![epa-logo[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/epa-logo1.png?quality=75){kind=logo}
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Fox News claim a leaked EPA draft budget proposal document promises deep cuts to the EPA budget, particularly climate related activities. But the Heartland Institute think the reported cuts don’t go far enough.
Environmental programs face deep cuts under budget proposal
Published March 03, 2017
WASHINGTON – The Trump administration would slash programs aimed at slowing climate change and improving water safety and air quality, while eliminating thousands of jobs, according to a draft of the Environmental Protection Agency budget proposal obtained by The Associated Press.
Under the tentative plan from the Office of Management and Budget, the agency’s funding would be reduced by roughly 25 percent and about 3,000 jobs would be cut, about 19 percent of the agency’s staff.
…
The draft proposal would cut the EPA’s annual budget from about $8.2 billion to $6.1 billion. Proposed cuts include reducing the climate protection budget by nearly 70 percent to $29 million, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by 97 percent to $10 million and environmental justice programs by 79 percent to $1.5 million.
Also targeted for steep spending rollbacks are the agency’s monitoring and enforcement of compliance with environmental laws, as well as regional projects intended to benefit degraded areas such as the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound and the Gulf of Mexico. A program dealing with San Francisco Bay that received $4.8 million last year would be eliminated, as would initiatives for reducing diesel emissions and beach water quality testing.
…
But the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, said the proposal didn’t go far enough.
“If Donald Trump and Scott Pruitt are serious about ending the national scandal that is EPA, they will accept nothing less than a 20 percent cut this year and make this year’s cut the first step in a five-year plan to replace the organization,” said Joseph Bast, the group’s president.
…
I don’t think there is any acceptable compromise on this issue. Any cut to the EPA budget will upset greens and Democrat supporters. No cut to the EPA budget will upset Trump supporters, many of whom are utterly fed up with excessive EPA interference in their lives. A lightweight cut to the EPA budget would upset everyone.
The EPA should be limited to monitoring the air and water quality as they cross state lines. If a river in state A is polluted when it flows into state B, then the federal government would require state A to correct the problem or lose all federal fundng. How the state did that would be left up to the state.
What goes on within a state is not the Feds concern, and the feds should only be involved with states, never individuals or businesses. There is already a group that would ensure that big business, those capable of buyng off state legislators, would not pollute; class action attorneys – and there are lots of them.
“agency’s monitoring and enforcement of compliance with environmental laws,”… It’s one thing to clean house of “activist” scientists… it’s another to dump heavy metals in water supplies and toxins in the air…
As ususal we’re screwed by the Greenies on one side and the corporate Predators on the others.
“Corporate ‘predators'” have to breathe the same air and drink the same water we do, and I trust them to keep that in mind to some degree, though not 100%. I trust Greens about as far as I can toss a live bull up an empty silo.
Well .. actually no. Corporate HQ is hundreds or thousands of miles away… but glad you live in a world of purest motivations and enlightened altruism … try observing such altruism, in, say China, where there is no EPA to ever worry about.
Trump needs to start an integrity initiative™ whereby government organizations and entities that leak are subject to internal fines and budget cut-backs. Not to mention firing and/or litigation of perps.
That line gave me a chuckle. It sounds like a socialist program. They are only happy when everyone is equally unhappy!
I will wait and see about the cuts. I suspect they may be deeper than many yet believe. But like the old joke about 500 lawyers at the bottom of the sea……
EPA budgetbis roughly 4.1billion to state grants, and 4 billion discretionary. A 2 billion cut to discretionary is 50%, very significant. So is a 20 % reduction in headcount.
Here’s some month old feel good verbiage from the warmist camp.
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/epa-has-started-remove-obama-era-information?utm_source=email-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=general
For each EPA taxpayer-funded job cut, at the very least, several taxpaying civilian jobs will be saved. The news media will not report that aspect, because they only care about jobs that support their agendas.
How do you figure? I know many taxpaying civilian jobs that will be lost with these program cuts. A large number of EPA programs are carried-out by the private-sector.
“EPA programs are carried-out by the private-sector.” Who will find other work.
“…Who will find other work…”
Really? Billions of dollars in environmental research, sampling, testing, etc, is just going to be “found?” The Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, etc, are suddenly going to be cleaned-up and/or maintained by private entities? Or by “other work” do you mean getting laid-off and finding a different career?
Contractors working for government agencies WILL find other work. All those GS employees will hit the bricks, collect unemployment and when it runs out find a job. Drain. The. Swamp. Get it, yet?
