This month, I spoke against one of the most alarming proposals I’ve encountered in years of climate advocacy: abolishing danger detection.
Honestly, it was emotional. I listened for hours to doctors, lawyers, scientists, and students. It was heart-wrenching to hear students wonder if they would have a future. One woman shared how pollution was making her cancer worse.
This wasn’t just about policies; it was about survival.
You would expect the Environmental Protection Agency to protect our environment. Yet, under the current leadership, its mission seems broken and even shamelessly undermined.
I’ve been a climate activist since I was 12, tackling environmental issues both domestically and internationally. Now, as I look back on my career, I can confidently say I’ve never seen a political climate this hostile towards our future.
This year, the EPA announced a major rollback of environmental protections—31 items, to be specific. They seemed almost proud of it. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin even declared it a victory for Americans, but it felt more like a gift to corporate polluters. In a press release, the agency outlined a full assault on environmental justice, reducing the protection against pollutants like mercury and particulate matter.
Now, the corruption runs deeper as the administration works to roll back the discovery of danger. This is pivotal for any modern climate strategy. The EPA’s scientific and legal findings indicate that gases such as carbon dioxide and methane pose risks to public health and welfare.
This finding, backed by extensive peer-reviewed research, legally justifies the EPA’s authority to regulate climate pollution under Clean Air Act.
Eliminating it would be devastating. It won’t change the reality of the ongoing climate crisis; it will only limit our ability to address it.
The public comment period on this proposal is open until September 22. I had the chance to testify directly to the EPA.
During my testimony, I tried to emphasize that it’s pointless to debate whether climate change is real. Zeldin knows it is. We both hail from Long Island, and he even served as my representative.
I vividly recall Hurricane Sandy tearing apart our community. The costs were staggering—over $60 billion. Climate science shows that storms are intensifying due to climate change, with an extra $8 billion in damages attributed to rising sea levels.
These costs are just going up. Disasters like Sandy aren’t rare anymore; they’re becoming the new normal.
I’ve communicated with Zeldin’s council office and successfully garnered his support for the Great American Outdoors Act, which invested billions in our national parks. That bipartisan effort proved that prioritizing public land and health is achievable.
Today, though, those parks are in jeopardy. As I spoke, I could literally see them burning.
The national parks we cherish face immense threats, with iconic landscapes—like those in Glacier National Park—possibly disappearing entirely. Even the Saguaros at Saguro National Park are at risk of collapsing due to extreme heat.
And let’s not ignore the staggering costs from wildfires—over $250 billion in California alone and ongoing flood disasters in Florida. Climate threats keep escalating across the nation.
This proposal doesn’t reflect a sincere policy revision; it’s an ideologically motivated attempt to undermine environmental protections in favor of corporate profit.
No one is asking for these changes. Through my collaboration with Yale’s Program, I’ve seen that Americans—whether they identify as Democrats, Republicans, or independents—are consistently in favor of stronger climate initiatives.
Cities, states, and businesses are all making strides toward clean energy and resilience. The federal government should lead the way, not hinder these efforts.
I oppose the corrupt political environment that has brought us to this critical juncture. It’s evident that this administration is too closely tied to the oil industry. As climate disasters worsen and people suffer, it’s clear they’re turning a blind eye.
This proposal sends a troubling message to polluters: that science is negotiable and public health is expendable.
We already exist in a world shaped by climate change. If we dismantle the process of discovering danger, the outcome will be a significant increase in human suffering and economic burdens.
This essential legal protection needs to remain intact. The EPA must uphold its obligations to safeguard the environment.
Saad Amer is a climate activist focused on environmental justice. He is a sustainability consultant, founder of Justice Environment, and works with the United Nations.
