Climate Policy Changes Under Trump
The Trump administration has recently taken steps to dismantle a longstanding initiative aimed at monitoring global climate change, a program that has influenced governmental regulations and policies for over three decades.
On Tuesday, federal staff members of the U.S. Global Change Research Program were dismissed from their roles, and a longstanding governmental contract with ICF International, a key supporter of the National Climate Assessment, was terminated, as reported by two anonymous former officials.
This action is seen as a strategic move by the administration to diminish the role of federal climate research while simultaneously easing environmental protections and encouraging further development of fossil fuels.
Supporting Science Journalism
If you find value in this content, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. Your subscription helps sustain future reporting on important discoveries and ideas that are shaping our world.
Originating in 1990 through Congressional approval and enacted by President George H.W. Bush, the U.S. Global Change Research Program has concentrated on various environmental aspects such as climate science, land productivity, water resources, fisheries, ecosystems, and atmospheric conditions. Its most notable output, the National Climate Assessment, is a critical report issued every four years that influences environmental regulations, legislative actions, and infrastructure planning.
Years ago, this program played a pivotal role in identifying the detrimental effects of the depleted ozone layer on Americans, which led to significant regulatory measures to address these concerns.
The forthcoming edition of the National Climate Assessment is scheduled for release either late next year or in early 2027.
Recent actions reflect the influence of Russ Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, who advocates for the program’s termination to prevent its findings from reinforcing federal climate regulations in legal disputes. In a chapter of Project 2025, a conservative strategy document endorsed by President Trump, Vought proposed reshaping the U.S. Global Change Research Program to limit its influence on policy and litigation concerning environmental regulations.
According to Vought, the program should be restricted to a narrower advisory capacity to prevent it from impacting litigation outcomes unfavorably, a stance that challenges the traditional autonomy of career bureaucrats.
Vought’s proposal includes guiding OMB to appoint a select group of researchers to develop a National Climate Assessment that considers the viewpoints of a minority of scientists skeptical of human impacts on climate change and places equal importance on studies funded by industry.
Neither an OMB spokesperson nor ICF International responded to inquiries for comments.
Vought received support from David Legates, a former head of the USGCRP during the final days of Trump’s first term. Legates, who was dismissed after trying to disseminate research papers denying established climate science, recently expressed on a podcast by the Heartland Institute—a conservative group known for spreading climate misinformation—that the U.S. Global Change Research Program should be completely shut down.
Legates also mentioned that Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency was made aware of the need to eliminate the program.
There are discussions within White House circles about producing a scientific report or a version of the National Climate Assessment that emphasizes the supposed benefits of global warming. This could support challenges to the 2009 endangerment finding which mandates the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases due to their harmful impact on human health. Legates has proposed creating an alternative body of climate research portraying carbon dioxide as a non-harmful gas.
The National Climate Assessment is widely regarded as a benchmark in climate science, respected across political lines, explains Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University and a lead author on multiple editions of the report. She emphasizes the comprehensive coverage of the report across various societal interests and its crucial role in informed decision-making for a resilient future.
Don Wuebbles, an emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the University of Illinois who has contributed to all previous National Climate Assessments, warns that terminating the Global Change Research Program could have severe long-term societal impacts. He cites recent flooding in Kentucky as an example of the type of extreme weather events the program helps to plan for, highlighting the potential for significant cost savings and preservation of lives through informed adaptation and resilience strategies.
Article reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2025. E&E News delivers critical information for professionals in the energy and environment sectors.
Similar Posts
- U.S. Uses Passenger Planes to Track Greenhouse Gases Nationwide!
- Trump Administration Scraps NIH Scientific Integrity Policy on April 1, 2025
- Top U.S. Scientists Slam ‘Climate of Fear’ Destroying American Research!
- Trump’s First 30 Days: Science Battleground Revealed!
- Trump’s Day One Plan to Overhaul Climate and Energy Policies Revealed!
Cameron Aldridge combines a scientific mind with a knack for storytelling. Passionate about discoveries and breakthroughs, Cameron unravels complex scientific advancements in a way that’s both informative and entertaining.