The Trump administration is gutting EPA's research arm. Can California bridge the gap?
The EPA this month announced that it was eliminating nearly 4,000 employees as part of a cost-saving "reduction in force," the majority of which are staffers from its Office of Research and Development - whose research into environmental risks and hazards underpins nearly all EPA rules and regulations. The reduction will save the agency $748.8 million, officials said.
"Under President Trump's leadership, EPA has taken a close look at our operations to ensure the agency is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment while Powering the Great American Comeback," read a statement from EPA administrator Lee Zeldin. "This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars."
The ORD had been in operation since the EPA was established by President Richard Nixon in 1970 and was focused on conducting scientific research to help advance the EPA's goals of protecting human health and the environment.
Experts said the decision to break up the research office sends a chilling signal for science and will leave more communities exposed to environmental hazards such as industrial chemicals, wildfire smoke and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances - or PFAs - in drinking water, all of which are subject to the department's analysis.
"The people of this country are not well served by these actions," read a statement from Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, former EPA Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science. "They are left more vulnerable."
It also shifts the onus onto California and other states to fill the void left by the federal government. ORD's research supported work around Superfund site cleanups and environmental disasters such as the Los Angeles wildfires or the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment.
"There will be another East Palestine, another Exxon Valdez [oil spill] - some disaster will happen ... and those communities will be hurt when they don't have to be," said Tracey Woodruff, a professor at UC San Francisco and a former senior scientist and policy advisor with EPA's Office of Policy.
The Golden State appears better positioned than many others carry on the work - particularly through the small but mighty department Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, located within the California Environmental Protection Agency.
"California has for some time developed a pretty robust infrastructure of assessing the health harms of toxic chemicals and pollutants," Woodruff said. "So in that way, we're better off than almost any other state because we have such a stellar group of scientists."
Indeed, California is known for some of its more rigorous health-based standards and regulations, such as the Proposition 65 warnings posted by businesses across the state to advise people of the presence of cancer-causing chemicals, which are overseen by OEHAA.
By dismantling ORD, the EPA is further politicizing the independent science and research that underpins so many of the nation's regulations, said Yana Garcia, California's Secretary for Environmental Protection. While California remains dedicated to such science, she said other states may not be so lucky.
"We will continue to keep the work of OEHHA strong and remain committed to it, but we're still getting a handle on what this loss really means," Garcia said. "It is a huge loss to California. It is an even bigger loss to so many other states that don't have an Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessments like we do."
Kris Thayer, OEHHA's director, came to agency from ORD, where she directed its IRIS program for identifying and characterizing the human health hazards of chemicals. She said the state is "absolutely going to be looking at every way that we can fill the void given our resources, but we are going to feel the pinch of this."
"It's not only that the quantity of assessments will be reduced, but the credibility of the assessments will be reduced, because they will be developed by programs where there's a lot more opportunity for political interference in terms of the science that gets shaped," she said.
Chemical industry and other anti-regulatory groups have lobbied for the EPA to limit ORD's influence. A January letter addressed to Zeldin spearheaded by the American Chemistry Council and 80 other organizations said risk assessments developed by ORD were "being used to develop overly burdensome regulations on critical chemistries essential for products we use every day."
In particular, they cited the government's evaluation of chemicals including formaldehyde, inorganic arsenic and hexavalent chromium, which can be used or created by industrial processes. The groups charged the agency with a lack of impartiality and transparency, a slow process and limited peer review.
Thayer noted that a lot of assessment work conducted by ORD is used in California. On the other hand, a number of states and EPA programs also look to California's assessments.
"We're going to be monitoring how this unfolds, but we're certainly going to be looking to do everything we can to meet capacity - we're not going to be able to fully meet it - and recognizing that our work will not only impact California, but can be used by other states," she said.
Garcia said California has hired a number of people from the federal government over the past year and is open to absorbing more EPA employees who were recently laid off. OEHHA has a number of open positions.
"California remains open for [a] rigorous, science-based approach to health and environmental protections," Garcia said.
Woodruff, of UCSF, said she hopes to see California and other states invest more in OEHAA and other scientific agencies by offering better salaries and bolstering staff numbers. But ultimately, she said the Golden State can use this moment to become an example for others to follow.
