From LCV Rapid Response <[email protected]>
Subject ๐Ÿ”Š Chilling EPA proposal to disallow use of science in policymaking - read this before itโ€™s too late
Date November 26, 2019 4:57 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Science itself is at stake here. We need your help.? ? ? ? Friend ? We're seeing a massive response since we reached out following the leak that the Trump administration was preparing to block science from being used in policymaking at the EPA. The plan could virtually end meaningful implementation of the Clean Air Act and other landmark environmental protections.

Now, Trump's EPA has blocked its Science Advisory Board from weighing in publicly before the rule's release by delaying a review of the rule.

They're obscuring the process and trying to put this giveaway to the fossil fuel industry into place without time for public debate or input from the science experts charged with advising the agency.

We need your help. There is still a short window before the new rule is proposed, and in the midst of the impeachment inquiry and a possible government shutdown, we need to organize, show our strength, and raise hell to block this pro-polluter policy.

We've won fights like this, and we can win this one too.

So we're asking every supporter of the League of Conservation Voters to contribute today to help us fight this damaging proposal. If you contribute before Saturday, a donor will triple match your donation ? making your impact go three times as far.

Please, chip in to stop the EPA from blocking critical science before it's too late. Even $5 can go a long way in this important fight ? [link removed]

The new rule would prevent policy makers from using any study if the study's data, code, and models aren't made public. In practice, the EPA currently relies on public health studies based on confidential medical information ? data that is incredibly private and should never be made public. These public health studies are absolutely critical to implementing virtually every law that protects the water we drink and the air we breathe.

This dangerous move by Trump's EPA is a giveaway to polluters and special interests, a cheap way to say they care about transparency when their ultimate goal is really to gut key protections that keep our land, water, and air safe.

Scientists are raising the alarm. This policy has been designed and pushed forward by lobbyists for the oil industry and big tobacco. And now, the EPA is delaying their expert review process ? because they know the criticism and alarms that will be raised.

With time running out, there is a real risk this rule goes into place with no time for public debate. And with the impeachment investigation and possible government shutdown in December, this rule could fly under the radar.

We can't let that happen, and that's why we're coming to you. This campaign is going to take organizing at a grassroots level, lobbying in Congress, and potentially taking the Trump administration to court.

We're still $11,000 short of where we need to be to have the resources to mount this fight. Remember ? a donor is offering a triple match through Saturday, so your contribution goes even further than usual if you give today.

Please, triple your impact. If the environmental movement doesn't turn out in a big way right now, the EPA's mission could be lost forever. Donate today ? even if it's just $5 ? [link removed]

Thank you ? for everything that you do for the environment, friend.

Sincerely,

Gene Karpinski
President
League of Conservation Voters ? ? ? ? ? This email was sent to [email protected]. If this isn't the best email address at which to reach you, update your contact information [link removed]. Click here to unsubscribe [link removed] from our supporter list. Send us any comments, criticisms, or feedback here mailto:[email protected]?subject=, or just reply to this email! Thanks for your support.

740 15th St NW, 7th Floor
Washington, DC xxxxxx
202-785-8683 [link removed] ? ? ? ? [link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis