[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Page 2640]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF SCOTT PRUITT

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, after careful consideration, I have 
decided to oppose the confirmation of Scott Pruitt, the nominee for 
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. I have met 
at length with Mr. Pruitt, who is an accomplished attorney with 
considerable knowledge about environmental laws. We discussed many 
important environmental issues about which I care deeply--from EPA's 
enforcement of landmark environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act 
and the Clean Water Act, to climate change and the Clean Power Plan, to 
protections from harmful pollutants such as lead and mercury. I also 
have reviewed testimony from his confirmation hearing.
  In keeping with my past practice, regardless of which party is in the 
White House, I will vote for cloture on his nomination so that every 
Senator can have a clear, up-or-down vote on this important nomination 
of a member of the President's Cabinet. But I will vote no on Mr. 
Pruitt's confirmation.
  The fact is Mr. Pruitt and I have fundamentally different views of 
the role and mission of the EPA. That does not mean that I agree with 
every regulatory action that EPA has taken. At times, the Agency has 
been difficult to work with and unresponsive to bipartisan 
congressional concerns, but the EPA plays a vital role in implementing 
and enforcing landmark laws that protect not only our environment but 
also public health.
  Specifically, I have significant concerns that Mr. Pruitt has 
actively opposed and sued EPA on numerous issues that are of great 
importance to the State of Maine, including mercury controls for coal-
fired power plants and efforts to reduce cross-State air pollution and 
greenhouse gas emissions. His actions leave me with considerable doubts 
about whether his vision for the EPA is consistent with the Agency's 
critical mission to protect human health and the environment.
  The State of Maine, located at the end of our Nation's ``air 
pollution tailpipe,'' is on the receiving end of pollution generated by 
coal-fired power plants in other States. Reducing harmful air 
pollutants is critical for public health, particularly for Maine, which 
has among the highest rates of asthma in the country. Controls for 
mercury, one of the most persistent and dangerous pollutants, are 
especially important for children and pregnant women. Moreover, there 
is no doubt that the greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change 
pose a significant threat to our State's economy and our natural 
resources, from our working forests, fishing, and agricultural 
industries, to tourism and recreation.
  The opposition to the nominee expressed by Friends of Acadia is 
grounded in concerns about the importance of emissions reductions for 
lessening the impacts of climate change that affect this gem of a 
national park. The changes we are already seeing in the aquatic life in 
Casco Bay and the Gulf of Maine, for example, are cause for alarm. The 
incidence of Lyme disease in northern Maine and high asthma rates 
throughout the State are also linked to environmental changes that 
threaten the health and well-being of too many Maine people.
  These are among the reasons why I have voted to uphold the EPA rule 
governing mercury and air toxics standards from coal-fired power plants 
and the cross-State air pollution rule, as well as the Clean Power Plan 
to limit carbon pollution from existing and new fossil fuel-fired power 
plants.
  I reject the false choice of pitting the environment against the 
economy because, for much of the State of Maine, the economy and the 
environment are inextricably linked. A strong commitment to protecting 
the health of our Nation's environment is critical for protecting 
Maine's natural beauty, the State's economy, and the health of those of 
us fortunate enough to call Maine home.
  Due to my concerns about Mr. Pruitt's commitment to the mission of 
the EPA, I will cast my vote in opposition to his confirmation.

                          ____________________