Both environmental threats and anti-science propaganda were spread by the EPA administrator when he recently announced reckless cutbacks in critical public safeguards. [See: AP Article. ]
“Today is the greatest day of deregulation our nation has seen. We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families ...” said EPA Administrator Zeldin.
Aside from the negligence of eliminating restrictions on heat-trapping emissions that cause rising temperatures, Zeldin attacks well-established science by depicting concerns about climate change as a religion. Moreover, he falsely asserts that dismantling these protections will benefit the public, hiding the actual truth that EPA cutbacks will help polluters – foremost the fossil-fuel industry – not American families.
Some trillion dollars in damage has been caused by extreme weather events since 1980 and a third of these have occurred just in the past five years. That means the public will be paying far more through the loss of EPA protections and suffering worsening hardships in the years ahead because of eliminating additional EPA climate actions already budgeted.
In his deceptive claims, EPA’s Zeldin omits billions of dollars in added medical care, insurance costs, and property damage that will burden Americans as a direct result of these irresponsible reductions. Removing EPA protections will leave millions of households and businesses financially stranded because of costly hazards to health and property, plus loss of income caused by flooding, wildfires, and poorly regulated pollution.
Furthermore, these reductions are unlawful.
- Legal experts say it's a marked departure from the agency’s historic purpose to protect human health and the environment. “It's an all out assault on climate regulation and environmental and public health protections,” says Michael Burger, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.
- However, the announcement does not mean that the EPA has legal authority to institute the proposed rollbacks, experts say. “It is not within the authority of an agency to take action or to push through decisions that are directly and diametrically opposed to its mandate and the reason it was created,” says Nikki Reisch, director of Climate and Energy at the Center for International Environmental Law.
- While each administration has flexibility in how they enforce agency regulations, the process of outright repealing regulations is more complicated, Reisch notes. “Merely making these pronouncements from up high does not change the law,” she says. “It doesn't change the statutes that exist to protect clean air and clean water, and to protect the health of people throughout this country.”
Concerned citizens are well-advised to contact their elected officials in Washington and state their unconditional opposition to these destructive, illegal cutbacks.