The EPA's Commitment to Children's Environmental Health: History and Current Challenges.

Children's environmental health (CEH) has a 25-year history at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), during which the agency has advanced CEH through research, policy, and programs that address children's special vulnerability to environmental harm. However, the Trump administration took many actions that weakened efforts to improve CEH. The actions included downgrading or ignoring CEH concerns in decision-making, defunding research, sidelining the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, and rescinding regulations that were written in part to protect children. To improve CEH, federal environmental statutes should be reviewed to ensure they are sufficiently protective. The administrator should ensure the EPA's children's health agenda encompasses the most important current challenges and that there is accountability for improvement. Guidance documents should be reviewed and updated to be protective of CEH and the federal lead strategy refocused on primary prevention. The Office of Children's Health Protection's historically low funding and staffing should be remedied. Finally, the EPA should update CEH data systems, reinvigorate the role of the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, and restore funding for CEH research that is aligned with environmental justice and regulatory decision-making needs. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):124-134. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306537).

Re-envisioning EPA and its work in the post-Trump era: perspectives from EPA employees.

The Trump administration has severely curtailed the work of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has rolled back environmental protections, lost ground on addressing climate change and environmental justice, and shed large numbers of experienced staff. All of this has accelerated a longer-term decline in EPA resources, expertise, and authority. Here, we present perspectives of EPA employees and retirees on reconfiguring and strengthening the agency to address current and future environmental health problems, based on qualitative data obtained through 100 semi-structured interviews with 76 current and former EPA employees. Interviewees emphasized a number of internal and external issues, including a hyper-partisan context in which the agency operates, lack of public understanding of the extent of domestic and global environmental problems, budget shortfalls, staffing and leadership challenges, reduced scientific capacity and use of science in decision-making, insufficient attention to environmental justice, and lagging technology. We argue that reforms cannot only be expert-driven but must also come from the public, incorporating community driven solutions and focusing on remedying environmental injustice.

History of US Presidential Assaults on Modern Environmental Health Protection.

The Trump administration has undertaken an assault on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an agency critical to environmental health. This assault has precedents in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The early Reagan administration (1981-1983) launched an overt attack on the EPA, combining deregulation with budget and staff cuts, whereas the George W. Bush administration (2001-2008) adopted a subtler approach, undermining science-based policy. The current administration combines both these strategies and operates in a political context more favorable to its designs on the EPA. The Republican Party has shifted right and now controls the executive branch and both chambers of Congress. Wealthy donors, think tanks, and fossil fuel and chemical industries have become more influential in pushing deregulation. Among the public, political polarization has increased, the environment has become a partisan issue, and science and the mainstream media are distrusted. For these reasons, the effects of today's ongoing regulatory delays, rollbacks, and staff cuts may well surpass those of the administrations of Reagan and Bush, whose impacts on environmental health were considerable.