[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 23, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4602-S4603]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Aaron Szabo

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the Trump corruption of the 
Environmental Protection Agency continues apace, so I am here today in 
opposition to the nomination of Aaron Szabo to serve as the Assistant 
Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation over at EPA.
  The Constitution provides the President the power to nominate 
ministers and officers of the United States and the Senate advice and 
consent power over his nominees.
  I think we probably agree that the Constitution means something, that 
advice and consent is not a mere rubberstamp. But when a nominee comes 
before your committee, they should provide straight answers to 
questions. Well, this nominee dodged our questions and then doubled 
down with more obfuscation when we gave him a chance to clarify through 
questions for the record. That alone should be sufficient reason to 
withhold consent until proper answers are obtained.
  This character Szabo is credited by name as a contributor to the EPA 
chapter of Project 2025, the extremist, rightwing, fossil fuel-funded 
blueprint for dismantling the Federal Government, which President Trump 
is now dutifully implementing. Some of the environmental highlights 
from Project 2025? Weaken the Clean Air Act by reversing the 
endangerment finding. Purge the Agency and bring to its staff 
``trauma.'' In case you aren't keeping score at home, EPA Administrator 
Zeldin is already hard at work on these.

  Szabo was an advisor to the America First Policy Institute--the 
Trump-aligned think tank funded by fossil fuel and aligned with Big Oil 
interests. He worked as a lobbyist, pushing the interests of major 
polluters like members of the American Petroleum Institute. Well, chief 
on the wish list of his former clients is rescission of the EPA's 
endangerment finding. That is a 2009 evidence-based determination that 
greenhouse gases are, in fact, harmful to human welfare and the 
environment. When that rule was adopted back in 2009, it had actually 
already been settled scientific fact for decades that greenhouse gases 
harmed the public and the environment. Now, 16 years later, the 
evidence has only gotten stronger, and the looming economic dangers of 
climate collapse have only gotten more evident. The only people who 
benefit from repealing the endangerment finding are the planet's 
biggest polluters--Mr. Szabo's former clients.
  To me, Mr. Szabo's recent work and professional affiliations should 
also render him unfit for the role to which he has been nominated. Is 
this really what we want for the EPA? Is this really how we protect 
clean air--by helping polluters rule the roost?
  It gets worse.
  When questioned at his hearing about his ties to Trump's donors' 
extreme anti-environmental agenda, Szabo provided obfuscatory answers. 
He acknowledged that he was a contributor to Project 2025, which he 
could hardly fail to do since his name was on it, but he stated that he 
kept no records--no records--of his contributions to that effort. He 
was asked whether he had no records because he never had any or because 
he had deleted them. He couldn't answer. He bumbled, stumbled, bobbed, 
weaved, dodged, and, ultimately, refused to answer, although he did 
concede that some of the advice he had provided was written advice.
  Following up with subsequent QFRs on the topic, we got from Mr. Szabo 
a sudden response, albeit one that does not seem credible, particularly 
in light of his previous inability to answer the question.
  He wrote:

       Like millions of other Americans, I have been the subject 
     of attempts to steal personal information through electronic 
     means. I, like many federal government employees, had their 
     completed Standard Form 86, titled ``Questionnaire for 
     National Security Positions,'' stolen in 2015 that included 
     sensitive information. I periodically delete old messages and 
     documents that are no longer necessary to help ensure privacy 
     and security to my family, those I interact with, and myself.

  Seriously? Szabo had plenty of time to provide that response during 
his confirmation hearing, but he never mentioned anything of the sort. 
His contribution to the anti-environmental portion of Project 2025 is 
hard to connect with any issues of family, privacy, and security.
  To be clear, this is not entirely about whether you approve or 
disapprove of Project 2025. What is relevant here is the extreme degree 
of evasiveness in answering or, more exactly, not answering our 
questions. Senators are constitutionally obligated to provide advice 
and consent on the President's nominees. So we should demand better 
than this in the people we confirm to serve in the most senior 
positions in our government. The current status of ``dodge `em'' in our 
nomination hearings is a disgrace.
  Beyond Mr. Szabo's own questionable qualifications and his 
deceptiveness and his troublesome testimony, we also cannot ignore the 
full-on corruption of the EPA on behalf of Trump's polluting

[[Page S4603]]

fossil fuel donors--corruption well underway. I already mentioned the 
endangerment finding, but there is more. Proposed deregulatory efforts 
will make cars dirtier and less fuel-efficient. Why? So Trump's donors 
in the oil industry can sell more gasoline. They will let powerplants 
and oil and gas facilities spew more carbon dioxide and methane without 
limits. Why? So Trump's fossil fuel political donors can sell more oil 
and gas to those facilities. The EPA is even attempting to shut down 
the program that keeps track of how much carbon pollution industrial 
facilities emit.
  See no evil. Hear no evil.
  The Trump corruption train rolls on, and to allow one of the 
architects of the EPA section of that fossil fuel-funded Project 2025 
free rein to dismantle an office that is so central to the Agency's 
core mission and to the protection of all our constituents will do 
nothing to help anyone except the interests of the polluters who fund 
President Trump and, if I may add, the Republican Party.
  I will vote no on his nomination, and I strongly urge my colleagues 
to do the same for a multiplicity of good reasons.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.