Another nominee, another big N-O.

Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) announced Thursday she will be voting no on the nomination of Scott Pruitt, President Trump’s pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

Murray said Pruitt is yet another nominee with a record that runs in direct conflict with the mission of the agency he has been picked to lead.

Washington’s senior senator said Pruitt has filed 19 cases against the EPA to roll back environmental regulations, and eight are still standing.

In a floor speech, Murray said she’d heard a wide range of concerns from her constituents, ranging from Pruitt’s ties to the fossil fuel industry, to his denial of climate change, and risks to Washington state’s environmental protection programs.

Murray said she has received more than 28,000 letters in opposition to Pruitt’s nomination.

“I come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to vote no on the nomination of Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency — a nomination that marks yet another broken promise from the new president to put the needs of American families first, over the wishes of big corporations and special interests,” Murray said.

“I sincerely hope the president and Mr. Pruitt truly understand the enormous responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency, not only in protecting our environment for future generations, but also for all the families we represent who rely on clean air and clean water right now,” she said.

Murray’s opposition is not a surprise. She expressed “deep concern” with his nomination when it was announced in December.

Murray blasted Pruitt’s record as Oklahoma’s attorney general.

“He filed no less than 19 to overturn environmental regulations – including one to topple the EPA’s Clean Power Plan,” Murray said.

“These regulations specifically seek to protect public health by reducing harmful air and water pollution and are projected to save tens of thousands of lives each year. Now, as if it wasn’t bad enough that Mr. Pruitt spent so much time filing lawsuits in court and fighting policies designed to protect the health of the environment as well as people — it’s pretty shocking that at the same time, he was collecting millions of dollars from the very industries he would regulate if confirmed,” she added.

“And I echo the sentiments of so many who have expressed serious concerns about Mr. Pruitt’s conflicts of interest — that his ties to the fossil-fuel industry make him more indebted to backing policies that loosen environmental regulations, benefitting big oil and gas companies, rather than backing policies that protect the American people.

“And I want to voice another concern my constituents have shared with me — it’s unnerving to think the president would choose a climate change denier to set our national environmental policy.”

“I don’t see how someone who has openly denied the existence of climate change — the devastating effects of which we’re already beginning to see in Washington state and around the country — will effectively protect human health, or our environment. And this is about more than just the environment — a report by the Congressional Budget Office last year found that climate change is a serious threat to our economic stability,” she said.