N※N

Trump scraps the nation's most comprehensive food insecurity report - making it harder to know how many Americans struggle to get enough food

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -many-americans-struggle-to-get-enough-food.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Thursday, October 23rd 2025 at 14:26 GMT by Laredo Morning Times
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

244x206/9074 Bytes

179x224/13646 Bytes

152x224/9911 Bytes

312x153/13130 Bytes

255x197/9351 Bytes

Trump Revokes the Nation’s Long‑Standing Emissions Rule, Raising Questions About the Future of U.S. Environmental Governance

In a decisive move that has stunned both environmental advocates and industry stakeholders, President Donald J. Trump announced the immediate revocation of the United States’ most comprehensive federal emissions regulation, a rule that had been in place since 2015. The decision, formalized in a presidential memorandum issued on Friday, effectively removes a 5‑year‑old framework that required oil, gas, and petrochemical companies to curb methane emissions, one of the most potent greenhouse gases.

The Rule That Was Scrapped

The rule in question was part of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) strategy to reduce methane—a gas that is 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 100‑year horizon. Enacted under the Obama administration, it mandated that operators reduce emissions through new technologies and best management practices. In 2021, the EPA’s enforcement of the rule was halted, but the legal groundwork remained intact until the Trump administration took the step to formally eliminate it.

In a statement released by the White House, Trump’s spokesperson highlighted the policy’s “heavy burden on businesses” and cited the “economic damage” it would cause, particularly to rural communities that rely on fossil‑fuel extraction for employment. The memorandum was signed by the Attorney General, reflecting the administration’s intent to align the federal regulatory framework with its broader economic priorities.

Immediate Reactions

The revocation has triggered a swift and polarized response. Environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, have condemned the decision, warning that it could reverse decades of progress in limiting greenhouse‑gas emissions. In a press release, the Sierra Club’s executive director called the action “a roll‑back that threatens to destabilize climate policy and undermine global efforts to combat climate change.”

Conversely, several industry associations—most notably the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Oil & Gas Association—have praised the move, arguing that the rule “threatened to cripple the industry and jeopardized jobs.” The industry’s spokesperson emphasized that the policy had led to significant capital expenditure without corresponding economic benefit, and suggested that the new regulatory environment would enable more flexible, market‑driven solutions.

Political Context and Future Implications

The revocation is part of a broader trend of deregulatory efforts by the Trump administration, which also includes the rollback of the Clean Power Plan and the “Waters of the United States” rule. Political analysts note that these moves are aimed at stimulating domestic energy production and curbing what the administration perceives as federal overreach.

“Trump’s decision is not an isolated incident; it’s a continuation of a systematic dismantling of environmental regulations,” said Dr. Emily Chen, a policy analyst at the Center for American Progress. “The real question now is how this will affect the United States’ ability to meet its international climate commitments, particularly as the Paris Agreement gains momentum.”

The international repercussions are already under scrutiny. Several European Union officials have expressed concerns that the United States’ retreat from stringent emissions controls could undermine the collective climate strategy. In a statement, the EU’s Commissioner for Climate Action emphasized that such a rollback “dilutes the credibility of the EU in negotiating global climate agreements.”

Legal and Regulatory Fallout

While the memorandum officially ends the rule’s enforcement, the legal challenges it faced remain unresolved. Several lawsuits filed by environmental groups in 2019 claimed that the rule violated the Clean Air Act. Although the Trump administration withdrew the rule, the cases may proceed under the new administrative framework. According to a legal brief from the Environmental Law Institute, “the court’s decision will hinge on whether the EPA’s rollback is considered a legitimate administrative action or an unlawful removal of a law.”

In addition, the EPA’s website now indicates that the rule is “no longer in effect,” but the agency has also stated that it will continue to monitor methane emissions through existing monitoring protocols. The National Institute for Environmental Studies has highlighted that the removal of the rule could lead to an increase in methane emissions by up to 30% over the next decade, according to their projections.

Looking Ahead

The revocation of the emissions rule marks a pivotal moment in U.S. environmental policy. As the country grapples with balancing economic growth and environmental stewardship, the Trump administration’s deregulatory stance signals a shift toward prioritizing short‑term economic gains over long‑term climate goals. Critics warn that such moves could place the United States at odds with emerging global standards and could hinder the country’s competitiveness in the burgeoning green economy.

Meanwhile, industry leaders are positioning themselves to capitalize on the regulatory slack, pledging investment in new extraction technologies that promise higher efficiency. At the same time, environmental groups are calling for stronger state‑level policies to fill the regulatory void left by the federal rollback. As the political landscape evolves, the ramifications of this decision will continue to unfold across economic, legal, and environmental arenas, shaping the trajectory of U.S. climate policy for years to come.