EPA needs to be rebuilt, not nickel and dimed to death with budget cuts  

The Republican plan to raise the nation’s borrowing authority by cutting federal spending would cap the EPA budget at a level that would devastate the agency’s efforts to rebuild after decades of eroding resources and the attacks of the Trump years. EPA spending in real dollars in 2020 was less than half what it had been in 1980, and a lack of resources continues to hinder the agency’s ability to protect our nation’s people and environment. The House plan would worsen the problem by cutting EPA’s FY 2024 budget to $9.6 billion, the level in the fiscal year 2022 Appropriations Act. That was far short of what the agency needed even then, but the shortfall would be worse in 2024, when it would take $10.9 billion in current dollars to match the purchasing power $9.6 billion had in 2022.  Finally, the plan would perpetuate the decline in EPA resources by capping future increases at 1 percent, far less than the inflation rate.   

The cuts will have a particular effect on staffing, because roughly 28 percent of the EPA budget supports its workforce, and EPA will struggle to meet current demands without sufficient staff to do the work. For example, EPA has used the increased funding in the FY 2023 budget to hire over 500 full time staff to address a range of priorities. These include ensuring that chemicals are safe before being sold to consumers, protecting the public from unhealthy air by modeling pollution and monitoring emissions, helping to ensure that water is safe to drink, and verifying that industrial sites are actually complying with safety requirements, and working to address “forever chemicals” in the environment such as PFAS by improving methods to detect and reduce this extPFAS in water, reduce PFAS discharges into waterways, and protect fish and aquatic ecosystems from this extremely toxic substance. Cuts could take away resources  to hire or retain these new workers, or sacrifice resources from other programs to keep them.     

The cuts could also disrupt vital ongoing EPA work to address a public health crisis caused by elevated levels of lead in the drinking water in Benton Harbor, Mich. EPA is working with the state, the city and the local drinking water system to keep community residents safe and healthy by, for example, funding a compliance advisor to provide direct, one-on-one technical assistance to the water supplier. The proposed cuts could disrupt these ongoing beneficial actions and block further progress toward addressing a crisis that has not been fully resolved in a community that is nearly 90 percent African-American.  

The cuts would also block $80 million earmarked to address drinking water and wastewater infrastructure across the country. This is critically needed funding that would be used to upgrade aging infrastructure, address the threat of climate change, invest in new technologies, assist underserved communities, promote resilience and sustainability, assist in flood control, address lead in drinking water, and control sewer runoff.   

 Cuts under the House plan could also set back EPA’s efforts to advance environmental justice, a signature administration initiative to tackle the inequities in environmental protections historically suffered by underserved and overburdened communities. Reducing support to the 2022 level could jeopardize resources to fund a host of grants to serve disadvantaged communities disproportionately affected by pollution, and could lead to staff cutbacks that could erode trust and disrupt existing progress toward environmental justice.    

Enforcement is also essential to ensuring that everyone is protected by the nation’s environmental laws and regulations. But EPA resource constraints have led to reduced enforcement and compliance activities, despite evidence of widespread non-compliance with environmental requirements. Operating EPA enforcement and compliance programs at FY 2022 levels would mean cutting $70 million in funding added in 2023. Such cuts would limit EPA’s ability to investigate, pursue, and compel timely and appropriate actions in priority areas; return facilities to compliance so they are operating safely and not impacting the health of adjacent communities; ensure a level playing field for well-run companies; and advance the promise of clean air, land, and water.   

Specifically, the cuts could mean losing 140 inspectors, which would reduce by 2200 the number of annual compliance monitoring activities, prolonging exposure to all kinds of environmental pollution. The enforcement and compliance programs are especially vulnerable to funding cuts because 80 percent of their budgets are for payroll, compensation, and benefits.  

Funding at the FY 22 level would also eliminate $24 million for EPA’s work to address climate change. And the spending cap would deny $700 million in needed support for EPA and state air programs and air and climate research to address the climate challenge. 

The plan would also cut $60 million in FY 23 support for states and tribes needed to protect drinking water, address surface and groundwater contamination, expand efforts to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and minimize waste generation and prevent its release. Such cuts could be particularly harmful to states that rely on EPA grants to support state environmental staff and programs.  

The measure also caps spending “increases” at 1 percent , far less than inflation. That guarantees that EPA resources will continue to decline, leaving the agency without new resources needed to restore its programs and workforce to the levels maintained for two decades between 1992 and 2012.  

EPA and the laws on which it was founded are in place to protect our health and our environment. It needs to be rebuilt, not nickel and dimed. 

David F. Coursen is a former EPA attorney and a member of the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit organization of EPA alumni working to protect the agency’s progress toward clean air, water, land and climate protection.