mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

EPA Chief Scott Pruitt Resigns After Months Of Emission And Fuel Economy Deregulation Efforts

Scott Pruitt, who led the Environmental Protection Agency for 18 months, is now out. The former EPA head tendered his resignation to President Donald Trump after months of scandals and investigations plagued Pruitt.

Pruitt is best known for his work to deregulate numerous industries, which was a major campaign promise of President Trump. Pruitt worked with the administration to roll back emission standards that led to higher fuel economy standards and his work to cut California’s ability to set its own emission standards. General Motors and numerous other automakers have lobbied to ease regulations in the short-term, but also agreed fuel economy and emission standards should rise in time.

The former EPA head also rolled back the Clean Power Act, which required coal-powered electricity plants to use carbon-capture technology or move to cleaner fuel sources, and limited the effects of the Clean Water Act.

President Trump broke the news on Pruitt’s resignation via Twitter.

“I have accepted the resignation of Scott Pruitt as the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,” the president tweeted. “Within the Agency Scott has done an outstanding job, and I will always be thankful to him for this.”

Replacing Pruitt will be deputy Andrew Wheeler as acting EPA administrator.

GM Authority respectfully reminds commenters to keep things civil. Name calling, bashing, and other personal attacks will not be tolerated and admins will be monitoring the thread.

Former GM Authority staff writer.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. Good riddance! Now we need the POTUS to go!

    Reply
  2. He was the worst! was doing the exact opposite of the EPA’s job. Fuel Regulations need to continue to stay. The consumer benefits from the Rules from the Obama Administration. Even if a consumer doesn’t switch to an electric vehicle, 50mpg+ vehicles would be great for everyone. Automakers are fully capable of making this happen, as research has proved it. Automakers are not keen on doing so, unless we voice our opinions and concern about it, or show them with our cash. Draining the swamp? The swamp has been the murkiest it’s ever been! Only cleaner from here!

    Reply
    1. The acting EPA chief is a former coal and fossil fuel lobbyist, and a climate change denier. I don’t imagine he’ll be as incredibly stupid as the last guy scandal-wise (talk about needing locked up), but he’ll be no better for our health or environment.

      Reply
  3. Let’s remember two things; when the Obama standards were initiated two of the major players GM and Chrysler were wards of the state and had no option but to agree. Secondly there was a planned progress review process which Obama scrapped shortly before leaving office. All Trump did initially was to reverse Obama’s move and reinstate a review process.

    Yes we need to challenge the industry with tough emission and CAFE goals, but these need to be realistic and attainable without incurring costs that grossly increase the price of vehicles. On the other hand any administration could add sufficient taxes to fuel and that would automatically chase purchasers to more economical cars but no government is willing to do this because they will be turfed from office.

    Reply
    1. The US government is not willing to do this. Overseas using taxes and regulation are par the course for social engineering to more efficient and smaller vehicles; among other things.

      Reply
  4. The last administration highjacked the EPA. They went from an enforcement organization to a legislative and that was not legal.

    Case in point. The EPA tried to redefine the laws approved by the senate and House and state what they thought they thought they should stand for.

    Case in point. The laws on car emissions were stated for cars on the road and defined by each state. The EPA wanted to change the definition to all cars be it even race cars. If you bought a Camaro to race you would legally be required not to remove the factory type engine or any emission controls.

    If this car was not ever used on the highway you could not modify it for racing.

    It nearly killed the racing industry and aftermarket. SEMA fought it off with support from politicians on both sides due to a government agency going rouge on laws they passed.

    The EPA has been a mess for a long time now, people have been making money off their regulations and the fight for power continues.

    Reply
    1. i’m glad we have the epa. i sort of enjoy clean water and air. look at what the situation was before the epa(under nixon) came into being.

      Reply
      1. No one said to get rid of the EPA.

        But uncontrolled changing of regulations to stricter or unnecessary standards to fVor others investments in green technology is just as bad as unregulation for the country and people as a whole.

        What the EPA tried to do is I force the laws as the Obama admin wanted them inforced and not as they were passed by the US goverment.

        That is illegal and just as or more corrupt than anything else.

        If they wanted laws changed that is fine but use the system and due process. They owned the house, Senate and POTUS but still chose to redefine laws in ways they were never intended.

        We only know about this one because SEMA and other bipartisan officials stopped them.

        The reality is not one tree was saved or fish preserved by forcing a hand full of racers from modifying their cars.

        The inforcments of EPA laws needs to be a well balanced act. You need to protect the environment but while protecting out country, economy and the Income of millions of people who pay tax money that supports the EPA.

        You lose the economy and things around here will look like China.

        Laws can help things but with some folks they can damage our country in ways that you would never want to see.economically.

        Reply
        1. There’s some truth to this yet “The reality is not one tree was saved or fish preserved by forcing a hand full of racers from modifying their cars.” isn’t exactly true…Often the cheapest way is the most polluting way so allow something for a handful of racer and automakers could jump on board…One of his last actions was to secure a semi truck glider loophole which allows older and dirtier engine to be installed into powertrain-less new semis called Gliders…Vox did a great summary of the damage he caused: “After taking the reins at the EPA, he pushed for budget and staff cuts to the agency. He also worked aggressively to roll back, weaken, or stall environmental regulations.”

          The worst part is, he’s a complete idiot for getting involved in all these scandals which were probably just the tip of the iceberg…He’ll probably be convicted then secretly pardoned which the POTUS can do…

          Reply
          1. Did you just reference VOX as a source?!?

            Any credibility you had just went down the toilet with that one.

            Reply
            1. I just sure did…Wait, I actually had credibility here?

              Reply
              1. Actually, like everyone commenting on the inter-webs; NOPE!

                Reply
          2. Vox lol! that is the the equal to a far radical left Glen Beck like Forum.

            The Glider deal is just Grand standing.

            It is like condemning Hummer. Many were critical of Hummer when most of the vehicles they were selling were rebodied Trailblazers with 5 cylinder engines.

            The H1 and H2 sold in low numbers and even the H2 was no worse than most other Tahoe’s or Yukons.

            As for credibility you have to have it before you can lose it.

            Reply
  5. Pruitt didn’t give a hoot about the environment. Too bad the EPA became another bureaucracy with pencil pushers dreaming up ways to keep their job rather than people in the field enforcing clean water and air laws.

    Reply
  6. every time there is a debate about raising CAFE standards, people scream that will be the end of sports cars.

    now we have more efficient vehicles and as well as cars with 400, 500, 600, 700 HP.

    Reply
    1. And now you complain about how much they cost.

      Reply
  7. It seems ‘…resigns after months of repeated ethics violations’ might have been the case.

    Deregulation doesn’t seem to have been the driving issue in this case.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel