Eyes on the Prize: Trump EPA Moves Repeal Physics

Just so we understand what this WHOLE MAGA thing is about, what it’s always been about, who is behind it, and who has been driving the narrative for 40 years, it is this, and nothing other than this.
All the other destruction to the Constitution, to our National Security, to NATO, to our alliances and economic place in the world, to people of color, women, and people of every sexual persuasion, to unions and workers, to Health Care, to our rule of law, Freedom of the Press, to Housing, Infrastructure, National Parks or Education – all of that, is just collateral damage and roadkill in the pursuit of this over-arching ultimate goal.

Politico:

The Environmental Protection Agency will move to reverse its 2009 declaration that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare — a step that would threaten most major climate regulations and make it harder for future presidents to enact new ones.

Three people granted anonymity to discuss the action said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has recommended to the White House that the agency overhaul the finding, which underpins all Clean Air Act climate regulations.

The action, which was first reported by The Washington Post, represents President Donald Trump’s most aggressive action to date to wipe out the federal effort to combat climate change, which he has repeatedly labeled a “hoax” despite soaring global temperatures and the vast body of scientific evidence that it is fueling disasters around the globe.

Trump has long sought to undermine the science of manmade warming that is at the heart of the endangerment finding.

“The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” he famously declared on Twitter in 2012.

It is unclear exactly how Trump’s EPA will seek to unwind the landmark finding, said three people familiar with the plans, who were granted anonymity to share details of not yet final decisions. They all expected it to reject the bedrock justification for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in some fashion to give agencies freer rein to dismantle climate rules.

Zeldin sent his recommendation to the White House last week, two of those people said. One person said it called for a formal rulemaking.

The recommendation is now part of a wider review that includes the White House Office of Management and Budget, said the other person. That person said the White House is still weighing how far it is willing to go to attack the foundational science underlying the endangerment finding, a step that would generate political and public backlash.

“They were trying to answer a very narrow question, which was: ‘Does it make policy sense?’” said the person, referencing conversations with administration officials. “The next round is more complicated, which is: ‘Do we want to spend time on it?’ … Pursuing a change, whether an overhaul or a modest amount of change, is going to cost political capital. It’s not going to be free.”

Mandy Gunasekara, who served as EPA chief of staff during the first Trump administration, told POLITICO’S E&E News on Wednesday that a review was justified.

“I think fundamentally, since 2009 the understanding of climate science and the evolution has significantly evolved, and EPA policies and future decisions reflect the latest and greatest numbers,” said Gunasekara.

“Whatever policy decisions are ultimately made by the administrator and his team, they should reflect the science,” she added. “And I don’t think that any science should be off limits for reconsideration.”

Supporters of overturning the endangerment finding say they expect EPA to follow a regular rulemaking process, which would include publishing a draft finding in the Federal Register and taking public comment.

“I think it’s the procedure they have to take,” said Steve Milloy, who worked on Trump’s first transition and is on the board of the Heartland Institute, an anti-climate advocacy group. “[H]opefully that will be done as quickly as possible.”

The Obama EPA spent eleven months developing the endangerment finding, and Milloy said it might take the Trump team longer than that. The first step, he said, would be for EPA to assemble new scientific advisory boards to replace the ones it disbanded last month.

And then it will be litigated — perhaps all the way to the Supreme Court.

“Who knows, Massachusetts vs EPA may even come down,” he said, referring to the landmark Supreme Court decision that led greenhouse gases to be regulated under the Clean Air Act. “The possibilities are endless.”

—–

And by the way, speaking of collateral damage:

Reuters:

U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday said that Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin is planning to cut 65% of his agency’s workforce, a move that came as a surprise to agency staff.

Trump revealed the potential EPA staff reduction at the first meeting of his cabinet, opens new tab, where his downsizing czar Elon Musk pledged that he would move quickly to slash federal spending.

“I spoke with Lee Zeldin, and he thinks he’s going to be cutting 65 or so percent of the people from environmental [sic],” Trump said. “And we’re going to speed up the process too at the same time.”