Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday September 21 2017, @08:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the your-tax-dollars-at-work dept.

Common Dreams reports

Thanks to a hiring freeze, budget cuts, and the exorbitant travel needs of Trump's cabinet, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agents are being forced to ditch climate crime investigations in order to serve as personal bodyguards for EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, resulting in what one critic called an "evaporation of criminal enforcement".

"The EPA head has traditionally had one of the smallest security details among cabinet members," the Washington Post reported [September 19]. But Pruitt's expansive security team--which cost taxpayers over $830,000 in his first three months as EPA chief--has shattered all precedent.

"This never happened with prior administrators", Michael Hubbard, former head of the EPA Criminal Investigation Division's Boston office.

Pruitt's 24/7, 18-member security detail "demands triple the manpower of his predecessors" and is forcing "officials to rotate in special agents from around the country who otherwise would be investigating environmental crimes", the Post's Juliet Eilperin and Brady Dennis noted.

These officials "signed on to work on complex environmental cases, not to be an executive protection detail", Hubbard observed. "It's not only not what they want to do, it's not what they were trained and paid to do."

The impact of this transfer of resources can already be seen in the rapidly falling number of new cases opened by the EPA's Criminal Investigation Division. Eilperin and Dennis note that the "current fiscal year is on pace to open just 120 new cases...down sharply from the 170 initiated last year".


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by linkdude64 on Thursday September 21 2017, @02:44PM (5 children)

    by linkdude64 (5482) on Thursday September 21 2017, @02:44PM (#571166)

    It's not like anyone on the left is making calls to assassinate Trump or his officials or anything, right?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=3, Overrated=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @03:38PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @03:38PM (#571190)

    The nation is too partisan, we forever fight the Culture War and waste all our time on it. Lincoln made a yuuuuge mistake: he should have let the South go. Split the USA.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:54PM (2 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:54PM (#571243) Journal

      Amen to that. Let it go, then burned it to the ground. I say if the bunch of slaveholding degenerates hated the US that much, they can be banished from it for eternity.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @05:12PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @05:12PM (#571260)

        Amen to that. Let it go, then burned it to the ground.

        It would have burned down on it's own. The southern economy was nearly all agriculture and grew rich off slave labor they didn't have to pay for. Eventually it would have all come undone as the free north would have eventually enticed the slaves to leave seeking asylum or even a violent revolt either of which would have devastated their economy. At that point they either swallow their pride and rejoin or burn to the ground and become a 3rd world hell hole. The same would apply if the south won and gained independence. If they won and took over the entire USA, there would still be a civil rights movement further down the line and again, economic disaster. Meanwhile the north would struggle with agricultural problems because of the less favorable climate. All lose-lose scenarios. What happened was for the best. I highly doubt we would be the great nation we are today had the civil war gone any other way.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @11:49PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @11:49PM (#571470)

          [Violent invasion and subjugation of the South by the North] was for the best.

          This is what the victors always tell themselves. Soothes whatever is left of the conscience.

          I highly doubt we would be the great nation we are today had the civil war gone any other way.

          Wait, what? That sure was fast. I didn't expect MAGA Trump to be so Johnny-on-the-spot!

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @10:03PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @10:03PM (#571432)

    Every administration has its share of crazies that threaten them. This is new or a valid argument how again? Oh right, "muh oppression!" and you don't even live here.