https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/epa-to-review-landmark-finding-that-greenhouse-gases-threaten-public-health/ar-AA1ANgzm?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Note: In addition to the video, please also see the following article included at the above-referenced Internet address:

“EPA to Review Finding That Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health”

The announcement was one of a flurry of actions by the EPA to roll back a wide swath of environmental regulations, including rules on pollution from coal-fired power plants and electric vehicles. The EPA's announcements also included narrowing the definition of waterways such as wetlands and streams that are protected under the Clean Water Act. 

The decisions start what is likely to be a years-long effort to repeal or revise dozens of environmental rules, with 31 earmarked in all, including those involving:

  • Wastewater discharges for oil and gas extraction facilities;
  • Oil and gas industry reporting through a greenhouse gas program;
  • Rules governing coal ash and coal-fired power plants;
  • National air quality standards for particulate matter;
  • Emission standards for industrial air pollutants;
  • Rules to reduce air pollution that causes haze; and
  • Regulations restricting vehicle emissions

We are driving a dagger through the heart of the climate-change religion and ushering in America's Golden Age," EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. "Today is the most consequential day of deregulation in American history," the EPA head wrote in the piece.

The EPA also is moving to eliminate all positions at the agency focused on diversity, equity and inclusion and environmental justice. Zeldin said in a March 11 memo that the action is in response to Mr. Trump's executive order on "ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferences," as well as two other executive actions.

Climate Experts Blast EPA

Climate change experts immediately criticized the wide-ranging move to strike down environmental protections and suggested the effort will face legal challenges.

"In the face of overwhelming science, it's impossible to think that the EPA could develop a contradictory finding that would stand up in court," said David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group.

Michael Mann, a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania dismissed the EPA's action as "just the latest form of Republican climate denial. They can no longer deny climate change is happening, so instead they're pretending it's not a threat, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that it is, perhaps, the greatest threat that we face today."

Discussion Questions

1. As indicated in the article, in his recent opinion-editorial piece in the New York Times, current EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin referred to the climate-change “religion.” In your reasoned opinion, what do you believe he meant by that reference?

This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. In your author’s opinion, Mr. Zeldin’s phraseology is quite interesting. “Religion” is traditionally defined as the belief and worship of a higher power (i.e., a God). However, over time, it has also come to mean a pursuit or interest to which someone attributes supreme importance. In that sense, perhaps the non-traditional definition of the word could be applicable to someone who believes that climate change is a matter of utmost importance for the United States and for the world.

2. As indicated in the article, EPA Administrator Zeldin believes pollution deregulation will usher in “America's Golden Age.” In your reasoned opinion, will it?

This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary.

Mr. Zeldin’s use of the term “Golden Age” is quite interesting. “Golden Age” is defined as a period, sometimes imaginary, when everyone was/is happy, or when a particular endeavor (e.g., business) was/is very successful. It is the most flourishing period in the history of a nation in terms of business, or as measured by some other barometer.

If Mr. Zeldin is referring to the “Golden Age” of business, one must question whether, in his capacity as EPA Administrator, that should be his goal. As indicated on the EPA website at the time of the writing of this newsletter:

“The mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment.

EPA works to ensure that:

  • Americans have clean air, land and water;
    • National efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available scientific information;
      • Federal laws protecting human health and the environment are administered and enforced fairly, effectively, and as Congress intended;
      • Environmental stewardship is integral to U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
      • All parts of society—communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments—have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
      • Contaminated lands and toxic sites are cleaned up by potentially responsible parties and revitalized; and
      • Chemicals in the marketplace are reviewed for safety.”

Based on its published mission, one could argue that having access to “clean air, land and water” is a “Golden Age.”

3. Is government regulation of business always bad? Is government deregulation of business always good?

This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. In your author’s view, although such a binary view of government regulation of business (“government regulation is bad; government deregulation is good”) is apparently beautiful in its simplicity, that beauty is superficial and fundamentally flawed.

Government regulation is neither inherently good nor inherently bad. It is instead a reflection of what “we, the people” want in terms of the society we live in. If we want a clean(er) environment, for example, we must accept the fact that if left to their own devices, many people and businesses will not self-regulate. In that sense, if the government imposes regulations to ensure a better environment, the government is acting as an intermediary between what “we, the people” want and what the individual actors want.

It is also important to note that the government exists to represent “we, the people” and to promote what is in our collective best interests.