As a new government
administration takes hold in the U.S., one that can be unpredictable and distrustful
of regulatory policy, we all should remind ourselves that public and
environmental health are important. Much of the science is quite settled on
what is harmful and what is not. Safety and contaminant limits might move up
and down according to changes in perceived risk. Perceived risk is affected by
many things other than science including media, public opinion, one’s psychological
tendencies, past associations, one’s neurobiology (amygdala system), and the
policy positions of one’s political affiliations.
Tom Nichols and the Death of Expertise
Tom Nichols, in
an article in The Atlantic, suggests that the DOGE firings are really a
war on expertise. That may be the case as there is little doubt that MAGA people
seem to distrust experts. Sometimes, as with COVID, he concedes that some of
that is warranted. He seems to suggest that DOGE is leveraging that distrust
and outrage to justify firings. We should remember that firings are common when
administrations change and the government is reorganized, but the chaotic methods
of DOGE have laid bare their own lack of expertise and manufactured outrage with
the Gaza condom gaffe and the ‘150-year-olds getting social security’ gaffe. Downsizing
government is one thing, but overemphasizing ideology and policy positions
about things like DEI, LGBTQ issues, and other culture war issues in that
reorganization, has not been the norm in the past. However, one could also argue
that the previous administration had more ideological hires to support policy
positions so a reversal is warranted.
Nichols studies expertise
and the title of his Atlantic article and of his book 2017 book, updated to a 2nd
edition in 2024, is The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established
Knowledge and Why It Matters, argues as have others that Musk has no
auditing expertise. He says that distrust of and turning away from expertise is
driven by two social ills: narcissism and resentment. He charges Musk with
attempting to portray wealth as competence. He sees Trump’s grievance-based
politics as evidence of resentment against apolitical experts, which he says
people like Musk and Trump see as contemptible “elites.” Nichols says that we will
soon find out that we need experts in all aspects of public service. I wonder
if he is right. The recent firing and rehiring or seeking to rehire important nuclear,
military, public health, and EPA personnel is a result of the chaotic and
aggressive way the current downsizing purge is being done.
“The first step in containing the damage is to see Trump’s
and Musk’s goals for DOGE clearly: It is a project rooted in resentful
arrogance, and its true objective is not better government, but destruction.”
The book description explains that the abandonment of
expertise is due to:
“…the openness of the internet, the emergence of a
customer satisfaction model in higher education, the transformation of the news
industry into a 24-hour entertainment machine, and importantly, the election of
Donald Trump. Paradoxically, the increasingly democratic dissemination of
information, rather than producing an educated public, has instead created an
army of ill-informed and angry citizens who denounce intellectual achievement.
When ordinary citizens believe that no one knows more than anyone else, democratic
institutions themselves are in danger of falling either to populism or to
technocracy or, in the worst case, a combination of both.”
One reviewer of
Nichol’s book noted a tidbit of wisdom from his Mom:
"Nobody knows it all like a know nothing."
The Role of Experts
Our modern form
of anti-intellectualism that sometimes elevates superstition over logical analysis
is not the same as pragmatic common sense which emphasizes good judgment. For
example, RFK Jr.’s views on vaccines and bioengineering are not based on sound
scientific judgment.
As others have
noted, including Alex Epstein in his book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,
the role of experts is debatable. Epstein sees the role of experts as advisors.
Certainly, science expertise does not translate to policy expertise. Scientists
are not experts on policy. Scientists focus on science, not on the social,
cultural, political, and environmental impacts of science and technology. Thus,
I would agree with Epstein that science and policy should remain separated.
Science and policy should, however, be integrated, with policy aligning to the
best science if possible. If they differ, it must be for adequate and justifiable
reasons.
Deregulation: Not Always Against Environmental
Protection
No one can deny
that notions like public health and environmental protection are important.
Musk’s moronic calls to remove all regulations and Trump’s obsession with the numbers
of regulations certainly indicate a lack of respect for expertise. Extreme
libertarians may have a similar disdain for rules. But, as Stephen Pinker noted,
there is a reason there are no successful socialist nor libertarian countries. The
U.S. understood the value of environmental protection when air pollution was
out of control and rivers were on fire and Nixon created the EPA. China understood
it when Beijing and other cities were choked with smog. Of course, too much and
too detailed regulation and regulation that is too expensive is not desirable and
Biden was decidedly pro-regulation and prone to overreach, overfunding climate
activism, environmental justice, and DEI. The environmental rollbacks thus far have been
fairly predictable. The removal of the LNG pause was a good move as the motivation
for the pause was, perhaps ironically, biased science, or science not based on
consensus. Getting back out of the Paris Accord was perfectly predictable as
Trump asserted his disdain for the international climate change mitigation effort.
