SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) conducted a survey of 1,586 EPA scientists, finding that 60 percent experienced political interference in the five years preceding the report. The study details how political appointees and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) manipulated scientific findings on issues like climate change and mercury pollution. It also highlights barriers to free communication, such as fear of retaliation and restrictions on media contact, and notes a decline in job satisfaction and resources. The report recommends elevating the EPA to a cabinet-level agency, strengthening whistleblower protections, and increasing transparency in regulatory decision-making.

• A majority of surveyed EPA scientists reported experiencing political interference in their work over a five-year period, with a significant portion of agency veterans noting that such interference had increased compared to the previous five years.
• Political interference manifested in several specific ways, including the alteration of technical information, pressure to change findings leading to staff resignations, and the selective use of data to support specific regulatory outcomes.
• Interference originated from various sources, with political appointees within the EPA, other federal agencies, and commercial interests cited as key drivers. The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was specifically identified as the primary external source of interference.
• The prevalence of interference varied by division; it was most frequent in program offices with regulatory duties and at EPA headquarters, while the National Center for Environmental Assessment had the highest rate of interference among all divisions.
• EPA scientists face significant barriers to the free communication of their research, including restrictive policies regarding media interaction and a fear of retaliation for expressing concerns both inside and outside the agency.
• There is a perceived gap between scientific findings and agency actions, with nearly half of the scientists feeling that the EPA occasionally, seldom, or never utilizes the best judgment of its scientific staff.
• The agency's effectiveness is hampered by insufficient resources, a trend toward contracting out scientific work, and the closure of library systems in certain regions.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (n.d.). SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/epa-report-executive-summary.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. n.d. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/epa-report-executive-summary.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/epa-report-executive-summary.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{unionofconcernedscientistsndscience, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{SCIENCE AND POLITICS AT THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/epa-report-executive-summary.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }