EPA chief Lee Zeldin, settling into 2nd year, proposes major cuts to state grants

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency, led by former Long Island congressman Lee Zeldin, is proposing steep reductions to state grants next year, calling for a 90% cut to funds that go toward a range of local clean water and air quality initiatives across states.

Zeldin, 46, now settling into his second year as EPA administrator, continues to call for a major downsizing of the agency, arguing that states should assume more responsibility over environmental protection funding. But his proposal to cut the agency’s annual budget in half next year to $4.5 billion has faced pushback from environmentalists and lawmakers.

Under the proposed 2027 budget, which Zeldin defended in a series of congressional hearings last month, the EPA would cut $3.6 billion in State and Tribal Assistance Grants and other grant programs that trickle down to states.

"This budget proposal captures significant efficiencies and a returned focus on what Congress has directed us to do, demonstrating our commitment to a leaner, more efficient, and accountable EPA," Zeldin told the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee during an April 29 budget hearing.

The budget proposal is the latest push by Zeldin to dramatically overhaul the agency to fit with President Donald Trump's vision for a smaller federal government and less regulation over manufacturing and energy companies. Zeldin has argued the agency has become bloated with programs and rules that are not mandated by federal law, and has enacted a number of policy changes praised by Trump but denounced by environmentalists. Those objections include rolling back the Obama-era Endangerment Finding, a legal opinion that has been used for the past 17 years to set regulations aimed at reducing carbon-emissions.

The EPA’s 98-page budget proposal argues that "states and local governments are more than capable of funding their own programs," but environmental advocates contend clean water and air quality are issues that transcend state borders and require federal coordination and funding.

"The federal government has a critical role in protecting the public's health and safety, and that's exactly what these grant-funded programs do," said Adrienne Esposito, executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, a statewide environmental advocacy group based in Farmingdale.

Esposito, in a phone interview, derided the push to cut EPA funding as Senate Republicans float a plan to provide $1 billion in federal funding for security enhancements at the White House, tied to President Donald Trump’s new ballroom project. Trump has said the ballroom will be paid with private money, and Senate Republican leaders have said the federal funding would be solely directed at "security enhancements" for the new structure. 

"We really wished that this administration valued clean water as much as they value a new ballroom," Esposito told Newsday in a phone interview. "The priorities of the American people are certainly clean water and clean air, not an elaborate ballroom."

The state Department of Environmental Conservation, in a statement, said the EPA's proposed budget would cut approximately $500 million in funding, "eliminating most, if not all, federal assistance for state implementation of critical environmental priorities."

"Federal funding makes up nearly one third of DEC’s budget, paying for approximately 265 staff each year that help carry out federal laws that are delegated to states, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act," an agency spokesman wrote in an e-mail to Newsday. "If enacted, these cuts would reduce DEC's capacity to maintain its air and water quality monitoring networks, help support clean water goals, inspect facilities, issue permits, and safeguard our state’s natural resources across the board."

John Walke, a senior attorney at the National Resources Defense Council, a Washington-based environmental advocacy group, told Newsday it’s unlikely the budget proposal passes in its current form, noting that even with Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress, a similar proposal to gut the EPA budget was blocked last year. Lawmakers did ultimately approve an overall 3.5% cut to the agency and nearly $300 million in cuts to state grants.

"This is a classic dumb political dance in Washington, because an administration like the Trump Administration proposes cuts that they know Congress will not enact because it goes to the heart of projects in their districts and states," Walke said, adding that presidential budget proposals act mainly as a messaging tool to relay the administration’s priorities.

Trump’s overall budget plan for 2027 calls for a 10% cut to domestic spending while requesting a 42% increase in military spending.

Walke said while some of the EPA’s proposed cuts may not end up being as large when Congress ultimately negotiates a new budget deal, any level of cuts to states will ultimately be felt. That's because while some states with strong environmental records like New York might try to find a way to fill funding gaps, other states whose economies are dependent on coal energy production and large-scale manufacturing may not try to make up for the loss of federal funding.

"When those states don’t crack down on pollution in their states ... when they don’t have the budgets to run the air programs to crack down on that pollution, it impacts New York," Walke said. "So New York will get kind of a double whammy from states that don’t make up the budget shortfalls the way New York probably would to run their programs responsibly."

Matt Salton, federal policy manager for the New York League of Conservation Voters, said Zeldin, a former state senator and U.S. House member from Shirley, should understand as a former local lawmaker that states and local governments cannot "just simply absorb the costs of what these programs cost without the federal government helping."

"The federal partnership that we have has been long established, and it's essential to protecting clean air, clean water, and public health in New York," Salton said. "These programs are really meant for communities to get resources and to have technical assistance to make sure that people are healthy, for things like air monitoring, to test water to make sure it's clean, and they can't do these alone without the federal government."

Asked about the concerns raised by local environmentalists, the EPA press office in an e-mailed statement said: "The Trump EPA is laser focused on ensuring every dollar we spend supports EPA’s core mission protecting human health and the environment for Long Island residents and all Americans."

By Laura Figueroa Hernandez

laura.figueroa@newsday.com@Laura_Figueroa

Laura Figueroa Hernandez is the White House correspondent and previously covered New York City politics and government. She joined Newsday in 2012 after covering state and local politics for The Miami Herald.