The U.S. funding commitment will again be put up by Democrat billionaire Michael Bloomberg. As David Brooks recently pointed out, there are many
liberal billionaires. However, recent analysis suggests that billionaire
donations to Republicans were nearly three times that donated to Democrat candidates.
Apparently, that was not the case 10 years ago when donations were more
balanced.
Backtracking on
ESG initiatives and climate disclosure is also not unexpected. Many companies
will continue voluntarily to address those issues. Legislating is not necessary
and backtracking likely won’t cause environmental harm. Even France is
considering blocking EU ESG requirements as too cumbersome.
Expectations for Trump EPA
The Trump
administration is expected to delegate more environmental authority to states,
particularly in enforcement. The effects of this will likely vary by state as some
states are more able to do this than others. Investigations will take longer in
states less prepared to deal with them.
The current
freezes on federal grants, including regulatory grants, are affecting people
and holding up projects. I recently interviewed for a county-level job and was
told that they are not certain when or even if the job will be available
pending the unfreezing of federal grant money. Money Talks News noted that air
monitoring projects approved last year are on hold due to the freeze.
“Recently implemented EPA rules targeting dangerous
carcinogens like ethylene oxide may be at risk of reversal or delayed
enforcement. Last year, the EPA adopted stricter regulations requiring
facilities nationwide to conduct air monitoring for ethylene oxide and add
equipment reducing emissions by 90%.”
Superfund site
cleanup is expected to be slowed down. Environmental justice cases are expected
to be delayed. Fenceline monitoring programs are in limbo. More than 100 new
fenceline air monitoring requirements may be affected. Money Talks News
explains:
“The fence-line monitoring requirement, set to take
effect next year, would measure up to six toxic gases and make the data
publicly available online. Previous similar requirements for oil refineries
successfully reduced benzene emissions, demonstrating the effectiveness of
transparent monitoring.”
“Without these monitoring systems, communities may remain
in the dark about what chemicals are crossing from industrial properties into
residential areas. Property investors should consider environmental monitoring
availability when evaluating locations for long-term investment.”
They also note that the financial burden for remediation
projects may shift back to taxpayers from “polluter pays” taxation for
Superfund site cleanup reinstated by the Biden administration as part of the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law as there may be repeals.
Staffing
reductions are expected to make environmental investigation timelines longer. Some
have noted that the current delays in many of these projects are unprecedented.
Some projects have been more or less scrapped or at least expected long delays.
These include more detailed investigations and rules development for emerging
contaminants.
Some changes in
EPA grants are warranted. For example, new EPA head Lee Zeldin noted that $2
billion was given as part of the $20 billion "gold bar scheme"
according to DOGE. The Washington Examiner notes:
“The $20 billion in grants doled out by the Biden
administration with funds from the Inflation Reduction Act were found
"parked" in an outside financial institution in a bid to give the
grant money out without oversight, according to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.”
The group Power Forward Communities was to receive the money
for renewable energy and electrification.
“The group said it would spend the grant to provide
"needed capital to transform the marketplace for heat pumps, heat pump
water heaters, induction stoves, solar panels, home battery systems, EV
chargers, and wiring and weatherization upgrades."
Power Forward Communities is a coalition of groups in league
with Rewiring America, a group associated with activist engineer Saul Griffith, and
has a goal to “electrify everything.” Stacy Abrams serves as senior counsel for
the coalition.
References:
Toxic
Takeover: 7 EPA Shifts Under Trump That Could Poison Your Water and Air. MTN
Staff. Money Talks News. February 19, 2025. Toxic
Takeover: 7 EPA Shifts Under Trump That Could Poison Your Water and Air
The
Death of Government Expertise: Why Trump and Musk are on a firing spree. Tom
Nichols. The Atlantic. February 17, 2025. The
Death of Government Expertise - The Atlantic
The
Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it
Matters 2nd Edition. Tom Nichols. March 2024. Book Description. Amazon. The
Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it
Matters: Nichols, Tom: 9780197763834: Amazon.com: Books
Why
Most Billionaires Still Favor Donald Trump and the Republicans | Opinion, David
Faris. October 11, 2024. Why
Most Billionaires Still Favor Donald Trump and the Republicans | Opinion -
Newsweek
$2
billion in ‘gold bars’ sent from EPA to Abrams-linked climate organization: Lee
Zeldin. Jack Birle, Washington Examiner, February 20, 2025. $2
billion in ‘gold bars’ sent from EPA to Abrams-linked climate organization: Lee
Zeldin
No comments:
Post a Comment