White House Budget to Cut EPA

[autigeremt 6,602]

http://www.ercweb.com/resources/viewtip.aspx?id=8573

The White House’s 2018 budget proposed, if enacted, will cut several programs that are listed at the end of this article, and will shift many environmental responsibilities to the states. However, funding to the states will be dramatically reduced. Prior to the budget cuts, federal grants to the states supported an average of 27% of state environmental agency budgets (EABs). While EPA’s overall budget is reduced 31%, the proposed FY18 reduction of $482M is a 44.5% cut to state categorical grants from the $1.082B annualized FY17 level. The Superfund proposed FY18 reduction of $330M is a 30% cut from the $1.092B annualized FY17 level. The proposed FY18 reduction of $233M is a 48% cut to the EPA Office of Research and Development from the $483M annualized FY17 level.

 

The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), a national non-profit, non-partisan association of state and territorial environmental agency leaders, released its Green Report – Status of State Environmental Agency Budgets, FY2013-15, showing that average federal funding to state EABs already has experienced a decline. “Frankly, language in the President’s budget blueprint that ‘EPA would primarily support States and Tribes in their important role protecting air, land, and water in the 21st Century’ is wholly inconsistent with the Categorical Grant cuts,” says ECOS Executive Director & General Counsel Alexandra Dunn. ”States need these federal funds to carry out their critical functions of advancing human health and protecting the environment, and to issue permits that keep local economies moving. States operate 96% of federally delegated and authorized environmental programs and manage funds to implement environmental regulations and are an important link to the local regulated community and local governments.”

 

“We appreciate that the important state revolving loan funds are proposed for a less than one percent increase, and not a decrease,” said ECOS President John Linc Stine, Commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. “However, the cuts to the core state programmatic grants are untenable. States welcome renewed confidence in our work and ability to protect human health and the environment. However, as ECOS’ report shows, the federal government supports this function at an average of 27 percent. A cut of nearly 45%—while state legislatures are in session—is frankly unworkable.”

 

ECOS’ March 15 report analyzed budget information from 46 state environmental agencies, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, finding state EABs increased 7% over three years, with the average state EAB being $203M over three years. The report looks at three primary funding sources—state EAB general fund support, federal government funding, and fees and other funding. The findings over three years are that: state EAB general fund support increased by $335M (35%); federal government funding support to state EABs decreased by $64M (3%); and fee and other fund support—the largest major funding source for state EABs—grew by $403M (10%).

 

Among the programs that will be cut or modified at EPA and other agencies

• Eliminates 3,200 direct federal EPA jobs, and associated jobs connected to EPA, environmental projects at the state level, educational institutions, and government contractors

• Cuts funding for Superfund cleanups

• Eliminates funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Chesapeake Bay Cleanup program

• Eliminates EnergyStar, the Environmental Justice Program, the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, and infrastructure assistance to Alaska Native Villages

• Eliminates funding for Clean Power Plan, international climate change programs, climate change research and partnership programs, and related efforts

• Cuts environmental education programs that were created through the National Environmental Education Act (NEEA), under the Bush administration in 1990

• Increases funding for fossil fuel development on public lands and waters

• Halts the creation of any new parks or public lands and the preservation of important historic sites

• Cuts $1.5 billion from the Department of the Interior

• Eliminates the DOE’s Weatherization Assistance and Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Programs which help millions of low-income Americans stay warm and keep the lights on

[TexasTiger 12,847]

3 hours ago, autigeremt said:

http://www.ercweb.com/resources/viewtip.aspx?id=8573

The White House’s 2018 budget proposed, if enacted, will cut several programs that are listed at the end of this article, and will shift many environmental responsibilities to the states. However, funding to the states will be dramatically reduced. Prior to the budget cuts, federal grants to the states supported an average of 27% of state environmental agency budgets (EABs). While EPA’s overall budget is reduced 31%, the proposed FY18 reduction of $482M is a 44.5% cut to state categorical grants from the $1.082B annualized FY17 level. The Superfund proposed FY18 reduction of $330M is a 30% cut from the $1.092B annualized FY17 level. The proposed FY18 reduction of $233M is a 48% cut to the EPA Office of Research and Development from the $483M annualized FY17 level.

 

 

 

 

 

The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), a national non-profit, non-partisan association of state and territorial environmental agency leaders, released its Green Report – Status of State Environmental Agency Budgets, FY2013-15, showing that average federal funding to state EABs already has experienced a decline. “Frankly, language in the President’s budget blueprint that ‘EPA would primarily support States and Tribes in their important role protecting air, land, and water in the 21st Century’ is wholly inconsistent with the Categorical Grant cuts,” says ECOS Executive Director & General Counsel Alexandra Dunn. ”States need these federal funds to carry out their critical functions of advancing human health and protecting the environment, and to issue permits that keep local economies moving. States operate 96% of federally delegated and authorized environmental programs and manage funds to implement environmental regulations and are an important link to the local regulated community and local governments.”

 

 

 

 

 

“We appreciate that the important state revolving loan funds are proposed for a less than one percent increase, and not a decrease,” said ECOS President John Linc Stine, Commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. “However, the cuts to the core state programmatic grants are untenable. States welcome renewed confidence in our work and ability to protect human health and the environment. However, as ECOS’ report shows, the federal government supports this function at an average of 27 percent. A cut of nearly 45%—while state legislatures are in session—is frankly unworkable.”

 

 

 

 

 

ECOS’ March 15 report analyzed budget information from 46 state environmental agencies, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, finding state EABs increased 7% over three years, with the average state EAB being $203M over three years. The report looks at three primary funding sources—state EAB general fund support, federal government funding, and fees and other funding. The findings over three years are that: state EAB general fund support increased by $335M (35%); federal government funding support to state EABs decreased by $64M (3%); and fee and other fund support—the largest major funding source for state EABs—grew by $403M (10%).

 

 

 

 

 

Among the programs that will be cut or modified at EPA and other agencies

 

 

• Eliminates 3,200 direct federal EPA jobs, and associated jobs connected to EPA, environmental projects at the state level, educational institutions, and government contractors

   

• Cuts funding for Superfund cleanups

   

• Eliminates funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Chesapeake Bay Cleanup program

   

• Eliminates EnergyStar, the Environmental Justice Program, the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, and infrastructure assistance to Alaska Native Villages

   

• Eliminates funding for Clean Power Plan, international climate change programs, climate change research and partnership programs, and related efforts

   

• Cuts environmental education programs that were created through the National Environmental Education Act (NEEA), under the Bush administration in 1990

   

• Increases funding for fossil fuel development on public lands and waters

   

• Halts the creation of any new parks or public lands and the preservation of important historic sites

   

• Cuts $1.5 billion from the Department of the Interior

   

• Eliminates the DOE’s Weatherization Assistance and Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Programs which help millions of low-income Americans stay warm and keep the lights on

   

Personal thoughts?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

11 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Personal thoughts?

We need more weapons.  A lot more weapons.  Enough that no none will mess with us.  We are always being attacked.

[autigeremt 6,602]

44 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Personal thoughts?

I believe Trump will try to dismantle the Clean Water Act as much as he possibly can.