Trump Administration to slash EPA budget by 45%, putting public health at risk

Washington D.C. – The Trump administration on Friday unveiled sweeping plans to restructure the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with major staffing cuts targeting the agency’s scientific research division. The reorganization signals a return to staffing levels not seen since the 1980s and has sparked alarm among environmental experts and former agency officials.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency intends to downsize its workforce to levels seen during President Ronald Reagan’s tenure, citing the need to “operate as efficiently and effectively as possible.” The EPA currently employs about 15,000 staff; during the Reagan years, that number ranged between 11,000 and 14,000.

The most significant changes will hit the EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD), which provides scientific analysis on pollutants, chemicals, and other environmental threats. Under the plan, ORD scientists will be reassigned to policy-writing departments or newly created offices. Staff were told Friday to expect cuts in the coming weeks.

“This is more than just a reorganization—it’s an undermining of the EPA’s scientific backbone,” said Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, a former senior EPA scientist. “By splitting things up or eliminating that expertise, we put people at greater risk and we put this country at greater risk.”

The ORD has long been the scientific foundation for environmental policy in the U.S., producing research that has shaped regulations on issues ranging from lead contamination to smog. Its scientists were instrumental in early research on PFAS “forever chemicals” and the health impacts of ozone exposure.

Experts warn that gutting the ORD could cripple the EPA’s ability to respond to environmental crises. Chris Frey, former ORD leader and current dean of research at North Carolina State University, said the administration’s proposed 45% cut to ORD’s budget would devastate its operations. “The magnitude of these kinds of cuts would really affect the entire research enterprise of the EPA,” Frey said.

The administration has claimed the changes will save $300 million by 2026, about 3% of the EPA’s $9 billion budget. In a Newsweek op-ed, Zeldin defended the cuts as part of a broader effort to “transform the EPA into a more efficient and effective agency.”

But morale among EPA scientists is plummeting. “I feel like they’re playing musical chairs, but taking out half the chairs,” said one ORD staffer, who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation.

The EPA has already closed offices dedicated to environmental justice and diversity, and frozen millions in grant funding. Across the federal government, the administration has fired scientists, slashed research budgets, and dismantled key climate programs.

Environmental advocates say these moves reflect a broader assault on science, with serious consequences for public health and environmental protection.