All Categories

Don’t Let EPA Put Industry Profits Before Human Health

Administrator Pruitt is at it again, teeing up another action to cripple the EPA’s ability to protect human health and well-being. Tell the EPA that we need a cost-benefit analysis that accurately reflects the benefits that pollution protections provide to our communities’ health and safety.

Write your comment in your own words so it will be counted as a unique comment:

  1. Copy the text below into the EPA template here. (If you include your address, it will appear in the EPA docket.)
  2. Make your comment unique:
    • Rewrite it in your own words.
    • Add opening and ending sentences explaining why this matters to you personally.
    • Remove all CAPITALIZED text.
  3. Sign your comment with your name, and if you are willing, city and state. Note that everything you write, including your name and address, will appear on the EPA docket.

Dear Acting Administrator Wheeler,

As a member of Physicians for Social Responsibility, I am writing to voice my strong opposition to U.S. EPA’s proposed rule, “Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Costs and Benefits in the Rulemaking Process.”

PUT IN YOUR OWN WORDS THE POINTS BELOW ON WHY A ROBUST COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS OF PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND OUR CLIMATE.

  • The new rule can drastically change how the EPA evaluates federal health and environmental safeguards, prioritizing the costs for companies to comply with rules over the benefits that pollution protections have for our communities’ health and safety.
  • This means that lifesaving programs like the Clean Power Plan, which sets the first limits on carbon pollution from power plants and would save up to 4,500 lives every year by 2030, would be undervalued and consequently eliminated.
  • This misinformed effort is based on a longstanding industry fabrication that federal standards cost more than the resulting benefits. In fact, the opposite is true. The benefits of public health protections far exceed the cost of adopting those protections.
  • The Trump administration’s own Office of Management and Budget found in 2017 that for every dollar spent complying with safeguards, Americans received between $2-$12 in benefits.
  • The less the EPA values the health of our children, families and communities, the easier it is for them to justify letting industry pollute our air and water. By downplaying the benefits of critical health and climate protections, the EPA is rejecting its mission to protect our health and environment.

CONCLUDE WITH YOUR PERSONAL CALL TO REJECT THIS RULE, WHICH WOULD CRIPPLE THE EPA’S ABILITY TO PROTECT OUR HEALTH AND WELL-BEING—THEIR VERY MISSION.

Sincerely,
NAME, TITLE
CITY, STATE

Take Action