On today’s BradCast: More encouraging signs for Democrats following special elections in both Arizona and New York on Tuesday. And more troubling news from Donald Trump’s never-ending cavalcade of corporate cabinet corruption. [Audio link to full show is posted below.]
All signs suggest that a potential Blue Wave continues to build for Democrats in the Trump Era, even as the party reportedly lost a U.S. House special election in the very “red” 8th Congressional District west of Phoenix on Tuesday. After Maricopa County, AZ’s new, even-more computerized polling place election system broke down in several precincts — a potentially ominous sign for the much-larger, upcoming mid-terms — former Republican State Senator Debbie Lesko is said to have defeated first time Democratic candidate Dr. Hiral Tipirneni by just 5 points, in a district that Trump won by 21 points in 2016.
The previously deep “red” House district in a longtime “red” state, had been represented for some 15 years by GOP Rep. Trent Franks, until he stepped down amid sexual misconduct allegations last December. While the Dems narrowly lost the race on Tuesday, thanks in part to big spending by national Republicans (and none by national Dems), election analysts regard the stunning 15+ point swing from “red” to “blue” as one of the strongest signs to date that Republicans in the House and Senate may be in very big trouble this fall.
Similarly, in New York, special elections on Tuesday for several state legislative seats resulted in one Assembly seat flipping from R to D for the first time in four decades, and in Democrats winning a majority of seats in the state Senate for the first time in years. However, one Democrat who caucuses with Republicans in that chamber means that the GOP will remain in control of the Senate until at least the end of the current session.
Meanwhile, back in D.C., Donald Trump’s swamp of corruption continues apace. Interim Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Mick Mulvaney reportedly told a crowd of some 1,300 banking executives and lobbyists yesterday that they need to keep donating to the GOP if they wanted still more regulations gutted and oversight trashed. He appears to have admitted — out loud — that as a Congressman, he would only consider meeting with lobbyists who had donated to him. (And, many in the financial sector, which the CFPB was mandated to regulate on behalf of consumers after the 2008 global banking crisis, did exactly that during Mulvaney ‘s time as a House Rep. from South Carolina.)
But it’s scandal-plagued Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chief Scott Pruitt who seemingly continues to lead the corruption cavalcade in Trump’s corporatized Executive Agency lagoon. Pruitt is not letting the mountain of scandals, corruption revelations and calls for his resignation stop him from doing the bidding of his fossil fuel industry funders at the EPA.
In a ceremony for fellow climate science deniers on Tuesday night, ironically trumpeting a supposed new era of EPA “transparency” as media and scientists were locked out of the event, Pruitt signed a proposed new rule barring what he describes as the use of “secret science” in the EPA rule-making process.
We’re joined today by Mother Jones’ environmental reporter REBECCA LEBER to discuss what the anti-science Pruitt actually means by that, what this deceptive new rule would actually do if finalized, and why, as she argues, this scheme may be his “most destructive move yet”.
“What Pruitt has done here is propose limiting the studies that the EPA can use in crafting regulations. Those studies would have to have data that is publicly available — which sounds great on its face. Who doesn’t want more transparency? But there is a lot of complications here that effectively limit the pool drastically and really could conceivably cut out our best available science showing that air pollution and water pollution is a health problem,” Leber tells me. “That’s because these studies typically rely on medical records that are, by law, forced to be private and also may include proprietary information that academic institutions and even industry don’t want to be public.”
Nonetheless, hiding behind false claims of “transparency” in science, Pruitt is now hoping to severely restrict the use of science and, in fact, rewriting decades-old rules for the use of science itself in public government. No wonder Trump prefers not to fire him, as Leber explains, no matter how wildly corrupt Pruitt is actually proven to be…
Dear Brad and Desi,
You do mean, the new Environmental Pollution
Agency, don’t you ?
Phil @ 1:
I’m afraid so. 🙁