Posted on 09/19/2017 7:46:52 PM PDT by Olog-hai
President Donald Trumps nominee to oversee chemical safety at the Environmental Protection Agency has for years accepted payments for criticizing studies that raised concerns about the safety of his clients products, according to a review of financial records and his published work by The Associated Press.
Michael L. Doursons nomination as head of EPAs Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention was to be considered by a Senate committee Wednesday, but was postponed when the Senate adjourned early for the week. If confirmed, ethics experts said, Doursons past writings and the money paid to him and a nonprofit he founded could represent potential conflicts of interest.
Past corporate clients of Dourson and of a research group he ran include Dow Chemical Co., Koch Industries Inc. and Chevron Corp. His research has also been underwritten by industry trade and lobbying groups representing the makers of plastics, pesticides, processed foods and cigarettes. [ ]
Doursons views toward industry are consistent with others Trump has selected as top federal regulators. Among them is EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who in March overruled the findings of his agencys own scientists to reverse an effort to ban chlorpyrifos, one of the nations most widely used pesticides.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Hard to see how picking a person knowledgeable regarding the industry could be any worse than picking a Big Government fanatic.
Trump should be eliminating the EPA.
The EPA sets a ceiling for some contaminant, then the states adopt an even lower number that industry struggles to attain, paying fines and going out of business. The crazy part is the regulators seem to believe that the ability to detect smaller and smaller quantities of something equates to industries being able to achieve lower and lower quantities in their processes. Sometimes going offshore looks really, really, good.
Vast swaths of the public have been conditioned to put their trust in those Big Government fanatics!
I myself found much of the reports from the recent past to be trumped up bilge.
Time for an even handed man, or even a man a bit biased toward business to level things out.
I don’t want contamination or water resources to be damaged, but the Left is just rabid as a dog on such matters.
The environmental extremists really know how to stretch what constitutes an industry “tie.”
If he was a complete commie they’d be good with it.
Ooh sounds like a great idea to me.
He beats the two reds who ran the EPA, Carol Browner (International Socialists) and her protege’, Lisa Jackson, a hardcore leftist in her own right.
I just hope that Mr. Dourson uses good science to make decisions unlike many of his predecessors who used “good Marxism” to promote government authoritarianism.
And I say this as someone who has been in the environmental cleanup arena for almost 25 years. Common sense, good science, and some economic balancing of regulations will go a long way to keeping us safe and prosperous (employed) at the same time.
IOW, he was effective, and that's why the left hates him.
I worked for 41 years as a chemical engineer in the chemical and refining industry. Much of my time was in environmentally related projects. One thing I saw ... many years ago instrumentation could detect components in a sample to a level of parts per thousands. As the years passed, those detections became more precise up to levels of parts per billion or parts per trillion.
And you know what ... each time the instrumentation became more precise, suddenly the acceptable levels of contamination were lowered to the levels of precision of current measurement. So, if lead was acceptable in water at 1 part per thousand, years ago, then the current acceptable level is probably in the parts per billion range.
Exactly. I said as much in my comment. It’s idiocy.
That's OK. I have been assured, in no uncertain terms, that if we just impose sufficiently high import tariffs, these industries will stay in America, or even come back.
I see from your snark that we are
kindred spirits on the matter.
Carry on, my man. I’ll remember
your name.
Snark.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.