Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt has unquestionably been the most effective official in President Donald Trump’s administration.

He has laid waste to Barack Obama’s radical environmental legacy, which is why Democrats, the mainstream media, academia, environmentalists, and left-wing advocacy groups are in full-panic mode. Out of desperation, these zealots (aided by the media) are resorting to unwarranted character assaults to challenge Pruitt’s integrity and diminish his authority.

The disingenuousness of these attacks is made evident by the silence of these same groups when several Obama-era federal agencies engaged in illegal and/or unethical activities. The fact very few Americans know the name “Richard Windsor” is proof of selective outrage by “good government” groups and the media. (Windsor is the name of a fake EPA employee created by former EPA head Lisa Jackson to skirt public-records laws.)

Thankfully, Pruitt is not letting ad hominem attacks distract him from his mission of implementing a “back to basics” agenda for EPA. Unlike most of his predecessors at EPA and his opponents on the left, Pruitt believes, “We can and we will achieve clean air and clean water and we will also have strong economic growth and job creation at the same time.”

To accomplish these long-overdue reforms, Pruitt has focused on and been incredibly successful at implementing a “three E’s” strategy: concentrating on the environment, economy, and engagement with state and local governments.

Here are just some of Pruitt’s remarkable achievements:

1. Protecting the Environment

Under Obama, the EPA became a highly politicized agency, one that had been captured by radical environmental groups. When Pruitt took office, he vowed to refocus the agency on its core mission: protecting the environment and staying out of politics.

In May 2017, Pruitt created the Super Fund Task Force “to provide recommendations for improving and expediting site cleanups and promoting redevelopment.” As of this writing, EPA has already completed seven Super Fund site clean-ups.

Additionally, EPA is prioritizing drinking water problems, including the egregious lead problem that arose during the Obama era in Flint, Michigan.

2. Sensible regulations that encourage economic growth

Obama’s two EPA administrators, Jackson and Gina McCarthy, instituted an unprecedented era of unnecessary, costly, burdensome rulemaking, undermining personal property rights and economic growth.

Fortunately, Pruitt has put an end to this. His highlights, which are many, include announcing that the United States will pull out of the Paris climate accord.

In 2016, Obama pushed the United States into the Paris climate agreement, which analysts found would reduce U.S. gross domestic product by more than $2.5 trillion and result in an average annual job loss of nearly 400,000 by 2035 compared to jobs projections without the accord.

Pruitt has been a staunch advocate of withdrawing from this fake “treaty,” and his support for the idea surely contributed to Trump’s decision to pull back from the Paris accords.

In October 2017, Pruitt proposed repealing Obama’s Clean Power Plan, a set of regulations that economists estimated would cost U.S. taxpayers $40 billion per year and produce no effect on global carbon dioxide levels.

Also in October, Pruitt issued a directive to end EPA’s “sue and settle” practices, a scheme in which radical environmental groups sue EPA to impose their agenda and EPA chooses not to fight the lawsuit in order to satisfy radical environmentalists’ demands.

Putting the interests of ordinary Americans ahead of special-interest groups, Pruitt declared in October 2017 “the days of regulation through litigation are over.”

In another measure designed to protect consumers, Pruitt announced in March 2018 the EPA will no longer use “secret science” in crafting regulations. Going forward, EPA rulemaking will be transparent and based on good data—not ideology.

Most recently, Pruitt suspended for review the onerous Corporate Annual Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards Obama’s regime rushed through near the end of his final term. These burdensome regulations mandated unachievable fuel economy standards and would have forced carmakers to produce vehicles Americans don’t want—and for an extra $3,800 per vehicle and negligible environmental benefits.

3. Engaging with state and local partners

For decades, EPA has usurped power from state and local governments. Pruitt is reversing this disturbing trend by instituting “cooperative federalism.” Under this program, EPA will coordinate with state and local governments, rather than dictating edicts. His track record so far includes his revision of the definition and implementation of Obama’s 2015 Waters of the United States rule (WOTUS), which was overly broad and abusive. WOTUS effectively granted to the federal government jurisdiction over every puddle and tiny body of water on private land.

“EPA is restoring states’ important role in the regulation of water,” Pruitt stated when announcing the end of the rule.

EPA is also establishing Compliance Assistance Centers to “help businesses, colleges and universities, local governments, tribes and federal facilities understand and comply with environmental requirements and save money,” and it’s introducing Next Generation Compliance standards to “reduce costs and saves time and resources, while improving compliance.”

Under Pruitt, the EPA is no longer imposing onerous rules that stifle economic growth and bankrupt the country. Instead, Pruitt is enacting levelheaded regulations that strike a proper balance between protecting the environment and maintaining consumer freedom.

After little more than a year on the job, Pruitt has transformed EPA’s culture and restored its mission. The EPA Swamp has been substantially drained, a huge setback for power-grabbing leftists. And it’s primarily for that reason the left and mainstream media have succumbed to attacking Pruitt’s character. Just imagine how apoplectic they will get if Pruitt is allowed to continue his record of success in the years ahead!

Chris Talgo (CTalgo@heartland.org) is an editorial assistant for The Heartland Institute and writer for Heartland’s American Exceptionalism website.

Scientists have developed a tiny subdermal patch that monitors calcium levels in the bloodstream and creates a visible mole when cancer causes those levels to spike.

