President-elect Donald Trump is poised to implement changes to the administrative state’s operations, raising questions about the future of the Environmental Protection Agency.
In Trump’s first term, the EPA experienced a significant staff reduction due to an extensive hiring freeze and many employees leaving the agency, including nearly 1,200 scientists and policy experts. President Joe Biden made efforts to rebuild the agency through significant climate legislation and, as of last year, hired almost 2,000 employees. Still, the incoming Trump administration could reverse those restoring efforts.
While campaigning, Trump vowed to “demolish the deep state” within the government.
Trump announced the new Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory group looking to make significant government changes, such as spending cuts and staff reductions. The EPA could be one of the agencies targeted by the group.
DOGE leaders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have recommended that 75% of the federal workforce and agencies be cut and move federal agencies outside Washington, D.C.
Jeff Ruch, director of Pacific Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a nonprofit organization that supports government employees at environmental agencies, said EPA employees are considering retiring or leaving before the new administration takes office.
“I would imagine the consensus is that EPA is probably the least favorite agency for the incoming Trump administration,” said Ruch.
The DOGE is billed in large part as reducing regulations, and the EPA is a major issuer of rules. Ruch said the EPA has fewer than 20,000 employees, and scrapping thousands of employees would mean a significant cut in their workforce.
Ruch said staff reductions could limit the agency’s ability to regulate and enforce laws.
“One of the difficulties the first Trump administration had was the poor quality of their regulatory work, which caused some of their initiatives to be reversed by the courts,” he said, adding that the administration may face the same challenges as it looks to deregulate while eliminating senior policy employees.
Stan Meiburg, former acting deputy administrator for the EPA, said there’s “a lot of anxiety” about what’s to come in the next Trump administration for federal agencies.
“The real issue has been this institutional animus that you see coming out of other elements from people who either speak or represent the thinking of the incoming administration. This notion that you’re going to sort of go through with a sickle and cut agencies,” said Meiburg.
He noted what Russell Vought, who served as Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, said in a recent speech: “We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can’t do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so. We want to put them in trauma.”
While the first administration had many policy disagreements, Meiburg said there was no systematic attempt to “tear the institution apart.” Trump named Vought to lead the OMB again in his incoming administration.
Before being named director of OMB, Vought sat for an interview with Tucker Carlson. Vought told Carlson, “There certainly is going to be mass layoffs and firings, particularly at some of the agencies that we don’t even think should exist.”
He helped lead the charge in 2020 on an executive order that implemented Schedule F, which classifies more civil servants as political appointees, making it easier to fire federal workers.
Vought said the incoming administration needs federal employees who are committed to helping accomplish the White House’s agenda.
Schedule F would make federal workers “at-will employees,” ensuring the president has control over the executive branch, he added.
“What you need is people who are able to absorb political heat. They don’t have a fear of conflict. They can execute under withering enemy fire. They are up to speed, and they are no-nonsense in their own ability to know what must be done,” said Vought.
“And they are unbelievably committed to the President and his agenda. And truly believe, in their bones, that they’re not there for their own agenda. They’re there for what President Trump was elected to do,” he added.
William Resh, an associate professor at the University of Southern California Price School, said he “fully expects” the incoming administration to reimplement Schedule F unless lawmakers act, but less likely to happen under a GOP-controlled Congress.
Resh said via email that some believe “the EPA has too much discretionary power” and that reducing the agency’s employees reduces its capacity to exercise that power.
“You use Schedule F to target those most endowed with that discretion as a function of their position,” he added. “Those are most likely the EPA’s most competent and experienced employees who are then more competitive in the general labor market and, therefore, more likely to leave.”
Resh said, “People intrinsically value autonomy [when] applying their expertise. If you take that away, they are not likely to work for you much longer.”
Implementing Schedule F will require several steps, including following the Administrative Procedure Act, and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management would need to undo Biden’s rule, preventing further reinstatements of Schedule F.
Resh expects many litigation challenges against any reimplementation of Schedule F.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Meanwhile, unions representing the EPA and Department of the Interior are working to extend or finalize their collective bargaining agreements before the Trump administration.
E&E News reported last month that AFGE Council 238, representing more than 8,000 EPA employees, is asking the Biden administration to revise its agreement to extend beyond the Trump administration.