Turns Out You Can’t Confirm Someone Who Wants to Destroy the EPA Without Angry Voters Showing Up

“Why did you vote for a man who doesn’t believe in climate change?”

JT Vintage/Glasshouse/ZUMA


On Wednesday, two GOP lawmakers from Nevada faced angry voters who complained about Trump, the GOP agenda, and Sen. Dean Heller’s vote to confirm Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency. Reno Gazette-Journal caught the Chamber of Commerce luncheon on video, which captures an interesting exchange about Pruitt and climate change in a county that voted 52.5 percent for Trump last fall.

A woman, who introduced herself as a military mother concerned about the environment and natural resources, asked Heller, “A few days ago you voted for Scott Pruitt for Environmental Protection Agency. Knowing his ties to big oil and gas and other polluters, what will you do to ensure the protection of our clean water and clean air?” She got a round of applause.

“I think every president has the right to put their cabinet into place, and I supported putting the cabinet into place,” Heller said, as some in the crowd of 100 began to boo. “It doesn’t mean I support all the policies. I am going to treat all the policies that come out of the Trump White House the same way I treated all the policies that came out of the Bush White House and out of the Obama White House. They are not always right, but they’re not always wrong. When a policy itself comes to my desk, I’ll take a look at it, and if it’s right, I’ll support it. If it’s good for Carson City, I’ll support it.”

Heller then touted his record on solar energy, claiming “nobody’s done more on my side of the aisle than myself to support solar energy.” He added that he “saved the solar industry” across the entire country by supporting the extension of solar tax credits in an omnibus bill. Heller might be overstating his environmental record. According to the League of Conservation Voters’ score of Heller’s votes, he had a 24 percent voting record on environment in 2016 and 8 percent in 2015. Since his vote supporting Pruitt, environmental groups have launched anti-Heller ad buys, in anticipation of his 2018 re-election bid.

Another woman called out, “Why did you vote for a man who doesn’t believe in climate change?”

“I talked to Pruitt, and he said he’s not a climate change denier,” Heller replied. “That’s what we talked about in my office…If I don’t like his policies I won’t support him. If I like his policies, I will support him.” While we don’t know what Pruitt told Heller in private, the new EPA head did pen an op-ed last year incorrectly characterizing climate change as a debate that “is far from settled.”

Rep. Mark Amodei (R), who was also speaking at the event, then took the mic from Heller (who appeared to be relieved, asking “are you tapping me out?”). Another woman asked Amodei about Pruitt’s emails from his time as Oklahoma attorney general. During Pruitt’s Senate confirmation, Democratic senators wanted to delay the vote because an Oklahoma judge ordered the attorney general’s office to turn over email communications with fossil fuel interests. But Republicans scheduled Pruitt’s vote before those emails were made public on Wednesday. The emails reveal close coordination between Pruitt and fossil fuel companies such as Devon Energy.

Amodei and Heller tried to minimize the importance of Pruitt to Nevada’s interests, though the state ranks fourth in installed solar energy and is home to a number of popular national monuments. Not to mention that Nevandans grapple with drought and extremely hot summers, and other consequences of climate change. When Amodei tried to deflect the criticism and focus on issues he sees as more relevant to Nevada, a man in the audience responded, “We are Nevada.”

Here’s the video, courtesy of Reno Gazette-Journal (the relevant exchange starts at 19:50).

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate