Pruitt Must Defend Trump’s Plan To Pillage The EPA
June 15, 2017
Trump is proposing slashing EPA’s budget by 31 percent – the largest proposed cut to any federal agency.
Washington Post: “Under the White House’s latest budget proposal, released Tuesday, the EPA would fare worse than any other federal agency. The proposal would reduce the agency’s current funding by more than 31 percent, to $5.65 billion.”
The Hill: “As a result of Trump’s budget cuts, 50 EPA programs and 3,200 agency jobs will be eliminated.”
Trump’s budget eliminates funding to mitigate environmental dangers like radon, lead, and other detection technologies.
Washington Post: “Dozens of other programs also would be zeroed out entirely, including funding for radon detection, lead risk reduction, projects along the U.S.-Mexico border and environmental justice initiatives.”
CNN: “Some of the biggest cuts would go to categorical grants for science and technology and environmental program and management spending, which would face 40% and 35% decreases, respectively. Some of the hardest-hit programs would include clean air efforts in the environmental program and management category, which would be cut nearly in half.”
Trump’s budget proposes deep cuts to the Superfund cleanup program, which helps restore of the country’s most polluted sites, as well as many regional cleanup programs.
Washington Post: “It would slash funding for the Superfund cleanup program, which helps restore some of the nation’s most polluted sites, despite the fact that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt lists it as one of his priorities.”
Trump’s budget nearly halves both the EPA’s research budget and grants for states to conduct their own environmental programs.
ABC News: “Trump’s budget proposal cut the EPA’s research budget almost in half, by $234 million.”
Washington Post: “Trump’s budget proposed nearly halving categorical grants, which support state and local efforts to address everything from pesticide exposure to air and water control.”
The funding cuts seem aimed at stopping the EPA from executing its job of regulating pollution.
New York Times: “The proposed cuts to the agency charged with protecting the nation’s environment and public health appear explicitly aimed at slowing or stopping some of its ability to regulate several forms of pollution, including the carbon dioxide emissions that cause global warming.”