Tag Archives: Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

Trump budget is survival of the fittest

Continue reading Trump budget is survival of the fittest

Chris Abele: Oppose Trump’s plan to defund Great Lakes restoration

Like many of you, I was concerned when I first heard that President Trump planned to cut funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. That concern turned to shock when I heard that the funding was nearly eliminated altogether — a 97 percent reduction.

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) sprang from the Great Lakes Compact, a regional commitment to protecting our natural resources that was approved by a bipartisan coalition that included all eight Great Lakes states, the U.S. Congress, and President George W. Bush. Long before I was elected county executive I was lucky enough to be involved with the organizations that advanced the research that led to the Great Lakes Compact. Today, both in office and as a citizen, I remain an ardent supporter of and advocate for the protection of our fresh water.

The GLRI has funded millions of dollars in Milwaukee County Parks alone, to include a four-year, $43 million cleanup effort along the Milwaukee River and a $1.4 million investment in waterway improvements at South Shore and other parks.

Since the GLRI began the need for fresh water hasn’t gone down; it’s gone up. One only needs to look to the ongoing water crisis in Flint, Michigan or the freshwater emergency that impacted hundreds of thousands of Ohioans in the Toledo area back in 2014 to know that we must protect the Great Lakes, which hold 20 percent of the entire world’s freshwater.

I strongly oppose the president’s proposed decimation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Environmentalists, business owners, and politicians from across the divide have historically been advocates for our freshwater and they are speaking out now as well. Yesterday, Milwaukee Riverkeeper, U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, and Gov. Scott Walker all spoke out in favor of restoring Great Lakes funding. And for good reason — the Great Lakes are a spectacular and rare treasure for all of us and we must protect them. Preserving these natural treasures isn’t idealistic or naïve; it’s part of who we are as a country.

I will be writing Wisconsin’s Congressional delegation to ask that they oppose this cut and I urge you to do the same. To find your elected officials visit: https://myvote.wi.gov/en-US/MyElectedOfficials

Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele

 

Trump wants to slash EPA, nix Great Lakes Restoration project

The Trump administration would slash the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget, scaling back and all but eliminating EPA programs aimed at slowing climate change and maintaining water safety and air quality, while eliminating thousands of jobs, according to a draft of the  proposal obtained by The Associated Press.

Under the tentative plan from the Office of Management and Budget, the agency’s funding would be reduced by roughly 25 percent and about 3,000 jobs would be cut, about 19 percent of the agency’s staff.

President Donald Trump has said he plans to pay for billions of dollars more for the military by cutting spending on domestic agencies and departments. Trump plans to submit his budget to Congress the week of March 13.

The proposal would all but eliminate funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a wide-ranging cleanup of the world’s largest surface freshwater system that has deep bipartisan support across the eight states adjacent to the lakes, from Minnesota to New York. The program has received around $300 million annually from the federal budget during former President Barack Obama’s tenure — more than $2.2 billion in all. Under the Trump proposal, it would get only $10 million.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., described the proposed cut as “outrageous.”

“This initiative has been critical to cleaning up our Great Lakes and waterways, restoring fish and wildlife habitats, and fighting invasive species, like Asian carp,” Stabenow said. “I call on President Trump to reverse course on these harmful decisions.”

A spokeswoman for the EPA declined to comment, but a top official said in an internal memo that EPA leaders “will do everything in our power to protect our ability to support the mission of the agency in protecting human health and the environment.”

A copy of the memo from Acting Assistant Administrator Donna Vizian was obtained by the AP.

Vizian said she could not verify news media accounts, but said any proposed cuts were just the start of a lengthy budget process. A final plan is subject to congressional approval, which likely is months away at the earliest.

But the far right, which includes Trump’s core constituents, want his administration to do away with all laws that protect the nation’s air, water and natural resources. They believe that environmental regulations stand in the way of greater profits for oil companies, manufacturers, and other industries.

The conservative think tank Heartland Institute, for example, said Trump’s proposal doesn’t go far enough.

“If Donald Trump and Scott Pruitt are serious about ending the national scandal that is EPA, they will accept nothing less than a 20 percent cut this year and make this year’s cut the first step in a five-year plan to replace the organization,” said Joseph Bast, the group’s president.

The White House declined to comment.

Anti-science leadership

The EPA is now under the leadership of Scott Pruitt, a former state attorney general for Oklahoma, who has questioned the scientific consensus that human activities are contributing to global warming and joined lawsuits against the agency’s emission curbs.

As Oklahoma’s attorney general, Pruitt filed numerous lawsuits against the agency he now heads.

Pruitt is under fire for using a private email account as Oklahoma AG to coordinate strategies with fossil fuel companies to oppose environmental rules. During his confirmation hearings, Pruitt said he’d never improperly used emails in an official capacity; but an investigation by The Associated Press found that he did use his private emails to conduct official business, including communicating with staff and lobbyists.

Democrats have accused Pruitt of perjury and called for an investigation, which is unlikely proceed given Republican control of the entire federal government.

Trump’s draft proposal for the EPA would help to achieve the goals of Pruitt and Big Oil. It would cut the EPA’s budget from about $8.2 billion to $6.1 billion. Proposed cuts include reducing the climate protection budget by nearly 70 percent to $29 million, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by 97 percent to $10 million and environmental justice programs by 79 percent to $1.5 million.

Also targeted for steep spending rollbacks are the agency’s monitoring and enforcement of compliance with environmental laws, as well as regional projects intended to benefit degraded areas such as the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound and the Gulf of Mexico. A program dealing with San Francisco Bay that received $4.8 million last year would be eliminated, as would initiatives for reducing diesel emissions and beach water quality testing.

Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy called the proposed budget “a fantasy” that ignores the EPA’s mission to protect public health.

“It shows the Trump administration doesn’t hold the same American values for clean air, clean water and healthy land as the vast majority of its citizens,” McCarthy said in a statement. “Our health comes before the special interests of multibillion-dollar industries.”

Environmental groups said the proposed cuts would threaten thousands of jobs and could harm health and safety protections for millions of Americans. The proposals would especially affect programs to address climate change and enforce clean air and water laws, they said.

“Instead of working to protect American families, President Trump’s plans put the interest of big-money special interests over people,” said Nat Mund, legislative director of the Southern Environmental Law Center, a Virginia-based advocacy group.

Congress in December authorized continuing the program through 2021 at $300 million a year, although separate annual votes are needed to provide the money.