"California could be a real leader for all the other states who also want to keep doing right by their by their constituents and continuing to address toxic chemical exposure," she said.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
22 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump injects a new dose of uncertainty in tariffs as he pushes start date back to Aug. 7
WASHINGTON — For weeks, President Donald Trump was promising the world economy would change on Friday with his new tariffs in place. It was an ironclad deadline, administration officials assured the public. But when Trump signed the order Thursday night imposing new tariffs, the start date of the punishing import taxes was pushed back seven days so the tariff schedule could be updated. The change in tariffs on 66 countries, the European Union, Taiwan and the Falkland Islands was potentially welcome news to countries that had not yet reached a deal with the U.S. It also injected a new dose of uncertainty for consumers and businesses still wondering what's going to happen and when. Trump told NBC News in a Thursday night interview the tariffs process was going 'very well, very smooth.' But even as the Republican president insisted these new rates would stay in place, he added: 'It doesn't mean that somebody doesn't come along in four weeks and say we can make some kind of a deal.' Trump has promised that his tax increases on the nearly $3 trillion in goods imported to the United States will usher in newfound wealth, launch a cavalcade of new factory jobs, reduce the budget deficits and, simply, get other countries to treat America with more respect. The vast tariffs risk jeopardizing America's global standing as allies feel forced into unfriendly deals. As taxes on the raw materials used by U.S. factories and basic goods, the tariffs also threaten to create new inflationary pressures and hamper economic growth — concerns the Trump White House has dismissed. As the clock ticked toward Trump's self-imposed deadline, few things seemed to be settled other than the president's determination to levy the taxes he has talked about for decades. The very legality of the tariffs remains an open question as a U.S. appeals court on Thursday heard arguments on whether Trump had exceeded his authority by declaring an 'emergency' under a 1977 law to charge the tariffs, allowing him to avoid congressional approval. Trump was ebullient as much of the world awaited what he would do. 'Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again,' he said Thursday morning on Truth Social. Others saw a policy carelessly constructed by the U.S. president, one that could impose harms gradually over time that would erode America's power and prosperity. 'The only things we'll know for sure on Friday morning are that growth-sapping U.S. import taxes will be historically high and complex, and that, because these deals are so vague and unfinished, policy uncertainty will remain very elevated,' said Scott Lincicome, a vice president of economics at the Cato Institute. 'The rest is very much TBD.' Trump initially imposed the Friday deadline after his previous 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April resulted in a stock market panic. His unusually high tariff rates announced then led to recession fears, prompting Trump to impose a 90-day negotiating period. When he was unable to create enough trade deals with other countries, he extended the timeline and sent out letters to world leaders that simply listed rates, prompting a slew of hasty agreements. Swiss imports will now be taxed at a higher rate, 39%, than the 31% Trump threatened in April, while Liechtenstein saw its rate slashed from 37% to 15%. Countries not listed in the Thursday night order would be charged a baseline 10% tariff. Trump negotiated trade frameworks over the past few weeks with the EU, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia and the Philippines — allowing the president to claim victories as other nations sought to limit his threat of charging even higher tariff rates. He said Thursday there were agreements with other countries, but he declined to name them. Asked on Friday if countries were happy with the rates set by Trump, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said: 'A lot of them are.' The EU was awaiting a written agreement on its 15% tariff deal. Switzerland and Norway were among the dozens of countries that did not know what their tariff rate would be, while Trump agreed after a Thursday morning phone call to keep Mexico's tariffs at 25% for a 90-day negotiating period. The president separately on Thursday amended an order to raise certain tariffs on Canada to 35%. European leaders face blowback for seeming to cave to Trump, even as they insist that this is merely the start of talks and stress the importance of maintaining America's support of Ukraine's fight against Russia. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has already indicated that his country can no longer rely on the U.S. as an ally, and Trump declined to talk to him on Thursday. India, with its 25% tariff announced Wednesday by Trump, may no longer benefit as much from efforts to pivot manufacturing out of China. While the Trump administration has sought to challenge China's manufacturing dominance, it is separately in extended trade talks with that country, which faces a 30% tariff and is charging a 10% retaliatory rate on the U.S. Major companies came into the week warning that tariffs would begin to squeeze them financially. Ford Motor Co. said it anticipated a net $2 billion hit to earnings this year from tariffs. French skincare company Yon-Ka is warning of job freezes, scaled-back investment and rising prices. Federal judges sounded skeptical Thursday about Trump's use of a 1977 law to declare the long-standing U.S. trade deficit a national emergency that justifies tariffs on almost every country. 'You're asking for an unbounded authority,' Judge Todd Hughes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit told a Justice Department lawyer representing the administration. The judges didn't immediately rule, and the case is expected to reach the Supreme Court eventually. The Trump White House has pointed to the increase in federal revenues as a sign that the tariffs will reduce the budget deficit, with $127 billion in customs and duties collected so far this year — about $70 billion more than last year. There are not yet signs that tariffs will lead to more domestic manufacturing jobs, and Friday's employment report showed the U.S. economy now has 37,000 fewer manufacturing jobs than it did in April. On Thursday, one crucial measure of inflation, known as the Personal Consumption Expenditures index, showed that prices have climbed 2.6% over the 12 months that ended in June, a sign that inflation may be accelerating as the tariffs flow through the economy. The prospect of higher inflation from the tariffs has caused the Federal Reserve to hold off on additional cuts to its benchmark rates, a point of frustration for Trump, who on Truth Social, called Fed Chair Jerome Powell a 'TOTAL LOSER.' But before Trump's tariffs, Powell seemed to suggest that the tariffs had put the U.S. economy and much of the world into a state of unknowns. 'There are many uncertainties left to resolve,' Powell told reporters Wednesday. 'So, yes, we are learning more and more. It doesn't feel like we're very close to the end of that process. And that's not for us to judge, but it does — it feels like there's much more to come.' Boak writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Paul Wiseman contributed to this report.


