“You’ve done more to dismantle this agency than probably all of your predecessors put together. That may be a source of pride for you, but it is not for the American people.”
Washington, D.C. — Today, during an Environmental and Public Works Committee hearing, U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) slammed Lee Zeldin, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, for his potentially devastating cuts to the EPA that would have a lasting impact on families across California and the United States. During the exchange, Schiff hammered Zeldin on the legacy he will be leaving by eliminating more than half of the agency charged with keeping American drinking water and air clean.
Watch the full clip HERE. Download the clip HERE.
Key Excerpts:
On the disastrous impact of EPA’s budget cuts on Americans:
You propose cutting America’s environmental agency by 55%, meaning that — in your view and that of President Trump — more than half of the environmental efforts of the EPA, more than half of the efforts to make sure Americans have clean air and clean water, are just a waste. They’re just a waste. Meaning that, Californians, and people all over the country, when they breathe the air, thanks to your good work, it’ll mean there’s more diesel and more other particulate matter in the air. When they drink a glass of water, they may not be able to see it, but this water that Americans drink is going to have more chemicals, like PFAS. Forever chemicals in their water. This will be your good work.
On the lasting legacy Zeldin will leave if he continues with these cuts:
I want to be very specific about the legacy you’re going to leave if you’re successful in eliminating half of our efforts to clean our water and our air. Your legacy will be more lung cancer. It’ll be more bladder cancer. It’ll be more head and neck cancer. It’ll be more breast cancer. It’ll be more leukemia and pancreatic cancer, more liver cancer, more skin cancer, more kidney cancer, more testicular cancer, more colorectal cancer, more rare cancers of innumerable varieties. That will be your legacy.
I don’t know that that’s a legacy that anyone should want to have. My kids are going to be breathing that air just like yours. My family is going to be drinking the water just like yours. We may not be able to pinpoint just who gets cancer because you’ve done away with half the budget of those looking out for our clean water and clean air. But it’s going to be somebody’s kids, it’s going to be somebody’s family. To put this in more specific terms, there are 22 grants frozen by the EPA focused on improving health and reducing pollution, many of which directly impact children. For example, one project in Santa Ana, California provided funding to help detect and prevent lead poisoning in children. According to the census, about ten percent of the population in Santa Ana are under the age of nine. With a population of about 310,000 people, that means that 31,000 children are at risk of lead poisoning in Santa Ana without this funding. What is it about this grant that you and EPA believe is problematic enough to freeze this funding and put potentially 31,000 children at risk?
###