評論
打印
But Pruitt's rollback isn't controversial for climate reasons alone.
但普魯伊特的松口并不僅僅因為氣候問題才引起的爭議。
Though automakers had requested the revision, saying compliance with Obama's rules would be costly,
盡管是汽車制造商自己要求修改政策的，理由是遵守奧巴馬的規定代價太大了，
they are now worried that the Administration may go too far.
他們現在又已經開始擔心特朗普政府會把政策修改得太離譜。
Most significantly, California could set its own emissions standards in response,
最重要的是，加州此后可以制定自己的排放標準了，
leading to a protracted court battle that would force car-makers to operate without clear or uniform rules.
而這一變化將引發一場曠日持久的官司，最終迫使汽車制造商們在沒有明確或統一的準則下運營。
Maintaining a single national program is critical to ensuring that cars remain affordable,
“維持一個全國統一的大綱對于確保汽車價格維持在可接受水平內至關重要。”
the Auto Alliance trade group said in a largely supportive statement.
美國汽車聯盟在一份民眾大體都表示支持的聲明中表示。
THIS HESITANT REACTION to Pruitt's rollback underscores the strange position in which the EPA administrator finds himself.
對普魯伊特的退讓的遲疑反應也突顯出這位環保署署長所處的奇怪處境。
He is extraordinarily effective at fulfilling Trump's promise to nix regulations—
他不僅在履行特朗普拒絕監管的承諾上卓有成效——
he's made more than 20 big deregulatory moves by his own count—
據他自己的計算，他已經部署了20多項放松管制的重大措施——
and also at attracting controversy that riles opponents
在引發激怒對手的爭議上也是如此，
and has led to questions about how long he can survive in a White House prone to turnover.
因為他已經引發了人們對他在一個容易發生人事變動的白宮還能再待多久的質疑。
The ethics scandals he faces are striking:
他面臨的道德丑聞也頗令人震驚：
he lived for six months in a condo co-owned by a lobbyist, paying $50 a night;
他曾經在某說客和他人共有的一間公寓里住了長達6個月的時間，每晚支付的房費為50美元；
he spent more than $100,000 of taxpayer money on first- and business-class travel everywhere from Italy to New York City,
挪用10萬多美元的國家稅收坐頭等艙從意大利到紐約滿世界飛，
a move he defended as a security measure;
稱是為了安全起見；
he went around the White House to give favored aides raises upwards of 30%.
還在白宮為自己喜歡的助手加薪30%以上。
And that's just news from the past few months.
這些還都只是過去幾個月內的事情。
His wonkier policy moves have been equally controversial.
他那更靠不住的政策舉措同樣充滿了爭議。
Most recently, in March, he told the conservative Daily Caller
最近一次是，也就是今年3月，他告訴保守派的《每日通話》，
that he would stop the agency from using any studies that aren't based entirely on data accessible to the public.
他將阻止該機構使用任何不是完全依靠公開數據的研究得出的結論。
This means, for example, excluding research that relies on private health information.
這就意味著，那些依靠未公開健康信息的研究就要被排除在外。
Pruitt says it's about transparency, but scientists say that ignoring essential public-health research endangers lives.
普魯伊特說，這一舉措事關透明度，但科學家們表示，忽視不可或缺的公共衛生研究將危及到民眾的生命。
"This leaves me and many of my colleagues puzzled about what to do," says Jonathan Levy, a professor of environmental health at Boston University.
“這讓我和我的許多同事都感到很困惑，不知該怎么辦，”波士頓大學環境健康教授喬納森·利維表示。
"How can you genuinely affect public health and decision-making if the decision-makers do not wish to use science?"
“決策者不走科學的道路，還怎么塑造公共衛生行業和政府的決策？”
Now Pruitt has hinted that the fight over vehicle-emissions standards will remain bitter if blue states don't fall into line.
由于普魯伊特已經暗示，如果藍州不同意，關于汽車排放標準的爭論還會愈演愈烈。
"Cooperative federalism doesn't mean that one state can dictate standards for the rest of the country," he said.
“合作的聯邦制并不意味著某一個州可以為全國所有地區制定標準，”他說。
So far, Trump has stood by his EPA chief.
到目前為止，特朗普一直是支持著他的環保局局長的。
Still, the relationship appeared strained as the latest round of revelations hit.
不過，隨著最新一輪爆料的曝光，兩人的關系似乎也有些緊張了。
The White House confirmed that the two men spoke by phone in the midst of the latest controversy but declined to give any more details.
白宮證實了兩人在最近的爭議期間曾通過電話，但他們拒絕透露更多細節。
Asked about Pruitt at a public appearance on April 3, Trump had a brief response.
在4月3日的一次公開露面中，當被問及普魯特的情況時，特朗普只做出了簡短的回應。
"I hope," the President said, "he's going to be great."
“我希望，”總統說，“他能表現得很好。”
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
