The EPA, led by administrator Lee Zeldin, has kicked off what he characterized as “the biggest deregulation action in US history,” unveiling over 30 environmental regulations. Zeldin suggests this will spark a “great American comeback.”
Yet, it mirrors the challenges of the 1960s when environmental neglect—polluted air, catastrophic oil spills, and toxic rivers—showed the consequences of prioritizing profits over public health and the planet.
Back then, alarming revelations about harmful pesticides prompted governments to step up regulations. Now, the Trump administration appears to be swayed by recommendations from Project 2025, which advocates for rolling back protections for both public health and the environment.
This shift suggests that the government is proud of saving money, but curiously, it hasn’t addressed the potential costs of deregulation—a topic that could use more discussion. Reports indicate that the rules Zeldin targets prevent around 30,000 deaths annually and provide society with $275 billion in savings each year. It’s a significant trade-off.
EPA regulations aim to keep industries from exploiting resources purely for profits, which can lead to serious health issues—everything from cancer and asthma to gastrointestinal diseases. These rules help safeguard our air, water, and food.
If businesses genuinely acted with a sense of social responsibility, perhaps regulations wouldn’t be as necessary. But history suggests otherwise. Scandals, like those involving the tobacco industry in the 1990s, reveal the extent to which some corporations will go to hide the dangers of their products, all while targeting vulnerable populations, including young people.
Subsequently, legal action led to the largest civil litigation settlement in US history, where over 40 tobacco companies agreed to pay billions yearly, contingent upon their continued sales of cigarettes.
Today’s fossil fuel industry seems to employ similar tactics of denial around climate change. The stakes are higher, though, as environmental degradation impacts everyone, not just consumers. Various states and cities have begun suing major oil companies for their role in climate damage, but there’s a political pushback from the current administration against these efforts.
Zeldin has stated, “We drive daggers straight at the heart of climate change religions,” but it feels like those very daggers are aimed at the citizens themselves. Alarmingly, around 316 million Americans—nearly all—have lived in areas affected by significant weather events since 2011, with 2.5 million displaced in 2023 alone. Recent surveys show that three out of four Americans have experienced extreme weather in the past year.
The question remains: what do Americans expect and deserve from their government? Ideally, companies should contribute positively to society, but profit often takes precedence over well-being. This is where regulation becomes vital.
The Trump administration appears to be loosening the grip on businesses, sidestepping their social responsibilities. An executive order now seems to threaten companies focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion, or environmental, social, and governance goals, while also urging legal inquiries into state climate policies.
With inadequate action on climate change from governments, people are turning to the courts. As of last fall, the largest oil companies found themselves embroiled in 86 lawsuits related to climate change accountability, with 58% of cases filed in the US. The outcomes have been mixed.
A recent ruling by the International Court of Justice underscores that countries have an obligation under international law to act on climate change, including necessary regulatory measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Americans do wield some influence over corporate behavior, yet it remains limited. As long as companies seek profit at the expense of the environment and public health, government intervention is essential. Elected officials who prioritize corporate interests over their constituents’ well-being ought to reconsider their roles.
