I had not heard of Lee Zeldin before Donald Trump nominated him to become the next Administrator of the EPA. I was curious to know more about his views on major environmental issues, especially his views on climate change. I did not watch his Confirmation hearing, but I was able to find a transcript of his Congressional testimony. Here’s what I learned.
On January 16, Lee Zeldin appeared before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works for his confirmation hearing as the EPA Administrator nominee. After reading the transcript, I was left with the impression that the hearing was mainly a cordial, non-confrontational event. To my surprise, Mr. Zeldin expressed views on EPA’s mission and climate change which seemed to align with those of the Biden Administration. Here is a smattering of his testimony.
In his prepared comments, Mr. Zeldin acknowledged that EPA’s mission is “simple, but essential: to protect human health and the environment”, and that he would “enthusiastically uphold the EPA’s mission.” He further pledged to support career staff who have “dedicated themselves to this mission”, emphasizing “we have a moral responsibility to be good stewards of our environment for generations to come.” (Tr. pp. 20-21)
Senator Bernie Sanders asked Mr. Zeldin if he agreed with President-elect Trump that climate change is a hoax, Mr. Zeldin unequivocally stated: “I believe that climate change is real.” He did, however, attempt to soften the Senator’s use of the word hoax by suggesting Mr. Trump’s real concern was with the economic costs of some climate policies. Senator Sanders disputed this characterization and followed up by pointedly asking Mr. Zeldin if he believed climate change posed an existential threat requiring urgent action. In response, Mr. Zeldin affirmed that “we must, with urgency, be addressing these [climate] issues.” (Tr. pp.42-43)
Later in the hearing, Senator Ed Markey asked Mr. Zeldin to confirm comments made in 2016 by then-Congressman Zeldin that the U.S. must reduce its reliance on fossil fuels and pursue clean, green energy. Here Mr. Zeldin was cautious in responding but did say, in an “idea [sic] world, we would be able to pursue always the cleanest, greenest energy sources possible.” (Tr. pp.69-70)
On January 20, four days after Mr. Zeldin’s confirmation hearing, President Donald Trump issued a series of Executive Orders many of which plainly reject Mr. Zeldin’s expressed concerns about climate change. (For an excellent short summary of the orders, see our colleague Michael Gerrard’s recent post on the ACOEL website.)
The Executive Orders revoke, eliminate and withdraw federal funding and support for myriad existing climate change and renewable energy programs and initiatives. Specifically, the Orders mandate exiting the Paris Climate Agreement; revoking financial support for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); and rescinding numerous executive orders issued by President Biden to address climate issues and to promote solar and wind development. The Orders also require federal agencies to discontinue disbursing monies for climate and renewable energy projects funded under the federal Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act. The Executive Orders replaced climate and renewable energy initiatives with a declaration of a National Energy Emergency and a mandate that federal departments prioritize and promote the development and use of fossil fuels.
Considering the recent Executive Orders, how are we to understand and put in context EPA Administrator Zeldin’s Congressional Testimony? The Orders seem to leave little room for EPA to develop and fund measures that acknowledge climate change is real. If climate change is an existential threat requiring urgent action, how can Mr. Zeldin uphold EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment without developing and funding policies and initiatives to combat climate change? And how is encouraging greater use of fossil fuels and their consequent increase in carbon emissions an effective strategy for preventing further ecological damage to the planet? Wouldn’t we be better off pursuing clean, green renewable energy sources?
At first blush, it’s understandable how Mr. Zeldin’s Congressional testimony on climate change may have reassured some concerned observers. The Presidential Executive Orders issued shortly after his testimony, however, dispel any such assurance.
Climate change is real, and it is an existential threat demanding urgent U.S and worldwide action. What, if anything, the new EPA leadership can or will do about it remains an open question.