New York Post
22 minutes ago
- New York Post
Obama's Russiagate meddling: Letters to the Editor — Aug. 2, 2025
The Issue: Reports that ex-President Barack Obama advanced the Russian collusion narrative in 2016. Kudos for Martin Gurri's piece on 'Obamagate' ('From Russia with nothing to speak of,' July 29) It's ironic that the framing of President Trump as a 'threat to democracy' was a red herring for the actual harm being done to us by President Barack Obama and his acolytes. His abuse of his high office was even more egregious than President Richard Nixon's, and similarly has greatly discredited our nation. It's irrelevant that this treachery didn't rise to the crime of treason. The defamation is every bit as damaging and wrongful. And to top it off, the legacy media remained complicit throughout. 'Democracy dies in darkness,' indeed! James Evans Worcester, Mass. We, the 'democracy-threatening,' 'stupid,' 'racist' MAGA citizens, are finally breathing the rarefied air of truth. Thank you, Martin Gurri, for your detailed and revealing piece on the Russiagate hoax. From ancient times to the present, the lust for power has destroyed many cultures. Now, may free speech, strong advocates and honor protect us as we unravel a historic example of hubris run amok. The waxed wings of Icarus melted, and he died, but our democracy will survive. Abby Rudnick Farmingdale, NJ In 2020, the Senate Intelligence Committee, headed by Marco Rubio, stated that the committee unequivocally found absolutely no evidence that Donald Trump and/or his campaign colluded with the Russian government in the 2016 election. However, it did conclude that there was irrefutable evidence of Russian attempts at meddling. And that is exactly what President Obama went on television and told the American public. This new obfuscation is just another sophomoric Trump administration attempt at deflection from what he is doing to this country, and what he is hiding. Lou Maione Manhattan Mainstream media were enamored with Obama through all eight years of his presidency, without ever questioning his performance. This was a love affair, pure and simple. And it remains so to this day, even as we now know that Obama directed a false operation to discredit his successor's victory. History is written by the victors, except when a paper trail exposes their betrayals, as Trump is now revealing about Obama. Paul Bloustein Cincinnati, Ohio Now that we know more about what happened, it's not really surprising to learn of Obama's involvement in Russiagate. After all, he rose out of the corrupt Chicago machine, and then callously lied to millions of people about their health insurance and access to doctors, and now we learn about this. Michelle Obama told us that her mother didn't trust anyone who took more than they needed. Look at the harm Barack has done, and now he has a huge net worth, owning mansions in Martha's Vineyard and Hawaii. Michelle's mom was right after all, wasn't she? Gary Mottola Brooklyn So the legacy media now want the public to move on from the Russia collusion hoax perpetrated by them. They were even given awards for this scam. I say: No! Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel should now investigate what the Obama administration did in that meeting on Dec. 9, 2016 at the White House. Republicans can never forget what was done to their elected president. Andrew Franza Dallas, Pa. No one should be shocked about the recent revelations that Obama was the mastermind behind the Russia collusion hoax. In February 2017, Paul Sperry wrote a column for The Post ('Bam-lined lie,' Feb. 19, 2017) in which he revealed the existence of Obama's 'Organizing For Action' (OFA), which included the recruitment of thousands of footsoldiers to sabotage the Trump presidency. It is doubtful whether any American today has learned anything new. J. J. Crovatto Ramsey, NJ Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.


CNN
23 minutes ago
- CNN
Keeping Them Honest: The Fact Remains - Anderson Cooper 360 - Podcast on CNN Podcasts
Keeping Them Honest: The Fact Remains Anderson Cooper 360 45 mins President Trump deals with unwelcome facts on the economy by firing the official in charge of gathering the facts. The markets are not fooled and we're keeping him honest. Plus, Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice in sex trafficking minors as young as 14 years old, is transferred to one of the cushiest spots in the federal prison system.