Since taking office in January 2017, President Donald Trump has overseen the shrinking of the unconstitutional Environmental Protection Agency by more than 700 workers, and that's a positive thing for Americans.
The story comes by way of The New York Times & ProPublica, both of which are clearly in support of bigger government.
WASHINGTON — More than 700 people have left the Environmental Protection Agency since President Trump took office, a wave of departures that puts the administration nearly a quarter of the way toward its goal of shrinking the agency to levels last seen during the Reagan administration.
Of the employees who have quit, retired or taken a buyout package since the beginning of the year, more than 200 are scientists. An additional 96 are environmental protection specialists, a broad category that includes scientists as well as others experienced in investigating and analyzing pollution levels. Nine department directors have departed the agency as well as dozens of attorneys and program managers. Most of the employees who have left are not being replaced.
The cuts deepen a downward trend at the agency that began under the Obama administration in response to Republican-led budget constraints that left the agency with about 15,000 employees at the end of his term. The reductions have accelerated under President Trump, who campaigned on a promise to dramatically scale back the E.P.A., leaving only what he called “little tidbits” in place. Current and former employees say unlike during the Obama years, the agency has no plans to replace workers, and they expect deeper cuts to come.
If you recall, immediately after taking office, President Trump signed an executive order that for every new regulation, two regulations must be revoked.
Apparently, that has had a strong effect on the EPA and other agencies.
“Earlier this year, we set a target of adding zero new regulatory costs onto the American economy," Trump said. "Today, I'm proud to announce that we beat our goal by a lot… for the first time in decades, we achieved regulatory savings. We blew our target out of the water. Within our first 11 months, we cancelled or delayed over 1,500 planned regulatory actions. And instead of eliminating two old regulations for every one new regulation we have eliminated 22 -- 22 -- that's a big difference. We aimed for two for one, and, in 2017, we hit twenty-two for one.”
This is a big deal for Americans. As The Common Constitutionalist wrote earlier this month:
In 2016 the Mercatus Center at George Mason University published a study on the cost of regulations.
Their findings should floor anyone, except of course, those in government.
The first thing I noticed was their use of proper terminology.
They did entitle their piece as “The Cumulative Cost of Regulations,” but went on to describe it as “the effect of government intervention on economic growth.”
I would have added the word “negative,” as the cost of their intervention is rarely if ever positive, but no matter.
The study spanned from 1977 to 2012.
They found that by 2012, the regulatory burden had become great enough to have caused the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to be “$4 trillion smaller than it would have been in the absence of regulatory growth since 1980.”
That works out to costing every American $13,000.
And this figure was derived only half way through the Regulator-in-Chief Obama’s eight year term. One could comfortably add another $1 trillion by now.
In 2016, America’s GDP was $18.57 trillion, which means that regulations alone are costing the nation approximately one quarter of the total.
That’s like forcibly taking a 25% percent pay cut.
Mercatus adds that the most insidious part of the regulatory State is that once the framework for a regulation is in place, bureaucrats are free to pile on more rules to the existing framework, making them even more onerous.
EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said the agency was running more efficiently.
“With only 10 months on the job, Administrator Pruitt is unequivocally doing more with less to hold polluters accountable and to protect our environment,” he said.
However, things have not been all positive. EPA head Scott Pruitt has received more death threats than any other EPA leader.
Additionally, the EPA is set to have its budget slashed by thirty percent.
The New York Post adds:
The EPA has experienced a downward trend since the Obama administration after Republican-led budget constraints left it with about 15,000 workers at the end of his term.
The reductions have accelerated under Trump, who campaigned on a promise to drastically scale back the EPA, leaving only what he called “little tidbits” in place.
“The reason EPA went down to 15,000 employees under Obama is because of pressure from Republicans. This is the effort of the Republicans under the Obama administration on steroids,” said John J. O’Grady, head of the American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents EPA workers.
Trump has called climate change a hoax and announced his intention to withdraw the US from the Paris climate accords.
Pruitt, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke all question the scientific consensus that carbon released into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels is the main driver of global warming.
Well, all of that is true. A lot of the "global warming"/"climate change" hoax is nothing more than Communism disguised as a concern for the environment.
Meanwhile, many of the same politicians selling that snake oil are busy behind the scenes polluting our skies and testing chemicals via the military on unsuspecting American citizens.
For one, I'm happy that government is downsizing at the EPA. The EPA, along with a lot of other non-essential alphabet agencies needs to permanently be disbanded, and a return to constitutional government needs to be implemented.
This is good news, America!Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.