No, working for government is not “private sector”, and they will find other work. Unless they have been scamming government agencies, which is highly likely for EPA,BLM,DpetInterior,USDA,FDA etc etc leeches.
They have been cleaned up greatly. You might want to check the latest.
“Billions of dollars in environmental research, sampling, testing, etc, is just going to be “found?””
No. They’ll have to find real jobs.
MarkG I’m talking about “real jobs” in the private sector that will be lost.
If they are real jobs they won’t be lost, just moved somewhere else.
2hotel9, I don’t think you should try to classify what constitutes a “real job.” You seem to live in some fantasyland.
Yea, it is called America, where I work a real job not leeching off the tax payers.
A “real job” is a job that someone else will willingly pay you to do, without the government holding a gun to their head. If these jobs are real jobs, someone else will pay them to do it. If not, we’re better off without them.
Excellent MarkG
MarkG you’re clearly clueless about how the business world works. You and 2hotel9 should get a room and play video games all night long.
Clearly you are clueless. What is your GS rating? How long have you been sucking the blood out of American tax payers?
Actually he is exactly correct. That is how the business world works.
The EPA’s political agenda focused on WOTUS and the endangered species act. The long-term goal was control over both land and water areas – both public and private. This was the driving force for the “sustainability” meme, including federal control of most of the USA’s natural resources. These are the areas where they should be cut way back, if not eliminated. Private land rights remain the fundament of a free and capitalistic society. Both were under siege.
On the climate side of EPA there is need to re-evaluate the CO2 pollutant designation and remove it from the list. Climate science will be carried forward by the entrenched university cadre of alarmists regardless of what EPA does. Accordingly, the climate research function of EPA can be cut completely. All climate research funding can be cut drastically as much is unnecessarily redundant. How many government and university-based super computers running models with the same basic assumptions and data bases are really needed. Funding also can be redirected to natural climate variability, with emphasis on ocean patterns and cycles, the hydrologic cycle, and other components of the models that are obvious known unknowns. There are a lot of solid solar researchers who are not in the green blob, and they should be supported. Monitoring and improving the systems for the measurement of climate, atmospheric quality and water pollution remain essential components of the EPA mandate.
Many of the biggest problems encountered today are related to man. Our waterways face huge issues with zebra mussels, asian carp, spiny shrimp and other invasive species. Similarly, there is a need to address the relationship between chemical farming and water and food quality. As a member of one the Lake Winnipeg research funding groups, I can attest that we have a real problem with not only water quality, but also ever-increasing runoff (flooding). These are fruitful avenues for research in many North American drainages. I really don’t care if the US maintains federal control over some of these issues, or mandates some to the states. Regionalization of some problems probably better defines the need for research/action, e.g. drainages, biomes, point-source air and water quality, and endangered species.
I spent 35 years teaching and conducting research on the conservation of natural resources, and have been retired for 15 years. Much of the last 25 years has been wasted chasing the “political aspects” of the environment, rather than increasing the biological and physical knowledge necessary for proper management. The wheel-spinning in climate science has been unbelievable, and the lack of debate and character assassination of many good scholars disheartening. It is important that clean air and water remain the primary objectives of the EPA. I hope your POTUS can survive the political onslaught long enough to make positive headway in all matters environmental. Regards from the Canadian prairies, where the highest temperature on this date in history was 14C, and the lowest -38C; try going outside of that natural variability.
Bravo, well said. I don’t quite understand the “but also ever-increasing runoff (flooding)” component. Why is runoff “ever increasing”? Has rainfall been ever increasing in Manitoba or other prairie provinces? GK
Farmers grade the land to drain out low areas so they can seed them in the spring . This increases the amount of water that makes it into lakes and rivers.
As cities expand and increase their paved areas, runoff increases.
I’m just an old retired nurse, but I dealt with the insane bureaucracy of government “regulation” from both state and feds, and am only too glad to have missed the “obummercare” mess. But I have a question, r2d2…
You said: ” All climate research funding can be cut drastically as much is unnecessarily redundant.”
Can you point out some NECESSARY redundancy here? In fact, I can’t think of anything paid for with stolen tax money that is in any way necessary. Voluntary association, individuals and companies paying for it with their own money… sure thing, but theft and the initiation of force are always wrong.
State of the art climate science…
Why California’s Current Drought Is Different
Very clearly one of the things that sets this drought apart is that now there is this incredibly clear climate signal. I think it’s unambiguous and that’s new.
https://www.newsdeeply.com/water/articles/2016/08/23/peter-gleick-why-californias-current-drought-is-different
And then…. it started raining.
