Get the latest market trends in your inbox

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with the Axios Markets newsletter. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Minneapolis-St. Paul

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa-St. Petersburg news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa-St. Petersburg

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's decision to host a public debate (possibly on TV) about climate change science is facing criticism from former heads of the agency and also industry officials who generally back what Pruitt is doing as administrator.

Why it matters: The criticism indicates that many experts outside the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress don't think debating climate change science is a worthy expense of the government's time and money.

Quoted:

  • "You don't debate on TV what are, essentially, solutions to an existential challenge for us, and that's why this proposal is ludicrous," Gina McCarthy, the most recent EPA administrator under Barack Obama, told me Wednesday. "It's not going to compete with Game of Thrones, I'll tell you that."
  • Christine Todd Whitman, an EPA administrator under George W. Bush, said the exercise is "just mind-boggling." She also discouraged scientists, most of whom agree human activity is a driving factor of climate change, from taking part. "It's more dangerous to give credibility to people that really don't deserve it," Whitman told me Wednesday.

Another side: Some fossil-fuel industry officials who are generally backing what Pruitt is doing at the agency--unraveling nearly all of Obama's regulations--said the debate doesn't seem to have a point.

  • "Personally between you and me, I think it's a load of crap," said one longtime energy expert, speaking anonymously given the critical nature of the words. "I don't know why we need to do that."
  • Another industry official said the only reason to do it is to unravel a scientific finding on climate change that Obama's EPA issued in 2009, and that, the official said, "is going to take a heck of a lot of effort and take away from other things they should be doing." (Check out a Harder Line column of mine from a few weeks ago for more on how some in industry don't want EPA to review the scientific finding).

The supporting side:

Myron Ebell, an expert at the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, says he supports Pruitt's plans but doesn't think it should be on TV, given the inherent granularity that is climate change science.

For the record: "Climate science like other fields of science is constantly changing," an EPA spokesperson said in an email. "A new, fresh, and transparent evaluation is something everyone should support doing."

Go deeper

Updated 1 hour ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Health: Coronavirus cases rose 10% in the week before Thanksgiving.
  2. Politics: Supreme Court backs religious groups on New York coronavirus restrictions.
  3. World: Expert says COVID vaccine likely won't be available in Africa until Q2 of 2021 — Europeans extend lockdowns.
  4. Economy: The winners and losers of the COVID holiday season.
  5. Education: National standardized tests delayed until 2022.
3 hours ago - Health

Standardized testing becomes another pandemic victim

Photo: Edmund D. Fountain for The Washington Post via Getty

National standardized reading and math tests have been pushed from next year to 2022, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) announced Wednesday.

Why it matters: There’s mounting national evidence that students are suffering major setbacks this year, with a surge in the number of failing grades.

4 hours ago - World

European countries extend lockdowns

A medical worker takes a COVID-19 throat swab sample at the Berlin-Brandenburg Airport. Photo by Maja Hitij via Getty

Recent spikes in COVID-19 infections across Europe have led authorities to extend restrictions ahead of the holiday season.

Why it matters: "Relaxing too fast and too much is a risk for a third wave after Christmas," said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.