Scott Pruitt Quotes

There is no reason why EPA's role should ebb and flow based on a particular administration or a particular administrator.

The EPA has no legal authority to expand the definition of navigable waters under the Clean Water Act, as the Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear.

The Obama administration is on notice - they will not be allowed to regulate what they have been unable to legislate.

Way back in 2000, the EPA was poised, and, in fact, had drafted a rule, to specially regulate pollution - water pollution and other types of pollution - from power plants, but the energy industry pushed back pretty significantly.

There are issues the EPA should be dealing with. When I talk about the EPA and its role with the states, it's not an abolitionist view, that we don't need that agency. It's that the agency should act within the outlines established by Congress.

As Attorney General of Alabama, I have never hesitated to stand up to the EPA before when it was wrong.

If the EPA cannot or will not act to halt the toxic e-waste trade to developing nations, then Congress should take action.

As members of Congress, we have to pursue the Congressional Review Act legislation as soon as possible.

We must, we must cut the EPA's legs off. I hate to say that, because it sounds rotten, but they are choking this country to death with legislating through the bureaucracy in Washington.

The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations is over 170 thousand ages long.

I take my 'advice and consent' duty as a U.S. senator very seriously.

The process of getting regulations right is described publicly as far more political than in fact it is. It's essentially a legal and technical enterprise.

In many respects, you can argue Dodd-Frank isn't even law. It's a license for unaccountable, un-elected officials to make law.

I have been trying to understand the regulators.

'Sue and settle' involves the creation of environmental rules and regulations through lawsuits filed by environmental groups against the EPA, not through Congress or proper rule-making.

The FCC should obviously not propose bad rules that will be struck down; it should propose good rules that will be upheld.

My job is to enforce the laws as passed by whom? Congress. They give me my authority. That's the jurisdictional responsibilities that I have, and when litigation is used to regulate... that's abusive. That's wrong.

The EPA has a history of overreaching its authority.

When the president and the prime minister decide to implement reforms, they have all the measures they need to pass them and enforce them.

You can't go to Washington as a congressman and a senator and expect to make a difference all at once. You have to earn your way.

The legal fight over climate change begins in the United States with the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977. Under the Act, the E.P.A. is required to publish a list of 'stationary sources' of air pollution, of which the most important are power plants.

Without question, I'm not a fan of the EPA. The EPA has overstepped their boundaries each and every day. They get into areas they shouldn't be involved in... the states have the right to regulate themselves if they have the ability to do so - and we do because we have the Department of Environmental Quality.

If you want to change a law, you have to pass a law. Presidents don't write laws. Congress writes laws.

In order to build anything from factories to schools to hospitals, one must jump through a series of regulatory hoops, giving EPA veto power over any major projects.

I hope the EPA will listen to the many votes over the years in Congress opposing cap-and-trade and rescind that proposed rule.