The quote is ‘honest guv’ Peter Gleick.
He still thinks more dams are a fantasy. I found the story quite interesting on how with a $37,000 grant 30 years ago he has made himself so bloody important, to the point it appears that California seems to depend on his thinking alone and there is no other opinion even discussed. Everywhere you look his and his institute’s programs are followed. ( I see he doesn’t like the tunnel idea either, he could start by losing his own tunnel vision)
The ethically challenged Peter Gleick dissembles and then the rains come. Apparently Gleick fails to study pre-historic droughts in California. http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site568/2014/0127/20140127_031535_ssjm0126megadry90_500.jpg
The climate protection and environmental justice budgets should be cut by no less than 100%.
Thinking about what it would mean if the budget was cut more than 100%, I’m led to the conclusion that some claw back of previous funding might be considered. The Federal government had no problem with requiring wounded National Guardsmen who couldn’t complete their enlistment contract to pay back a proportionate amount of their enlistment bonus. This could be a very useful precedent when reviewing NSF, EPA, NOAA, and NASA activities.
Never stop taking antibiotics half way through the prescribed course. It can enable the infection to rebound stronger. Let the reader understand.
The corrupt bureaucracy needs to be broken. A modest cut in funding will not in itself break the cosy relationship between activist EPA administrators and environmentalist NGOs.
It is normal for bureaucrats to respond to
a request to propose a budget cut from
‘goals’ given in the request by Admin. Bureaucrats would brainstorm and give
a cut they thought would look big enough to mgt but still keep the setup they wanted plus get rid of the people that probably should be kept. Just from Obama’s priorities I’d suggest cutting at least all the departments and personnel added since Dubbya and then cut back from there. Here the people you keep is important. Send NWO types to agriculture or some other place where they can’t do harm. Let attrition bite for a decade and hire more of your own people as needed.
I’ve been advocating that all positions created in the last ten years be eliminated. No need to fire anyone, just RIF them.
100% cuts to climate change I would get. 100% to enviro justice I would get. Some of those others bother me greatly.
Especially Chesapeake. There are still significant sources of contamination emanating from streams. Mostly fertilizers and pesticides now, less sewage. The buffer planting and artificial oyster reefs over the silt must continue.
But Libertarian Market fundies oppose all government programs on principle… better to drink raw sewage than using tax monies to remedy such conditions. These are the BFF of the Corporate Predator class.
Excellent. Fire the weather modelers and such junk science idiots and use the money to restore the Chesapeake Bay and other much more worthwhile projects. In fact all the oyster beds and such should be cleaned up.
And why is that a NATIONAL issue?
Surely the locals or the State can deal with their own Bay… Especially if the Feds are not sucking their money away as taxes to fund agencies like the EPA and others focused on political agendas…
End the EPA. Hand the money back to the tax payers as a rate cut. Let the States solve their own problems and they can deal with any conflicts as neighbors do. Negotiate, agree to each pay half to fix the fence, or take it to court.
EM Smith you can take almost anything and argue that it isn’t a “NATIONAL” issue.
What was “supposed” to happen was the elimination of the climate change garbage and regulatory over-reach. Much of what is listed in the leak is drastic cuts to legitimate programs.
Oh great, “take it to court.” WTF kind of solution is that? Where do you think the $$$ is going to come from for those lawsuits? Taxpayer money to feed a small group of attorneys. Great idea.
“EM Smith you can take almost anything and argue that it isn’t a “NATIONAL” issue. ”
Because the vast majority aren’t. The Federal government was given very few powers, because they were only supposed to be involved in things that actually are “NATIONAL” issues. It’s taken a century for ‘Progressives’ to completely turn that around to the point where who’s allowed in which bathroom is apparently now a “NATIONAL” issue.
But that’s not what it says, Pat Ch.
“Leaked ” documents to Fox . Really ? Fox is Republican Party as CNN is Democrat Party . Planted maybe . I read this as fake news and from it bet they are going lite on the EPA . They are just trying to throw red meat to the people who see the EPA as anti -American bullies run by Eco grant takers. They are just softening people up to the broken promise of the un- canceled Paris Agreement . The Agreement will stand and the $Billion dollars in payments deferred .
Now that Pruitt is embedded a few regulatory overreach changes will be temporarily addressed for show and a bit of expected union whimpering will occur but that is it .
