During a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) asked President Trump's nominee to be an Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Jeffrey Hall, whether he would break the law if ordered by Trump.
00:09Mr. Hall, do you commit to not allowing any enforcement actions to be dropped or softened for political reasons? Yes or no?
00:21I commit to following the law and the rule of law and to acting impartially in all cases, including on decisions whether or not to dismiss actions.
00:28So you're saying that you will not drop any cases for political reasons. Is that what you're saying?
00:34It depends on what you mean, Senator. If you mean for policy considerations, those are absolutely appropriate to be made both in enforcement and in the regulatory context.
00:44If you're talking about partiality to parties, that will not impact my decision making.
00:49Well, obviously, very clearly, you should just be saying that our laws exist to protect our air, our water, our land.
00:56They're not optional, depending on how the president feels that day, for political reasons.
01:01That should be your answer. I'm not hearing it.
01:04Mr. Hall, if directed by EPA leadership or the White House to turn a blind eye to violations of environmental laws, would you comply?
01:12Mr. Senator, again, it's going to depend on the context.
01:20If you mean a blind eye and to not enforcing the law appropriately, I will enforce the law appropriately.
01:26There are many circumstances in which we enforce the law in different ways.
01:31The core goal is to bring entities into compliance, not to just take enforcement actions for that goal.
01:38Okay. Again, this question should be a gimme as well.
01:41If they ask you to break the law, you just have to say no.
01:46It doesn't matter if you don't think it will ever happen.
01:49That should make it even easier for you to say that you will not do it.
01:54No is actually a complete sentence.
01:57There's no reason to play politics with our clean air, our clean water, our health.
02:01Mr. Hall, will you commit to cooperating with Congress and the EPA Inspector General in any investigations of allegations of political interference, suppression of staff, findings, or unlawful weakening of enforcement?
02:16Yes or no?
02:17I will work with Congress and OIG, as is lawful. Yes.
02:22Yes. And again, you should be able to easily agree to participate in investigations, especially if you are able to stand by your agency's actions.
02:37Mr. Hall, if EPA staff resists or report inappropriate political interference in enforcement cases,
02:45would you protect your own staff from retaliation if there is inappropriate political interference in their work?
02:56Senator, I would follow the law, including protecting them from retaliation for any unlawful reason.
03:03And that's excellent, because Korea EPA staff who work to protect our environment should be safe from political retaliation.
03:11Unfortunately, we've already seen that this is not the case.
03:15In the Trump administration, 144 EPA employees were recently suspended after they used their First Amendment rights to express concern that the Trump administration was politicizing the EPA
03:29and preventing it from carrying out its mission to protect the public health.
03:35Mr. Hall, do you think it was appropriate to suspend EPA employees for using their constitutional rights? Yes or no?
03:43Senator, that's not my understanding of what happened.
03:46I wasn't involved in the decision-making on that, and it's also an act of investigation,
03:50so I'm not going to comment beyond saying that I don't think that's a fair characterization.
03:56I appreciate that, but on that, you're wrong.
04:00Mr. Hall, if confirmed, would you follow the Hatch Act?
04:03To be more explicit, Mr. Hall, if confirmed, would you attack Democratic lawmakers in writing using agency resources?
04:14It is not my intention to do that, Senator.
04:16Well, unfortunately, we have already seen that happen at Trump's EPA since Administrator Zeldin apparently thinks being a troll through political mail is an appropriate use of agency resources.
04:30I don't see how that's a legal or efficient use of taxpayer money.
04:35I would hope that you would agree, but I know that you're not going to be able to say that publicly right now if that did reflect your views, although I'm not sure that it does.
04:47So, obviously, there is a massive politicization which is taking place at the EPA.
04:54It's going to endanger our air, our water, and our lands.
04:59We're going to see vast amounts of pollution going up into the atmosphere because of AI.
05:08There has to be 80,000 new megawatts of electricity installed every year for the next 10 years, 80,000 a year.
05:16And the wind and solar tax breaks have now been killed.
05:22And, unfortunately, as people move over to fossil fuels, it first won't be sufficient, and second, that which is put in place is just going to pollute the air.
05:33And there's going to be a tax on Americans, and that tax will be in new cancers, in new asthmas that were avoidable.
05:42And the EPA is going to wind up being complicit in that crime against the health of not just our planet, but the lives and lungs and health of Americans in our country.
