Dozens of House Democrats pushed back on planned Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cuts in a Thursday letter to the agency.
“We are particularly concerned by the proposal to eliminate up to 75 percent of employees within EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD),” the letter, from Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and addressed to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, reads.
“Firing nearly 1,200 dedicated ORD public servants across the country would decimate the scientific backbone of EPA which provides independent, objective, and unparallelled research that informs Agency assessments and decision-making,” they added.
The letter featured the signatures of over 60 House Democrats including Reps. Nikema Williams (Ga.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Don Beyer (Va.), Joe Neguse (Colo.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).
The Hill reported last week that the EPA was considering the cutting of its science arm and dropping most of the employees of the branch, per documents reviewed by Democratic staff for the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
The termination of the Office of Research and Development as an EPA National Program Office is called for in a plan reviewed by committee staffers. Fifty percent to 70 percent of the 1,540 staffers in the office would be cut under the plan.
“While no decisions have been made yet, we are actively listening to employees at all levels to gather ideas on how to better fulfill agency statutory obligations, increase efficiency, and ensure the EPA is as up-to-date and effective as ever,” EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou said in a previous statement.
In his letter, Landsman said dropping “the majority of ORD employees would be particularly harmful to EPA’s work to address industrial pollution, contaminated air and drinking water, environmental health, and worsening natural disasters.”
The Ohio Democrat also questioned the EPA about the reasoning behind the staff cuts in the plan and the way the agency is prepping “to mitigate the loss of scientific expertise, institutional knowledge, and subject matter capacity resulting from this proposed action.”
The Hill has reached out to the EPA for comment.
