There’s fear in Climatology Land. We’ve seen reports that EPA employees have been crying themselves silly, and, perhaps they have a reason to, as Team Trump may start holding them accountable, just like in the private sector
Donald Trump could sack many of the climate change staff at the Environmental Protection Agency and cut large parts of its funding, according to an official.
Myron Ebell, who led Mr Trump’s transition team at the agency, said that he expects the new President to sack at least half of the staff there. He also hopes that the organisation will have its budget cut significantly, he said. (snip)
Mr Ebell said that he wouldn’t speculate on exact numbers of staff who might be sacked. But he said that he personally would start by sacking at least half of them.
Donald Trump to sack climate change scientists and slash Environmental Protection Agency budgets, says officialTrump is thinking like a businessman. What happens at times in acquisitions is that one company takes over, and lots of staff are let go. Especially those with redundant jobs, poor performance, and unnecessary positions. The EPA is a valuable federal agency, in my opinion, but, unfortunately, they have gone light years beyond their mandate, and are now as much an activist group as Greenpeace and the National Resources Defense Council. And they do this on the taxpayer dime.
“President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA, or ‘leave a little bit,”‘ Ebell said. “I think the administration is likely to start proposing cuts to the 15,000 staff, because the fact is that a huge amount of the work of the EPA is actually done by state agencies. It’s not clear why so many employees are needed at the federal level.”
People think of FEMA as this vast, gigantic organization. In fact, it’s rather tiny, and simply meant to coordinate disaster responses using other federal, state, and local agencies. It’s high time to roll back the uber-activist EPA, and let those people go work for a state organization or in the private sector.
Good!
Let’s just hope they don’t shit in the hallways again or destroy any more rivers before they leave.
Fewer employees means cutting down the carbon footprint of their commute, plus a smaller workforce would require smaller spaces, less heating/cooling, lights, electricity for computers…brilliant!
Serves them good for all the jobs and opportunities lost due to over regulation.
The best thing to do would be to eliminate the agency completely, and start over again from scratch. In that way, all of the EPA employees would be let go, and only those people who were really necessary for the new agency, and who had strong work records, would be rehired.
Thing is, that same logic ought to be applied to a lot of the federal bureaucracy: take a meat cleaver to it, then replace only those things necessary.
Another wise step would be to farm out federal agencies, and get them out of Washington. Put them in eastern Kentucky or small towns in Kansas, where the bureaucrats can be paid less and still live decently.