- Becky Peterson/Business Insider
Apple executive Lisa Jackson did not mince words about the impact the Trump Administration is having on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which she led from 2009 to 2013.
“I just have to say the EPA hasn’t changed. There’s a leadership change that is beyond politics in my mind,” said Jackson, from on stage at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco on Tuesday.
“The EPA has been run by Democrats, by Republicans, but has never, in its history that is 40-plus years old, been run by someone who seems to be determined to do the one thing that could destroy its credibility, which is not making it transparent,” Jackson said.
Jackson didn’t elaborate on how the Trump administration and its appointed EPA leader Scott Pruitt have been un transparent. However, the administration has been known to remove information that doesn’t conform with its political stances from public agency websites.
Research and data related to climate change were scrubbed from the EPA website in April, on request of the Trump administration. EPA staffers pushed back in an effort to preserve the content, Reuters reported at the time, but ultimately the content was removed.
Government should set the standards
Today, the phrase “climate change” has been virtually eliminated from the EPA website, in accordance with President Trump’s personal – albeit unfounded – doubts that climate change is real. However, archived references can be found on the website through the search feature.
Now vice president of environment, policy and social initiatives at Apple, Jackson’s job is to oversee the company’s efforts to minimize its environmental impact.
She said that while it’s important for corporations like Apple to monitor the impact of the product supply chain, the onus is on the federal government to determine what is acceptable behavior from private companies.
“Government should be setting standards based on what’s possible,” Jackson said. “Yes, companies absolutely have the right to say this will impact me in a way that will not be good for my bottom line. Where I think the buck should stop, frankly, is you don’t have the right to decide ‘I’m willing to give up clean water so that you can make money.'”