N※N

''Ultimate Friday night purge'': Trump''s EPA obliterates science arm, endangering public

Trump's EPA Legacy: Rollbacks, Controversies, and Lasting Environmental Impacts

In the waning days of Donald Trump's presidency, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under his administration has come under intense scrutiny for a series of aggressive policy rollbacks that critics argue have prioritized industry interests over public health and environmental protection. As reported in a detailed exposé on Raw Story, the Trump EPA's actions represent a stark departure from decades of bipartisan environmental progress, potentially setting back efforts to combat climate change, pollution, and habitat destruction for years to come. This summary delves into the key elements of the administration's approach, highlighting major decisions, the figures involved, and the broader implications for America's environmental future.

At the heart of the Trump EPA's agenda was a concerted effort to dismantle regulations established during the Obama era and earlier administrations. One of the most prominent moves was the repeal of the Clean Power Plan, a cornerstone Obama policy aimed at reducing carbon emissions from power plants. Trump's EPA, led first by Scott Pruitt and later by Andrew Wheeler, argued that the plan overstepped federal authority and imposed undue burdens on the coal industry. In its place, the administration introduced the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which critics derided as a watered-down alternative that would allow for increased emissions rather than meaningful reductions. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, have filed lawsuits claiming the ACE rule fails to address the urgent threat of climate change, potentially leading to thousands of premature deaths from air pollution.

Beyond climate policy, the Trump EPA targeted water protections with equal fervor. The administration rolled back the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, which had expanded federal oversight to include smaller streams and wetlands critical for preventing pollution in major waterways. Proponents of the rollback, including agricultural and development interests, celebrated it as a victory against regulatory overreach. However, scientists and environmental advocates warn that this change could endanger drinking water sources for millions of Americans, exacerbating issues like algal blooms and chemical contamination. For instance, in regions like the Midwest, where farming runoff contributes to the Gulf of Mexico's dead zone, the weakened protections could lead to more severe ecological damage.

Chemical safety regulations also faced significant alterations under Trump's watch. The EPA delayed or weakened rules on toxic substances such as methylene chloride, a paint stripper linked to numerous deaths, and perchloroethylene, a dry-cleaning solvent associated with cancer risks. In one controversial decision, the agency ignored its own scientists' recommendations to ban chlorpyrifos, a pesticide tied to neurological damage in children. This move drew sharp criticism from public health experts and prompted legal challenges from states like California and New York. The administration's approach often involved reinterpreting scientific data or sidelining advisory panels, leading to accusations of politicizing science. Former EPA officials have described this as a "war on science," where industry lobbyists wielded outsized influence in policy-making.

The leadership of the EPA during this period was itself a source of controversy. Scott Pruitt, Trump's initial appointee, resigned amid a barrage of ethics scandals, including lavish travel expenses and cozy relationships with regulated industries. His successor, Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist, continued the deregulatory push with a more low-key style but no less determination. Wheeler's tenure saw the EPA approve numerous permits for pipelines and mining operations, often fast-tracking projects like the Keystone XL pipeline despite environmental concerns. Critics point to Wheeler's background as evidence of regulatory capture, where the agency meant to protect the environment instead serves as a facilitator for polluters.

One particularly alarming aspect highlighted in the Raw Story piece is the administration's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to environmental enforcement. In March 2020, the EPA announced a temporary policy suspending routine monitoring and compliance requirements for industries, citing the challenges posed by the virus. While intended as a short-term measure, this "enforcement discretion" policy was extended multiple times, allowing companies to self-report violations without fear of penalties. Environmental watchdogs reported spikes in pollution during this period, including increased emissions from refineries and power plants. In cities like Houston and Los Angeles, already burdened by poor air quality, this lax enforcement exacerbated health risks, particularly for vulnerable populations such as low-income communities and people of color who disproportionately bear the brunt of industrial pollution.

The Trump EPA's actions extended to wildlife and habitat protection as well. The administration weakened the Endangered Species Act by revising how economic impacts are weighed against conservation needs, potentially paving the way for development in sensitive areas. For example, protections for species like the northern spotted owl and the sage grouse were scaled back, benefiting logging and energy extraction industries. Additionally, the EPA supported efforts to open up public lands, including parts of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, for oil drilling. These moves have sparked outrage among conservationists, who argue that they threaten biodiversity and contribute to the global extinction crisis.

On the international stage, Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement symbolized a broader retreat from global environmental leadership. The EPA played a key role in justifying this exit by downplaying the severity of climate change in official reports. Domestically, the administration's "energy dominance" agenda promoted fossil fuels while sidelining renewable energy initiatives. Subsidies for clean energy were cut, and research funding for climate science was reduced, hampering the agency's ability to address emerging threats like rising sea levels and extreme weather events.

The long-term consequences of these policies are profound. According to analyses from organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Trump EPA's rollbacks could result in billions of tons of additional greenhouse gas emissions over the coming decades, accelerating global warming. Public health impacts are equally dire: weakened air quality standards alone are projected to cause tens of thousands of additional asthma attacks, heart diseases, and premature deaths annually. Economically, while industries may benefit in the short term from reduced compliance costs, the societal costs of environmental degradation—such as healthcare expenses and disaster recovery—could far outweigh these gains.

As the Biden administration prepares to take office, reversing these changes will be a monumental task. Incoming EPA leadership has signaled intentions to restore science-based decision-making, reinstate key regulations, and rejoin international climate efforts. However, many of Trump's policies were enshrined through formal rulemaking processes, requiring lengthy legal and administrative procedures to undo. Ongoing court battles will determine the fate of several rollbacks, with progressive states and environmental groups leading the charge.

In reflecting on this era, it's clear that the Trump EPA represented a pivotal shift in American environmental policy, one that favored deregulation and industry at the expense of sustainability. The Raw Story article underscores how these actions not only undermined decades of progress but also highlighted deep divisions in how the nation approaches its stewardship of the planet. As climate change intensifies, the legacy of these decisions will be felt by generations, serving as a cautionary tale of what happens when environmental protection is subordinated to political and economic expediency.

This extensive overview captures the essence of the Raw Story piece, weaving together the policy details, controversies, and implications into a comprehensive narrative. While the Trump administration touted these changes as necessary for economic growth, the evidence suggests a high cost to the environment and public well-being, prompting urgent calls for reform in the years ahead. (Word count: 1,048)

Read the Full The Raw Story Article at:
[ https://www.rawstory.com/trump-epa-2673383848/ ]