A group of Environmental Protection Agency employees on Monday published a declaration of dissent from the agency’s policies under the Trump administration, saying they “undermine the EPA mission of protecting human health and the environment.”
More than 170 EPA employees put their names to the document, with about 100 more signing anonymously out of fear of retaliation, according to Jeremy Berg, a former editor-in-chief of Science magazine who is not an EPA employee but was among non-EPA scientists or academics to also sign. The latter figure includes 20 Nobel laureates.
The letter represents rare public criticism from agency employees who could face blowback for speaking out against a weakening of funding and federal support for climate, environmental and health science. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health made a similar move earlier in June.
“Since the Agency’s founding in 1970, EPA has accomplished (its) mission by leveraging science, funding, and expert staff in service to the American people. Today, we stand together in dissent against the current administration’s focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise,” the letter read.
The EPA responded with a statement that said policy decisions “are a result of a process where Administrator (Lee) Zeldin is briefed on the latest research and science by EPA’s career professionals, and the vast majority who are consummate professionals who take pride in the work this agency does day in and day out.”
The statement also criticized the Biden administration for what it called “attempts to shut down American energy and make our citizens more reliant on foreign fossil fuels,” with worse environmental outcomes around the world as well as economic pain.
Employees want the EPA get back to its mission
“I’m really sad. This agency, that was a superhero for me in my youth, we’re not living up to our ideals under this administration. And I really want us to,” said Amelia Hertzberg, an environmental protection specialist at the EPA who has been on administrative leave since February from the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights, while the administration works to close down her department.
Hertzberg’s work focused on the most vulnerable groups impacted by pollution: pregnant and nursing people, young children and babies, the elderly, people with preexisting and chronic health conditions and people living in communities exposed to higher levels of pollution. That wasn’t supposed to be controversial, but it’s become so in this political climate, she said.
“Americans should be able to drink their water and breathe their air without being poisoned. And if they aren’t, then our government is failing,” she said.
Berg, who also directed the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at NIH from 2003-2011, said the dissent isn’t motivated by partisan criticism. He said the employees hope it will help the EPA get back to the mission for which it was established — which “only matters if you breathe air and drink water.”
The letter outlines what the EPA employees see as five main concerns: undermining public trust; ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters; reversing EPA’s progress in America’s most vulnerable communities; dismantling the Office of Research and Development; and promoting a culture of fear, forcing staff to choose between their livelihood and well-being.
EPA has cut funding and rolled back federal regulations
Under Zeldin, EPA has cut funding for environmental improvements in minority communities, vowed to roll back federal regulations that lower air pollution in national parks and tribal reservations, wants to undo a ban on a type of asbestos and proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas.
Zeldin began reorganizing the EPA’s research and development office as part of his push to slash their budget and gut their study of climate change and environmental justice. And he’s seeking to roll back pollution rules that an Associated Press examination found were estimated to save 30,000 lives and $275 billion every year.
“People are going to die,” said Carol Greider, a Nobel laureate and professor of molecular and cellular biology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who also signed the letter. She described last week’s East Coast heat wave as evidence of the ways people are feeling the effects of climate change. “And if we don’t have scientists at the EPA to understand how what we do that goes into the air affects our health, more people are going to die,” she added.
Berg said the declarations of dissent from both the NIH and EPA employees are noteworthy because they represent scientists speaking out as their careers are on the line. Even non-agency employees have to consider whether the government will withdraw research funding.
Greider, asked about fears of repercussions or retaliation, said she’s “living the repercussions of everything.” She regularly meets with graduate students who are worried about pursuing scientific careers as labs lose funding.
It’s a long-term problem if we aren’t supporting the next generation of scientists, she said: “That’s decades worth of loss.”
___
This story has been updated to correct the number of Nobel laureates signing the document to more than 20, from more than 70.
___
Follow Melina Walling on X @MelinaWalling and Bluesky @melinawalling.bsky.social.
___
The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