The concept is deceptively simple. Cancer causes calcium levels in the bloodstream to rise dramatically. The patch, implanted under the surface of the skin, merely releases melanin to create a small mole as soon as it detects levels high enough to indicate the presence of a developing tumor.

Swiss scientists of the ETH Zurich University in Switzerland claim that the patch already recognizes breast, colon, lung, and prostate cancers. Moreover, it does so even in the very early stages of development, giving potential victims a much higher chance of receiving successful treatment.

ETH Zurich Professor at the Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering Martin Fussenegger explains: “Nowadays, people generally go to the doctor only when the tumour begins to cause problems,” he said. “Unfortunately, by that point it is often too late.”

Since “early detection increases the chance of survival significantly,” the implant should represent hope more than dread. While “an implant carrier should see a doctor for further evaluation after the mole appears,” it is important to understand that this is a warning sign, not a death sentence. Fussenegger reminds that “the mole does not mean that the person is likely to die soon.”

According to experts, “1,688,780 new cancer cases and 600,920 cancer deaths” were projected to occur in the United States in 2017 alone. With something as simple as this calcium monitoring patch, those numbers could see a huge reduction. If the patch proves practical and effective, its implementation would mean another major step toward the eradication of one of humanity’s greatest plagues.

When you think about the censorship and outright banning of books and opinions, do you imagine the United States of America?

Or, more likely, does that kind of suppression strike you more as the tactics of communists or fascists that America has frequently fought against?

If liberal lawmakers in California get their way, that west coast state may be one step closer to being unrecognizable as part of the United States. A bill currently pending in the legislature would essentially ban the sale of books that include traditional Christian views on marriage and sexuality.

Shockingly, the proposed law could even be construed to make it illegal to sell Bibles, since they include verses that the far left finds unacceptable.

“Assembly Bill 2943 would make it an ‘unlawful business practice’ to engage in ‘a transaction intended to result or that results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer’ that advertise, offer to engage in, or do engage in ‘sexual orientation change efforts with an individual,’” explained National Review.

That’s a lot of legalese to digest, so let’s break it down. What the bill basically says is that anything that can be seen as trying to impact a person’s sexual orientation would be illegal to sell or offer.

This would almost certainly include traditional Christian counseling services and books.

“The bill then defines ‘sexual orientation change efforts’ as ‘any practices that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex,” continued National Review (emphasis added).

“Efforts to change behaviors” is where the real problem is. After all, almost all counseling and even common psychiatric care are intended to “change behaviors” in various ways.

If you think about it, that’s the entire reason people seek help in the first place: They want to stop drinking or becoming angry or, yes, having troubling thoughts about their sexuality.

It’s also worth pointing out that the bill as written would apply to people who are trying to change their own behavior. This would mean that if a person was struggling with same-sex behavior or sexual identity and they themselves wanted to change, it would be illegal for them to buy any book meant to help them with this.

The problem here isn’t limited to Christian books. Bizarrely, the bill appears to put almost any counseling or psychiatric service in the cross-hairs.

For example, let’s say a man has the paraphilia of crossdressing or transvestism. For whatever reason, the person has become addicted to wearing women’s clothes and has found that showing up to work in high heels and a dress has a negative impact on his life.

RELATED: Alert: The California 3-State Split is a Massive Liberal Trojan Horse

Setting aside any personal judgment about this lifestyle choice (how liberal of us), suppose he voluntarily seeks counseling to get a handle on this problem. Maybe he just wants to stop being addicted to cross-dressing in public.

It’s his own choice. Yet counselors or books intended to help him would be illegal because they’re “efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions,” in the words of the proposed law.

You might consider that example silly, but this concern is rather serious: If passed, it could only be a matter of time before the law’s extremely vague wording is used against traditional Christian teachings in the Bible.

Take Romans 1:26-27, for instance. This verse calls out homosexuality as “shameful” and encourages Christians to not act in this way.

Then there are 1 Peter 1:15-17, Romans 6:1, and Ephesians 4:22-24, all of which direct followers of Christianity to abstain from homosexuality even if they have those desires.

Let’s be extremely clear: The point of this article is not to lecture about gay lifestyles. There are an increasing number of gay conservatives who have reached their own conclusions about their beliefs, and many are on the front lines of the culture war.

You don’t even have to particularly agree with the Bible verses mentioned here to see the problem. Efforts like the proposed bill represent dangerous slippery slopes that would use the legislature to attack traditional beliefs, and even mainstream views that happen to be at odds with the far-left agenda.

If nothing else, it’s an affront to the free exchange of ideas — yes, even ones that someone might dislike — and a censorship of speech.

“No one doubts that (Christianity’s) teachings on sexual morality are increasingly unpopular,” summarized National Review. “But they remain constitutionally protected, and no state legislature should be permitted to ban a ‘good’ (such as a book) or a ‘service’ (like counseling) that makes these arguments and provides them to willing, consenting consumers.”

It’s amazing that the same liberals who bemoan “government in the bedroom” eagerly jump at the chance to give the same government control over sexual and moral topics the moment it helps their cause.

Even non-Christians and political moderates need to fight against the new wave of suppression before a 21st-century iron curtain appears. Free speech is everyone’s fight.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!