Scott Pruitt

Scott Pruitt Spent Over $1,500 in Taxpayer Money on “Tactical Pants”

The E.P.A. administrator has now blown through $4.6 million in taxpayer money on security alone.
Image may contain Scott Pruitt Human Person Suit Clothing Coat Overcoat Apparel Sitting Tie and Accessories
Aaron P. Bernstein

Since the deluge of stories concerning Scott Pruitt’s ethically bankrupt ways began, we’ve learned a lot about the Environmental Protection Agency chief. For starters, we’ve learned that he avoids flying coach like the plague, and insists on sitting in the part of the plane where the champagne flows freely. We’ve learned, according to a former aide, that he often makes travel decisions based on his “desire to visit particular cities or countries rather than official business,” hence his $100,000 trip to Morocco last year arranged by a lobbyist buddy. And, of course, we’ve learned he thought it was prudent to spend $43,000 on a phone booth, which ultimately turned out to be illegal. Other getting-to-know-you tidbits about the ex-Oklahoma attorney general have included his reported insistence on staying in fancy hotels that far exceed the U.S. government’s per diem, sometimes by as much as 300 percent; his alleged decisions to use staffers as personal assistants and headhunters for his wife; his five-star dinner with an accused child molester; and his general belief that his position should afford him the lifestyle of a billionaire, despite the fact that he is, in fact, a mere thousandaire. Until now, though, we haven’t heard anything about Pruitt’s sartorial preferences. But praise the gods of corrupt Trump administration officials, because today’s our lucky day.

According to documents obtained by the Intercept, Pruitt has spent more than $4.6 million of taxpayer money on security alone since being sworn in in 2017—a $1.1 million increase from the figure disclosed a month ago. Among the totally necessary items? “Tactical pants” and “tactical polo shirts,” for which Pruitt shelled out $2,749.62, and which were presumably worn by the 24/7 security detail he’s deemed necessary, though perhaps Pruitt himself simply prefers the fit in the waist. Despite seemingly mortifying stories coming out on a near daily basis about his spending habits, Pruitt does not appear to have eased up when it comes to blowing taxpayer money. His security payroll spending for the most recent quarter was up by $138,373, to $742,205, almost double the cost from the same period last year. Other totally essential expenditures? A “breaching kit,” typically used by law enforcement to get through a locked building or vehicle when someone is in danger (or, in this case, napping):

Pruitt’s security team has run into problems with locked doors before: His security detail called the police to his apartment on March 29, 2017, when they became concerned that they couldn’t contact him. Pruitt was taking a nap, but the police and guards smashed down the door and eventually had to pay $2,460 to replace it. Despite that embarrassment, the security detail now has its own door smasher.

Pruitt, of course, maintains that a 24/7 security detail is a must-have, despite the fact that none of his predecessors were provided with ’round-the-clock care. The E.P.A. has claimed there’s been an increased number of threats against him, but Senate Democrats say they’ve reviewed an internal E.P.A. security assessment, and that zero credible threats have been received. Among those deemed scary enough by the administrator to warrant 24-hour security were protestors questioning him at events and a postcard sent to his office that reportedly read, “Climate change is real!! We are watching you.”

At this point, one might expect Pruitt to have few defenders on Capitol Hill, especially considering his buddy from Oklahoma, Senator Jim Inhofe, had begun to publicly sour on the spendthrift. But one would expect wrong! Following a “face-to-face meeting with Pruitt” on Tuesday night, Inhofe told reporters he totally understands why Pruitt has been forced to waste millions of dollars in taxpayer money, and abuse government resources to try to find his wife a job at Chick-fil-A:

By Wednesday morning, Inhofe had adopted Pruitt’s approach of blaming his ethics quandaries on disgruntled former employees, a bloated government bureaucracy, unfair media coverage, and political opponents such as liberal activist Tom Steyer and “left-wing environmentalists” who oppose Trump administration policies.

“I’m a little embarrassed I was starting to doubt him in some areas where he shouldn’t have been doubted,” Inhofe said. Yes, clearly that’s the thing to be embarrassed about here.