Lindsey Dillon is with the Department of Sociology, University of California, Santa Cruz. Christopher Sellers is with the Center for the Study of Inequalities, Social Justice, and Policy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY. Vivian Underhill is with the Department of Feminist Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz. Nicholas Shapiro is with the Science History Institute, Philadelphia, PA. Jennifer Liss Ohayon is with the Silent Spring Institute, Newton, MA. Marianne Sullivan is with the Department of Public Health, William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ. Phil Brown and Sara Wylie are with the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA. Jill Harrison is with the Department of Sociology, University of Colorado, Boulder.
Am J Public Health. 2018 Apr;108(S2):S89-S94. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304360.
We explore and contextualize changes at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the first 6 months of the Trump administration, arguing that its pro-business direction is enabling a form of regulatory capture. We draw on news articles, public documents, and a rapid response, multisited interview study of current and retired EPA employees to (1) document changes associated with the new administration, (2) contextualize and compare the current pro-business makeover with previous ones, and (3) publicly convey findings in a timely manner. The lengthy, combined experience of interviewees with previous Republican and Democratic administrations made them valuable analysts for assessing recent shifts at the Scott Pruitt-led EPA and the extent to which these shifts steer the EPA away from its stated mission to "protect human and environmental health." Considering the extent of its pro-business leanings in the absence of mitigating power from the legislative branch, we conclude that its regulatory capture has become likely-more so than at similar moments in the agency's 47-year history. The public and environmental health consequences of regulatory capture of the EPA will probably be severe and far-reaching.
我们探讨了特朗普政府执政头 6 个月期间环境保护署（EPA）的变化，并认为其亲商业的方向正在促成一种形式的监管俘获。我们利用新闻文章、公开文件以及对现任和退休 EPA 员工的快速响应、多地点访谈研究，（1）记录与新政府相关的变化，（2）将当前亲商业的改革与之前的改革进行背景化和比较，（3）及时公开传达研究结果。受访者拥有与之前共和党和民主党政府的长期综合经验，使他们成为评估由斯科特·普鲁伊特领导的 EPA 近期转变以及这些转变在多大程度上使 EPA 偏离其保护人类和环境健康的既定使命的有价值的分析人员。考虑到其在立法部门没有制衡力量的情况下强烈倾向于亲商业，我们得出的结论是，其监管俘获的可能性比该机构 47 年历史上的类似时刻更大。EPA 监管俘获对公共和环境健康的影响可能是严重和深远的。
