Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
Former EPA Leaders Condemn Rollback of Environmental Protections
Three former leaders of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have raised significant concerns regarding plans announced by the agency’s current administrator, Lee Zeldin, suggesting that the proposed rollbacks could jeopardize the lives of countless Americans and deviate from the core mission of safeguarding the environment and public health.
On Wednesday, Zeldin revealed intentions to repeal 31 pivotal environmental regulations concerning essential aspects such as air and water quality, and climate change. Gina McCarthy, a former EPA administrator who served during two Democratic administrations, described this moment as “the most disastrous day in EPA history.”
The alarm sounded by McCarthy was echoed by her successors who held office under Republican administrations, emphasizing a bipartisan concern over the implications of Zeldin’s proposals. William K Reilly, who led the agency under President George H.W. Bush and was instrumental in the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act, referred to the agenda as a “catastrophe” that signifies a retreat from decades of environmental protection efforts.
“What this administration is doing is endangering all of our lives – ours, our children, our grandchildren,” stated Christine Todd Whitman, who oversaw the EPA under President George W. Bush. She argued that the right to clean air and water is fundamental, suggesting that if there’s any legitimate cause for an endangerment finding, it lies within the current administration’s actions, which seem at odds with the mission of the EPA.
Whitman highlighted a crucial aspect of Zeldin’s announcements: the reconsideration of a 2009 scientific finding that established greenhouse gases as a threat to public health and welfare. This finding has been foundational for various U.S. initiatives aimed at combating climate change, influencing regulations on vehicles, power plants, and more.
Experts in environmental science and advocacy assert that the endangerment finding is essential to U.S. environmental law and express skepticism over the likelihood of success for any attempts to nullify it.
The former EPA leaders were taken aback by the prospect of the administration attempting to dismantle this and numerous other established regulations. They cautioned that the adoption of these changes could result in “severe harms” not only to public health and the ecosystem but also to the economy at large.
McCarthy criticized the current direction of the EPA, suggesting that Zeldin appears to be serving the interests of the fossil fuel sector rather than adhering to the agency’s mission. She stressed that protecting the environment and promoting economic growth can coexist, citing historical evidence that robust regulations have led to both a healthier environment and a thriving economy since the inception of the EPA 55 years ago.
In response to these criticisms, EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseli defended the administration’s actions, asserting that President Donald Trump had previously “advanced conservation and environmental stewardship while promoting economic growth” and that this would continue.
Trump has historically downplayed the significance of climate change, having rescinded over 100 environmental regulations during his first term. His stance has led to a freeze on climate program funding, termination of scientists in crucial positions, and a reduction in federal assistance for renewable energy initiatives.
Reilly expressed concern that Zeldin and Trump, possibly influenced by others in their political sphere, might revert to a pre-EPA landscape where industrial pollution was largely unchecked, invoking memories of historical environmental disasters like the infamous Cuyahoga River fire in 1969, which led to the establishment of the EPA.
The former agency heads have previously voiced their worries in an op-ed for the New York Times regarding the detrimental environmental effects anticipated from the current administration’s funding cuts, spending freezes, and layoffs within the agency. They indicated that the proposed changes to environmental regulations are poised to inflict lasting damage on American citizens, businesses, and conservation efforts nationwide.
McCarthy emphasized the complexity involved in establishing environmental regulations, which are intentionally rigorous and require significant effort and collaboration. She questioned the rationale behind reassessing frameworks that have proven effective over time.
In detailing the upcoming rule amendments, Zeldin remarked that the current administration aims to challenge the beliefs underpinning climate change policies and to herald what they describe as America’s “Golden Age.” Among the targeted changes are revisions to air pollution standards for fossil-fuel power plants and modifications to emissions regulations for vehicles, incorrectly labeled as mandates for electric vehicles.
The Biden administration previously asserted that the proposed power plant regulations were designed to mitigate pollution while ensuring a reliable and long-term electricity supply to meet national demands. President Biden has made climate action a priority, committing to ensure that half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. will be zero-emission by 2030.
Furthermore, the EPA plans to revise rules concerning industrial emissions of mercury and other pollutants, soot emissions, and established guidelines aimed at reducing downwind smog. Plans also include revisions to federal protections for rivers, streams, and wetlands provided by clean water laws.
Environmental advocates are gearing up to challenge these changes, with one organization stating that the proposed regulatory rollbacks could lead to significant increases in pollution levels across the United States over the coming years.
Source
www.theguardian.com