Donald Trump has previously claimed: “I’m an environmentalist. I am. I want the cleanest water on the planet. I want the cleanest air anywhere”. After declaring such an exaggerated goal for himself, however, Trump has done nothing but the opposite–his actions have actually worsened the stability of the environment by attempting to defund programs that protect it. Living in an era where the federal government controls virtually every aspect of our lives, it is imperative to know exactly which federal bodies participate in the everyday function of the country. One of these significant bodies is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); it provides protection to citizens and the environment from health risks, and aids in the regulation of environmental rules. Surprisingly, former U.S. President Donald Trump had taken initiative during his presidency (2017-2021) in dismantling this program. While there could be rational reasoning behind his movements, it would be ridiculous of a president to dismantle the EPA, leaving the environment vulnerable to ignorant critics of the EPA.

Our country needs help in maintaining a healthy environment. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has claimed, “In 2022, about 66 million tons of pollution were emitted into the atmosphere in the United States”. This drastic amount is absolutely appalling–the environment is in dire need of aid. And aside from the United States, the whole world has been suffering. The condition of the earth has been crippling even more by each passing day. But at what cost? It would be a chaotic mess to try and fix issues when they are at breaking point; soon, the Earth will fall apart and life as we know it will be simplified to almost nothing. Leaders must take the time, effort, and initiative to help restore the Earth and the well-being of their citizens at the same time. In getting rid of agencies which protect the environment and address the living conditions of citizens, leaders and presidents would show arrogance to the world that has been gifted to us in its original state. The dismantling of the EPA would make it all the more harder for legislators to pass laws which are meant to protect the environment, and its restoration. Noted by Encyclopedia Britannica, the EPA “was enforcing 12 major statutes, including laws designed to control uranium mill tailings; ocean dumping; safe drinking water; insecticides, fungicides, and rodenticides; and asbestos hazards in schools”. With the above information being collected from the 1990’s (20 years after the start of the EPA), the EPA has constantly been changing and adding laws to better the environmental state of our country. The fact that asbestos–a natural mineral and a carcinogen–causes about 90% of all mesothelioma (rare and aggressive cancer) cases is alarming; if it weren’t for the EPA, asbestos could still be a concerning issue within the U.S. It is necessary to acknowledge that the EPA has taken responsibility in demonstrating care for the environment around us, and to keep citizens of the United States safe.

To add onto the role of the Environmental Protection Agency, this agency’s landmark acts dating back to 1970 still affect citizens of the United States to this day. One of these significant acts is the Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act authorized the EPA to regulate pollution from vehicles, like cars. In doing so, “fuels are much cleaner—lead has been eliminated, and sulfur levels are more than 90% lower than they were prior to regulation”. This data has been claimed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency itself, and highlights just one of the countless EPA achievements. An intriguing fact is that sulfur levels have been reduced significantly—lowering 90% of these levels can deliver a huge positive effect to the environment. The benefits of the EPA being present in our country are overwhelming, and Trump’s motives to disassemble this federal body are simply and evidently ridiculous.

Not to mention, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency informs that, “sulfur dioxide can damage trees and plants, inhibit plant growth, and damage sensitive ecosystems and waterways”. Sulfur levels will continue to rise with the burning of fossil fuels. And, certainly, with no restraint by agencies such as the EPA, ecosystems, trees, and other plants will surely suffer the toll. The NY Times magazine presents the negative causes of Trump’s actions toward the disassembly of the EPA, explaining that Trump’s administration “significantly increase(d) greenhouse gas emissions over the next decade and lead to thousands of extra deaths from poor air quality each year”. Most of the population try avoiding the fact that if the environment keeps intaking negative energy such as high sulfur levels, essential environmental factors will begin to fall apart. But why does it matter? As students are taught at a young age in elementary school, we need the environment around us to be healthy in order to survive. The downfall of the environment would decrease oxygen levels, food supply, and other essential supplies such as wood; the human population would face dire consequences from these effects. If trees and ecosystems are dying due to unrestricted access to the burning of fossil fuels and more, nothing will be able to help civilization to recover from this tragedy. To prevent such a grave tragedy, the President of the United States and his/her administration should do their best to avoid the dismantling of the EPA. The EPA’s laws and regulations have looked after the environment in the United States so far, and a leader would make the wrong decision by breaking it apart.

The Environmental Protection Agency has put forth their best foot into prioritizing the needs of the environment and the protection of their citizens. By focusing on environmental needs, the EPA has also aided U.S. citizens from the downfall of their environment, and the issues that come with a destroyed environment. With the destruction of an environment comes a huge jeopardization of human life–it would be difficult to find food, shelter, water, and more. If a president were to disassemble such an influential organization, which prevents environmental damage, they would rid their country of a better health and a safer environment. The establishment of the EPA goes back 54 years, and has been integral to the federal government. It would not be a wise decision to break apart such a program, and instead,  we should strive to improve the EPA and make it more beneficial and effective for the country and its citizens.