, and what was the
deal? Scott Pruitt doesn't want our committee or this Senate or the
American people to know.
Colleagues and I sent letters to the Office of Government Ethics and
to the Environmental Protection Agency's top ethics official. Their
responses indicate that their ethics rules predate Citizens United and
its torrent of dark political money. Their regulatory authority on
government ethics has not caught up with the post-Citizens United dark
money world. Since their ethics authorities have not been updated for
these dark money conflicts, if Pruitt doesn't disclose any of this
information before the Senate, no one will know, and even those
government ethics watchdogs may end up blind to conflicts of interest.
That doesn't mean there isn't a conflict of interest here. What it
means is it is a hidden conflict of interest. That makes it our duty in
the Senate to examine those relationships, except for the fact that the
fossil fuel industry now, more or less, runs the Republican Party, so
there is a scrupulous lack of interest in this fossil fuel industry
dark money.
How badly does Mr. Pruitt want to hide his dealings with his fossil
fuel patrons? An Open Records Act request was filed with the Oklahoma
attorney general's office--Mr. Pruitt's office--for emails with energy
firms, fossil fuel trade groups, and their political arms, with
companies like Devon Energy, Murray Energy, and Koch Industries, and
the American Petroleum Institute, which is the industry's trade
association.
Let me share three facts about this Open Records Act inquiry: No. 1,
the Open Records Act request was filed more than 745 days ago--over 2
years, 2 years. No. 2, Pruitt's office has admitted that there are at
least 3,000 responsive documents to that Open Records Act request.
Consider that fact alone for a moment. There were 3,000 emails and
other documents between his office and these fossil fuel companies and
front groups--3,000. No. 3, zero, exactly zero of those documents have
been produced--745 days, 3,000 documents, zero produced.
Think how smelly those 3,000 emails must be when he would rather have
this flagrant Open Records Act compliance failure than have any of
those 3,000 emails see the light of day. Given the important financial
interests of these groups before the EPA, do we really not think that
3,000 emails back and forth between him and his office and those groups
might be relevant to his conflicts of interest as Administrator? Until
very recently, Republicans had a keen interest in emails. Chairman
Barrasso asked that important question: ``Do you know of any matters
which you may or may not have disclosed that might place you in any
conflict of interest if you are confirmed?'' Scott Pruitt answered:
``No.''
On this record, there is every reason to believe that his statement
is false. Might having raised significant dark money from the industry
that he would regulate create a conflict of interest? Let's say that he
made a call to Devon Energy and said: I slapped your letter on my
letterhead and turned it in as if it were the official work of the
Oklahoma attorney general's office. Now I need a million bucks. And you
can give it to the Rule of Law Defense Fund as dark money, without
anyone knowing that it was you.
Might such a quid pro quo create a conflict of interest in his
ability to carry out the duties of EPA Administrator in matters
affecting Devon Energy? It is impossible to say that it would not be a
conflict of interest.
Let's say that at those confidential private meetings with Murray
Energy and Southern Company, something went on. Might something that
takes place in private meetings with Big Energy interests that he is
going to have to regulate create a possible conflict of interest? They
paid to be there. They wanted something. Might that not give rise to a
conflict of interest?
And who knows what conflicts of interest would be divulged if his
office were not sitting on 3,000 undisclosed emails with fossil fuel
industries that he will be regulating as EPA Administrator?
I challenge anyone to come to this Senate floor and tell me with a
straight face that there is nothing that those emails could reveal that
might create a conflict of interest for the man discharged with
regulating the companies on the other end of those emails. ``No'' just
doesn't cut it as an answer from Mr. Pruitt when there is still so much
that he is hiding.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. PETERS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________