The ongoing debate over environmental regulations intensified with the release of recent analyses highlighting the potential consequences of rollbacks initiated during the Trump administration. During the Trump Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rolled back air quality standards. As we’ve written previously, critics say these changes would do much damage by undermining public health protections.
Not so fast — we have air quality to protect, and Gina McCarthy, the former EPA administrator under President Barack Obama, was on the case. Later, as President Biden’s climate adviser, she kept pushing—hard—for strict regulations. Under her guidance, the EPA produced a 445-page analysis in January 2024, outlining the necessity of tightening standards on particle pollution. This in-depth technical report cited more than 90 scientific publications and highlighted the substantial public health gains from current regulatory protections.
While these findings may be reassuring, the Trump-era rule changes have caused conservationists to ring alarm bells. The EPA’s own fact sheet acknowledges that even imposing just one of those rules is going to cost them close to $1 billion. It fails to stock any estimated benefits associated with this rule. Critics say that these kinds of omissions are part of a deeper pattern in environmental policy that favors economic considerations over the health of people.
Biden’s proposed new power plant rule would aim to undo rollbacks like these. It has the potential to provide more than $24 billion in annual economic benefits and avoid about 3,700 premature deaths and 3 million asthma attacks each year. These figures highlight how powerful targeted regulation can be in saving lives and protecting public health.
During this time—from 2005 until 2010—Vanderburgh County was in nonattainment for federal air quality standards. It and the nearby areas consistently breached national limits for fine particulate matter. Due to tough, enforceable EPA regulations, those communities have made great strides in cleaning up the air around them. On the ground, residents have experienced dramatic improvements, with cleaner air contributing to an improved quality of life.
The most recent data confirms that smog pollution is down by almost 15%, and sulfur dioxide has dropped an astounding 80%. The EPA’s decision to update allowable soot particles by cutting them by 25% reflects a commitment to align regulations with contemporary scientific understanding of pollution’s adverse effects.
Taken individually, these five regulatory rules are projected to produce net benefits of more than $200 billion a year per EPA’s own documents. Because of those stringent environmental policies, California has achieved some of the most remarkable outcomes. They have saved lives, keeping millions of Americans healthy, out of the hospital and preventing premature deaths.
And the single greatest industry financial supporter of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign is none other than the fossil fuel industry. Despite these opportunities, it has consistently aligned itself with Republican interests. This new connection begs the question for what other regulatory rollbacks, which clearly prioritize industry profit over the public interest, might be pushing this type of industry agenda.
Since the mid-2000s, air pollution deaths associated with coal-fired power plants have decreased significantly nationwide. They fell from more than 43,000 deaths per year to only 1,600 in 2020. This decrease coincides with the implementation of stricter regulations meant to subdue emissions and increase air quality. According to the most recent EPA statistics, the average concentration of these tiny airborne particles has declined more than 40 percent. It’s dropped over one-third from levels observed between 2000 and 2009.
Together, the two proposed regulations would result in almost $38 billion in annual net savings. This will be largely due to the reduction of health problems caused by air pollution. These expected benefits clearly illustrate why it’s so important to fight to keep strong environmental safeguards — we all deserve them.
Southwestern Indiana is one example of what EPA regulations have devastated. Combined, they have avoided about 19,000 to 23,000 premature deaths from coal-fired power plant emissions from 1999 through 2020. The success of these regulations in stopping plant construction shows, in real terms, the benefits of following strong air quality standards.
Howard Frumkin, a prominent public health expert, remarked on the significance of the EPA’s findings:
“This is a rigorous, compelling and much-needed analysis.” – Howard Frumkin
Frumkin expressed concerns regarding regulatory rollbacks initiated during the Trump administration:
“It makes clear that regulatory rollbacks by the Trump administration will have major, direct consequences for health and well-being. Because of these regulatory rollbacks and funding cuts, Americans will die needlessly.” – Howard Frumkin
Lee Zeldin stated,
“I’m not going to prejudge outcomes with what will be a lot of rulemaking.” – Lee Zeldin
Scott Segal cautioned that focusing solely on lives saved without considering other factors can lead to misleading conclusions:
“If you only count lives saved by regulation, not lives harmed by regulation, the math will always favor more regulation.” – Scott Segal
Segal highlighted that public health encompasses more than just air quality:
“This framing misses the larger point: public health isn’t just about air quality — it’s also about job security, housing, access to medical care, and heating in the winter.” – Scott Segal
K. Sabeel Rahman emphasized the severe health impacts associated with particulate matter pollution:
“The human body count and human health toll of particulate matter alone is just absolutely massive.” – K. Sabeel Rahman
He added a stark warning about the potential human cost of deregulation:
“Literally tens of thousands of people will lose their lives.” – K. Sabeel Rahman
Worries go deeper than numbers, and firsthand stories are bringing the human impact of air quality home. One resident recounted their experience:
“It’s a very scary feeling, particularly as a kid, to not be able to get enough air in your lungs.” – Kirt Ethridge
Molly Vaseliou stated:
“Unlike the Biden EPA attempts to regulate whole sectors of our economy out of existence, the Trump EPA understands that we do not have to choose between protecting our precious environment and growing our economy.” – Molly Vaseliou
Christine Todd Whitman expressed her dismay at current policies:
“This administration is endangering all of our lives — ours, our children, our grandchildren.” – Christine Todd Whitman
McCarthy reinforced the importance of robust regulations in safeguarding public health:
“Millions of Americans have avoided illnesses, hospital visits, and premature deaths thanks to EPA’s cleaner car and truck standards in concert with rules that limit industrial pollution.” – Gina McCarthy
