Mike Boots, chief of staff of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, will become acting chairman this month when current Chairwoman Nancy Sutley steps down, the White House announced Thursday.
A CEQ spokeswoman strongly praised Boots’s work, but did not say whether he would be formally nominated to lead the council. He’ll become acting head on Feb. 18.
CEQ Communications Director Taryn Tuss said Boots, an ocean-conservation and Clinton administration veteran, has been an “integral part” of major environmental decisions by the admnistration and has been a “key liaison between agencies and White House senior staff.”
“He helped develop the President’s Climate Action Plan and is a strong force behind ensuring agencies are on track to implement it. He has coordinated the administration’s work to establish new national monuments that permanently protect unique American sites, as well as to restore the Gulf Coast region’s ecosystem following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill,” Tuss said. Boots has also worked on federal ocean policy and making the federal government more energy efficient, Tuss said.
Early in the Obama administration Boots was an associate director at CEQ, managing its portfolio on natural-resource topics. In the private sector he was a senior official with the ocean-conservation group SeaWeb.
Boots worked at the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration and later was a Washington-based adviser to then-California Gov. Gray Davis.
CEQ helps coordinate and craft federal green policies and oversees implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act, the 1970 law that requires agencies to analyze how their decisions will affect the environment.
The council had a high profile during the George W. Bush administration, when then-CEQ Chairman James Connaughton was a public face and point person on Bush’s environmental policies.
It has had a lower profile in the Obama administration, and other top aides such as former energy and climate czar Carol Browner have wielded considerable power.
What We're Following See More »
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."
President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"