Trump Selects Rick Perry, a Critic of Federal Bureaucracy, for Energy Secretary
Last Wednesday, President-elect Donald Trump selected
Perry’s selection draws mix of reactions
Perry’s commitment to the stewardship of DOE is certain to arise during his confirmation hearings. In 2011, while campaigning for the Republican presidential nomination, Perry pledged that he would abolish the department alongside the Departments of Education and Commerce to reduce the size of the federal government. Then, during a Republican debate, Perry could not recall DOE while listing off these departments and bowed out of the race soon thereafter.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who chairs the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which will handle Perry’s nomination, welcomed the selection, remarking in a statement
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), who is a member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and represents the home state of Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, found the selection unacceptable. He released a statement
President-elect Trump has signaled his blatant hostility to the Department and the workforce at our National Labs by nominating someone who has proposed eliminating this entire agency. I’m not confident that Rick Perry is fully cognizant of the role that DOE plays in keeping our nuclear deterrent safe, secure, and reliable. He is utterly unqualified to lead this critical agency.
Perry a critic of federal bureaucracy, proponent of state action
Perry’s proposal to eliminate DOE stemmed primarily from his general dissatisfaction with the scale and regulatory power of the federal bureaucracy. Perry’s 2010 book “Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington”
The federal administrative state has become so far-reaching—having departments or agencies focused on energy, environment, health care, food, drugs, guns, labor, education, and more—that it is almost impossible to know where it ends. It gets its initial empowerment from Congress, which passes broadly worded statutes, but the unelected employees of these executive agencies are left with the real rule-making authority. These are the ‘experts’ who will decide precisely how your life is affected by federal laws.
Implications of Perry pick for DOE science unclear
Between Perry’s amenability to new energy source development and his long campaign against federal bureaucracy, it is difficult to foretell precisely how he will regard DOE’s work once he is in charge of it. This is doubly true since he is not yet on record concerning large portions of the department’s mission, including its sprawling scientific research portfolio. Some clues, though, might be gleaned from his stewardship of Texas’s public universities during his time as governor.
Interviewed
However, Faulkner’s successor as university president, William Powers, Jr., clashed
What Perry’s history in Texas augurs for his agenda at DOE is unclear, but, in any event, Congress will certainly continue to play a major role in setting DOE policy. This year, Congress seriously considered
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), who currently chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee responsible for DOE’s budget, welcomed Perry’s selection, saying in a statement:
I have known and worked with him for years. I look forward to learning more about his plans for supporting energy research, strong national laboratories and supercomputing that help give America its competitive edge in creating jobs.
Perry views climate science as politically biased
Perry’s selection has done little to quell worries about climate research at DOE, which is conducted through its Biological and Environmental Research program under the Office of Science. These worries were stoked last week after Trump’s landing team
In “Fed Up!” Perry derided the scientific consensus on climate change as the product of systematic political bias, claiming that some scientists had “doctored” their data and that the Earth was actually experiencing a “cooling trend.” He further asserted that “the complexities of the global atmosphere have often eluded the most sophisticated scientists, and that draconian policies with dire economic effects based on so-called science may not stand the test of time. Quite frankly, when science gets hijacked by the political Left, we should all be concerned.” Perry made similar remarks