Obama hired thousands at the EPA and armed them while cutting the military budget 20% . Despite the all to familiar rhetoric as long as fuel producers needs are taken care of does anyone seriously think tax payers are going to see any difference ? No chance .
Funny how “leaked ” documents are a concern when they are intended to damage Republicans but when used as public propaganda to push the Republican agenda
not a peep .
What happened to draining the swamp ? They can’t even get a Cabinet approved and the next exciting election cycle has started .
FoxNews is no more Republican than my dog is. They are just as big a pile of leftard enabling scumbags as anyone else in “media”.
Democrats have tried to change the language so much, that now a “News” organization is partisan. Fox is an equal opportunity reporter. Its COMMENTARY is right, but its news is simply news. That is what separates it from the rest of the riff raff. Their “news” is commentary.
A check with the largest cut, the Great Lakes shows that the vast majority of money never goes to where it was intended. The Asian carp and zebra mussels get very little out of the budget. Instead the money goes to featherbedding and State and Federal salaries. Desk jobs.
To affirm your statement, I once worked for a State Dept of Education. They had a section that was federally funded (Special Ed). The grants came to them with the stipulation that “no more than 10% could be spent on administrative overhead”. The “administrators” took that to mean 10% HAD to be spent on administrative overhead, so they bought things they did not need, did not know how to use, and were woefully inadequate for the purpose they were purchased for.
Maybe now the agency can refocus on real pollution instead of sunshine, rain, hail, sleet, snow, floods, storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, and plant food. Stop trying to regulate weather. It just makes a person or agency look stupid.
Maybe now the agency can refocus on real pollution instead of sunshine, rain, hail, sleet, snow, floods, storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, and plant food. Stop trying to regulate weather. It just makes a person or agency look stupid.
Has any EPA official been punished for poisoning Animas river?
3 were promoted, several others got phat bonuses.
Exactly. Sewage treatment and farm and urban water setbacks come immediately to mind. Reforestation of river and stream sides with indigenous trees, and when not available (American chestnut comes to mind), a substitute of similar shading and fodder also pops up.
Heh.
LEAKED by the opfor to mobilize the anti-cut ‘forces’.
The ‘deep state’ is a long ways from being dead yet …
“environmental justice” why not a 100 percent cut? As has been stated the Trump administration would be making a galactic error if it believes for a moment that it can buy friends among its enemies. The best approach is to eviscerate the worst excesses, publicize the waste at every opportunity, and redirect the spending to specific programs like lead abatement in Flint, MI. Let the opposition defend that.
Line up Trump speaking in Detroit, Chicago, LA, Oakland, Atlanta, Newark, Flint, etc… housing upgrades, apprenticeship programs, union partnerships, rebuilding our cities. We spend many billions on climate change related programs. Many billions as in 20-30 billion per year. It is tucked into every nook and cranny of the federal budget. Let a river of money flow to the people who need it most. Better than flushing it down the climate bowl. Do it now so that we can run “Morning in America” before the mid term elections. Don’t overlook the obvious.
Leaking a draft budget is classic balloon floating. Hes being consistent with his law and order theme. EJ programs are NOT statutory (law passed by Congress) programs and were used by BO and as early as Clinton as a tool to garner voting support. CAGW is also NOT a statutory program.
In terms of the overarching approach, federalism rules the day in this administration.
Every federal initiative concerning State primacy begins with … “how can i help you”.
Like the President said….stop the climate change nonsense, and work on clean air and water in a sensible way, not fantasy, as it is now! Stop all “renewable subsidies”, and let private owners take on those risks as they choose. Invest in the US, and not foreign energy sources, whenever able.
I heard this a week ago. It is a good, quite bold start I think. And I think, with Trump, he’s picking up speed in doing. And this is only his first month. Nothing like this has ever happened before as far as I’m aware, certainly in recent history.
From today’s Wall Street Journal …
How a Michigan County Road Got Stuck in Regulation Purgatory
Building a direct path to a new mine makes perfect environmental sense, but the EPA hasn’t budged.
It is scandalous that the federal bureaucracy can arbitrarily thwart such a valuable state-approved project—and then insist it needn’t answer for its decisions.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-a-michigan-county-road-got-stuck-in-regulation-purgatory-1488585470
We’re from the government and we’re here to help.
I think the ENTIRE fed-gov is stuck in slow-walk mode; The original issuance of an experimental FCC Part 5 license (for 630m band operation) took a month 2 years ago. The renewal THIS year so far has seen 33 days and it only looks to be half way through their process in the “queue”.