In Trump’s America, People Sue the EPA to Block a Toxic Pesticide

Pruitt is getting a taste of his own medicine

Cheriss May/NurPhoto via ZUMA Press

This story was originally published by Fusion and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

As the Environmental Protection Agency’s administrator, Scott Pruitt has swiftly enacted the decidedly anti-environment agenda he perfected as Oklahoma’s attorney general. Rolling back several decades worth of regulations, Pruitt has chosen to prioritize corporate interests over the most basic of safety concerns.

Pruitt, who knows a thing or two about suing the EPA, will now get a taste of his own medicine. Ignoring the EPA’s own previous analysis, Pruitt rejected a petition spearheaded by environmental groups to ban a pesticide called chlorpyrifos. Now six states are suing the EPA in response to his decision.

 Despite years of research concluding that exposure to chlorpyrifos is harmful to children, even at the lowest levels, Pruitt’s decision strongly favored Dow Chemical—the pesticide’s manufacturer. Prompted by Pruitt’s blatant disregard of health, a “coalition” of several states has sued the EPA, hoping to overturn his denial.

According to the Associated Press, the lawsuit is spearheaded by New York’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman; Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia have also joined the effort. In the filing, Schneiderman chastised the administration’s endangerment of children.

 “Job No. 1 for the EPA should be protecting Americans’ wellbeing, especially that of our children. Yet the administration is jeopardizing our kids’ health, allowing the use of a toxic pesticide for which it can’t even identify a safe level,” Schneiderman said.
 
Chlorpyrifos’s toxicity has already been recognized by the EPA. Following a Columbia University study that demonstrated a link between newborns who were exposed to the pesticide and significant setbacks to their cognitive development, the EPA released its own findings on the chemical. EPA researchers found that no level of chlorpyrifos was safe in groundwater and it recommended “revok[ing] all tolerances for chlorpyrifos.”

Why might Pruitt defy the repeated proposals of an agency he now runs? The answer seems quite apparent. The AP’s report noted that Dow Chemical spent $13.6 million on lobbying last year and the company’s CEO, Andrew Liveris, is a close adviser to President Trump; Liveris also donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund.

Pruitt’s rejection of a chlorpyrifos ban goes against the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation. Last month, the organization said it was “deeply alarmed” by Pruitt’s decision. AAP wrote a joint letter with the Environmental Working Group to Pruitt imploring him to reconsider. They wrote, “The risk to infant and children’s health and development is unambiguous.”

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