There are 600,000 US citizens living in Canada, and we urge you all to request your ballots, mail them back ASAP and vote Democrat. Trump would lay a wrecking ball to climate action.
The Biden administration has the best record on climate change action of any in American history. A partial list of the accomplishments include: rejoining the Paris Agreement; passing the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and numerous Executive Orders on climate change; developing a climate finance plan; introducing a rule for methane emission reductions; promoting electric vehicle initiatives and providing funding for clean energy.
A proposed Republican initiative threatens to undo these gains.
The threat of Project 2025
Project 2025, written by the conservative Heritage Foundation, former Trump administrative officials, and other Trump allies, has articulated the objectives for the next Republican administration. Trump now appears to be trying to distance himself from the proposal.
Project 2025, assisted by the far-right wing of the Supreme Court, calls for the review of all federal rules and regulations — presumably with the purpose of rolling back government protections, bending federal agencies to the president’s will, and returning the US economy to the deregulated status of circa 1910.
Trump himself has stated that he will overturn the current civil service protections and politicize the federal workforce. The plan would place political personnel in positions to oversee science at major federal agencies and reduce regulation of polluting industries.
Whole offices dedicated to climate research and policy development would be eliminated within federal agencies. For instance, the renewable energy, climate technology and energy technology research offices of the Department of Energy would be on the chopping block.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), responsible for much of the research on the nation’s oceans, weather, climate and fisheries would be reorganized, with much of the climate research disappearing. The National Weather Service would focus on commercial operations; climate forecasting would be privatized.
Rollback of climate rulemaking would include the elimination of energy efficiency standards for household appliances, a target of congressional Republicans who have made multiple efforts to ensure the continued profitability of fossil fuel industries.
At the EPA, the plan calls for the consolidation of science and policy under the direction of political officials. It euphemistically calls for an “update” to the agency’s 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to human health and the environment, which compels the EPA to do something to address the threat of these emissions, and calls for the repeal of ones that require greenhouse gas reductions from power plants and automobiles.
Other revisions to existing environmental protection are to make the agency’s consideration of potentially toxic substances more industry friendly and “revisit” a rule that is currently set to bolster the cleanup of cancer-linked chemicals like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
This last topic is one I know well.
In 2016, after working 33 years for the United States Environmental Protection Agency, I retired rather than accede to the immoral demands being made of me by the Trump administration’s EPA leadership.
Personal experience
As the Chicago office branch manager for the Toxics Control Substance Act, I served as the US lead for Annex 3 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, and one of the managers in charge for the American portion of the Great Lakes Toxics Strategy.
The purpose of the strategy was to list chemicals of concern for the Great Lakes, and then develop pollution control and mitigation strategies to address these chemicals. Almost immediately, there was a proposal to list PFAS, known popularly today as the “forever chemicals” because of their long persistence in the environment and humans after their release.
Exposure to PFAS has been linked to various health issues, including birth defects, cancer, immune system effects, and more. These chemicals have been detected in the blood of people around the world, including in remote areas.
Chemicals that were listed had to be approved by EPA Headquarters, and it became clear that Nancy Beck, the Trump appointee to the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention who came from the American Chemistry Council, had no real commitment to the Annex 3 process, and PFAS, in particular, were a hot-button topic to be avoided.
Not until Biden took office were steps once again taken to truly regulate these chemicals.
Environmental protection has made great strides since the creation of EPA in 1970. Let’s not let Trump and his associates throw it away.
Mardi Klevs is an environmental engineer who worked for the Chicago Region 5 office, most recently as the manager for the toxics and pesticides programs, including enforcement, as well as the Resource Conservation Recovery Act enforcement program. She is a member of Third Act, an organization of 70,000 Americans over the age of sixty determined to change the world for the better. Third Act harnesses the unparalleled generational power to safeguard our climate and democracy.
Comments
Why do conservatives universally hate the environment and want to destroy it as fast as possible?
So they can get to heaven sooner?