Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Scott Pruitt and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke have decided to replace nine of the eighteen-member Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC), which recommends whether or not the EPA’s scientific research addresses important evidence. Board members were shocked to find out that their jobs had been terminated. Although board members were informed twice that they would be kept on for another term, this was not the case in reality.

These firings come after President Trump directed Pruitt to remake the EPA, pushing for cuts in its budget, such as a 40% reduction in the main scientific branch. Ponisseril Somasundaran, a chemist at Columbia University who focuses on managing hazardous waste, says “I think they want to bring in business and industry people” to restrict regulations they feel will hurt business interests instead of focusing on improving the environment. Taking this into consideration, it is apparent that the cuts are a political move with a lack of environmental concern.

The recent EPA budget cut not only affects the employment of important scientists on the review board, but also many facets of our daily life. Too often U.S. citizens take for granted the services that the EPA provides. For example, the EPA is instrumental in ensuring clean tap water. Given the recent tainted tap water in Flint, Michigan, it is imperative the EPA has enough funding to provide these services essential to survival. Additionally, the EPA is responsible for a Superfund cleanup program which could save taxpayers money in terms of health care costs, as the project helps to remove thorium from the environment. According to the National Cancer Institute, thorium exposure is linked to increased risk of liver tumors, as well as lung, pancreatic, and bone cancers.

Similar to the Superfund program, the EPA also carries out “a program that helps towns and cities redevelop former industrial sites,” called the Brownfield cleanup project. Although some, such as the U.S. President, argue that the EPA is a business-killing agencies, programs like the Brownfield project prove these claims false. The United States Environmental Protection Agency website contains multiple pages dedicated to “Brownfield Success Stories,” like when the EPA took a “.87-acre urban Brownfields property” in Boise, Idaho and used it as a “catalyst for [a] badly needed downtown residential development.” Because of these programs and funding for such programs, the EPA is able to clean up and develop communities not too different from our own here in West Hartford.

Many individuals in the West Hartford community have strong feelings about these new budget cuts.  Mr. Norland, an Environmental Science teacher at Hall High School, believes that giving the EPA less power is negative because “most profit-driven corporations are not willing to comply with sustainable guidelines.” Norland posits that most corporations will act in their own self-interests, without true concern for their environmental impact. He also believes that the EPA budget cut will probably increase activity in the fossil fuel industry, adding additional impact to the environment. Without the EPA protecting and restoring our environment, it is imperative we take initiative to protect it ourselves.