The American environmental protection agency plans to eliminate its research and development office, the reduction of more than 1,000 scientific jobs and the agency’s capacity to conduct independent pollution, toxic chemicals and climate change.
Lisa Friedman reports for The New York Times.
In short:
- The EPA research and development office provides a crucial scientific analysis on air pollution, water contamination and dangerous chemicals, informing environmental regulations.
- The Trump Administration plan would reduce up to 75% of the office workforce, aligning the efforts supported by industry to weaken federal surveillance of pollutants.
- Critics, including former officials and legislators of EPA, warn that the dissolution of the office would leave environmental policy vulnerable to political influence rather than to decision -making focused on science.
Key quote:
“Each decision taken by EPA must be in the continuation of the protection of human health and the environment, and that simply cannot happen if you quickly the science of EPA.”
– California Zoe Lofgren representative, Chamber Sciences Committee
Why this counts:
The cognitive dissonance is striking: while EPA officials issue declarations asserting the agency’s commitment to protecting public health and guaranteeing clean, water and soil air, the decision to dig the research and development office guarantees that the independent science necessary to do so will be knececoma. Without the office, regulatory decisions pass guarantees based on evidence to the lists of wishes for companies, leaving public health to be won. It should be noted that dozens of EPA officials who served in the republican and democratic administration have written a letter to the current EPA administrator, Lee Zeldin, warning that these cuts will make it impossible for the agency to fulfill its mission.
In relation: