Scott Pruitt Just Testified Before Congress. It Didn’t Go Well.

Democrats pressed and ridiculed him for his various scandals and extravagant spending.

Tom Williams/Congressional Quarterly, Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Given an opportunity to address the scandals that have dominated his 16 months at the head of at the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt admitted Wednesday, “I would not make the same decisions again.” It was the only time in the two-hour Senate hearing that Pruitt took any responsibility for the decisions that have led to at least 14 federal investigations into his ethical conduct, alleged retaliation against whistleblowers, and extravagant spending.

Pruitt didn’t elaborate on his regrets. Instead, he made ample use of the passive voice when discussing specific issues raised by Senate Democrats. For instance, in addressing the secure phone booth that was installed in his office at a cost of $43,000 to taxpayers, he said, “There were not proper controls early to ensure a legal review.”

Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) pressed Pruitt another of his more controversial expenditures: a round-the clock security detail his predecessors did not have. The senators asked Pruitt whether he had personally requested the detail on his first day in office.

Pruitt maintained that the EPA’s criminal enforcement office made the decision independently, adding carefully, “I did not direct that on the first day.” 

“So your answer is no,” Van Hollen replied, noting that Pruitt had just directly contradicted a letter from the EPA inspector general stating that Pruitt had “requested 24/7 protection once he was confirmed as Administrator.” 

In another exchange about whether he had asked for sirens and flashing lights to be used to expedite a trip to his “favorite” Washington restaurant, the upscale French eatery Le Diplomate, Pruitt answered, “There are policies in place regarding the use of lights. Those policies were followed by the agencies.” Asked again if he had personally made the request, Pruitt said, “I don’t recall that.” 

Udall also asked Pruitt how he came to pay below-market rent for a condo owned by a lobbyist with business before the EPA. Pruitt said his EPA aide Milian Hupp looked for housing on his behalf “on personal time.” Udall asked if Hupp was paid for her work, and Pruitt said no. “Then that’s a gift,” Udall said. “That’s in violation of federal law.” (Federal law that prohibits significant gifts from subordinates.)

Pruitt was ridiculed for another of his professional extravagances: flying in first class. The EPA has maintained that his flight upgrades were necessary for his safety after he had been heckled. “What a silly reason,” Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) remarked in his opening statement. “Nobody even knows who you are…You have to fly first class? Oh, come on.”

Pruitt confirmed that he had set up a legal defense fund, which experts see as yet another ethical minefield because the administrator’s biggest supporters hail from industries that are prohibited from donating.

Van Hollen asked Pruitt if he will ensure that he doesn’t accept donations from lobbyists and people who have business before the EPA. Pruitt gave one of his few direct replies of the day: “Absolutely.” 

 

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