News & Articles

Protecting the water we drink, the air we breath, soil that grows our food, the natural resources that fuel our economy and the natural systems that make the world habitable for our species should not be controversial.

Environmental protection should be one of the most important activities of government. So it is astonishing to read news stories like the ones below.

Wisconsin’ ranks #10 for cuts to environmental protection funding

WPR reports that Wisconsin’s funding for the DNR declined 29% percent, adjusted for inflation, between 2010 and 2024. They cite a report from the Environmental Integrity Project (environmentalintegrity.org) which says two-thirds of states cut staffing and more than half cut funding for environmental agencies since 2010. Wisconsin ranked 10th in the size of the budget cuts.

WPR says the Wisconsin DNR lost more than 500 positions (out of 2,975) between the 2003-05 biennium and current budget. Governors from both parties were responsible for these cuts.

For comparison, Minnesota, which started out with double the spending ($256 million vs $121 million for Wisconsin), increased their funding by 69% since 2010.

Mississippi led the pack with cuts of 71% (“State of Decline: Cuts to State Pollution Control Agencies Compound Damage from the Dismantling of EPA,” Environmental Integrity Project, December 10, 2025).

Also between 2010 and 2024, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) budget declined by 40%. Today the proposed federal budget for FY 2026 cuts the EPA 55%.

The Trump administration is shifting responsibility to the states for environmental oversight. But pollution does not respect state boundaries. Plus federal EPA cuts mean state agencies will have less funding to deal with problems.

All this is a recipe for abandoning necessary conservation and environmental protection. This is the stated goal (in Project 2025) of this administration.

EPA to Ignore human health considerations in setting air pollution standards

According to the New York Times, the EPA will stop considering the impact of air pollution on public health when making enforcement decisions. They will stop assigning monetary value to the health benefits of reducing fine particulate matter and ozone levels –  two of the most widespread and dangerous air pollutants.

Jeremy Symons from the Environmental Protection Network says, “EPA’s current leadership has abandoned EPA’s mission to protect human health and safety. Human lives don’t count. Childhood asthma doesn’t count. It is a shameful abdication of EPA’s responsibility to protect Americans from harm” (“EPA Plans to Ignore Lives Saved When Rolling Back Air Pollution Limits,” Environmental Protection Network, January 12, 2026).

The Environmental Protection Network (environmentalprotectionnetwork.org) began in 2017 in response to EPS cuts. They are an organization of over 650 former EPA career scientists and experts volunteering their time and skills to protect human health and the environment.

What are the health costs of air pollution? A 2021 report said air pollution in the U.S. contributes to 107,000 premature deaths per year, results in $2,500 in average, individual medical costs per year and results in national economic costs of $820 billion a year (“The Costs of Inaction: The Economic Burden of Fossil Fuels and Climate Change on Health in the United States,” produced by The Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, Wisconsin Health Professionals for Climate Action and Natural Resources Defense Council).

Closing the world’s premier atmospheric research center

In December Russell Vought, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, announced the closure of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. NCAR is a world-class, federally funded, climate and weather research institute. They provide weather prediction, climate data sets, atmospheric modeling, supercomputers and other tools to support scientific research across the country. They operate the Mauna Loa Solar Observatory in Hawaii and research facilities in other states. They developed LIDAR (light radar) an important archaeological and earth science tool.

According to their website, since 1960 NCAR has delivered “critical insights that protect lives, support the economy, and strengthen national security” (”White House Says It’s Breaking Up National Center for Atmospheric Research,” Democracy Now Headlines, December 18, 2025).

The NCAR mission is:

To understand the behavior of the atmosphere and related Earth and geospace systems

To support, enhance, and extend the capabilities of the university community and the broader scientific community, nationally and internationally

To foster the transfer of knowledge and technology for the betterment of life on Earth

But scientific research is too “woke” for the Trump administration. Vought accuses NCAR being, ““one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country.” The great leader’s ignorant belief that “climate change is a hoax” trumps any scientific evidence or common sense.

Addressing the climate change is good for the world economy

The United Nation’s Environment Programme, in a recent study, says “addressing the global climate emergency would deliver major economic benefits in addition to creating a cleaner and more  habitable planet.” The seventh edition of the “Global Environmental Outlook” says global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) could increase 6% by 2070 if countries embraced sustainability.

The UN report was produced by 287 multi-disciplinary scientists from 82 countries. It says, “...investing in a stable climate, healthy nature and land, and a pollution-free planet can deliver trillions of dollars each year in additional global GDP, avoid millions of deaths, and lift hundreds of millions of people out of hunger and poverty in the coming decades” (“A future we choose: The seventh edition of the Global Environment Outlook,” UN Environment Programme, December 9, 2025)

A better economy and cleaner world can be accomplished, the report says, by ending the $1.5 trillion a year in government subsidies for polluting industries, promoting green energy and other green technologies, encouraging people to make better personal choices and requiring businesses to pay the full costs of production. Market prices rarely include societal or environmental costs. Also other metrics than GDP should be used to measure social, economic and environmental well-being.

Tragically the “Know Nothings” currently leading our country reject science, climate change, green energy, environmental protection and sustainable economics. Their agenda is to protect polluting industries by watering down standards, gutting regulations and cutting funding and staffing for environmental agencies. Republicans have always opposed any restrictions on business no matter how harmful to the public. They believe in “freedom” – the freedom for business to do whatever they want regardless of the impact on people or the planet. The damage this administration is inflicting on the environment will be severe and, in many cases, irreversible.