In a recent development, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) clarified that there are no plans to reduce its staff by 65%, contrary to comments made by President Donald Trump. The White House and the agency confirmed that the 65% figure referred to expected spending cuts rather than staffing levels. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin emphasized the need to cut unnecessary spending, stating that the agency does not require the amount allocated in the current budget.

Zeldin criticized EPA grants authorized under the 2022 climate law, particularly the $20 billion earmarked for a green bank supporting climate and clean-energy programs. He pledged to revoke contracts for the green bank program and expressed a commitment to eliminate wasteful spending within the EPA.

However, the head of the EPA’s largest union expressed concerns over the potential impact of significant budget cuts, noting that such reductions could jeopardize critical functions such as monitoring air and water quality and responding to natural disasters. Democrats and environmental groups voiced strong opposition to substantial budget cuts, warning of the detrimental effects on environmental protection efforts and public health.

In response to the situation, calls have been made for Congress and the courts to intervene and prevent what is perceived as reckless sabotage of the EPA’s mission. The controversy surrounding potential staff and budget cuts at the EPA underscores ongoing tensions and concerns regarding environmental policy and resource allocation within the agency.