Center for American Progress

The Trump Budget: A Significant Cut to Ohio Environmental Protection Resources

The Trump Budget: A Significant Cut to Ohio Environmental Protection Resources

The Trump budget would severely hinder the programs that protect Ohio’s environment, exposing people to dangerous chemicals and air pollution.

Part of a Series
A maintenance vessel approaches the Toledo, Ohio, water intake crib on September 15, 2015. (AP/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
A maintenance vessel approaches the Toledo, Ohio, water intake crib on September 15, 2015. (AP/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

The Trump administration released its long-anticipated budget targets last week, providing more detail on exactly how President Donald Trump will meet his goal of cutting $54 billion in nondefense discretionary spending in order to boost defense spending by roughly the same amount. The budget details released by President Trump largely represent a hodgepodge of recycled ideas from previous conservative spending plans. These cuts would directly threaten the safety and economic security of ordinary Ohioans while benefiting wealthy and powerful corporations.

In particular, the Trump budget guts programs that help ensure that people in Ohio are breathing clean air and drinking clean water. By forcing heavy cuts on the agencies responsible for environmental protection and land management, the Trump budget would hamper Ohio’s ability to strengthen its outdoor recreation economy, recover from an environmental disaster, and address climate change impacts on local communities.

Trump’s cut to Ohio’s environmental defenses

The Trump budget would cut the budget of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, by 31 percent. The budget would also cut the U.S. Department of the Interior by 12 percent, and the U.S. Department of Energy nonnuclear programs by 18 percent. The cuts would make it significantly more difficult for these agencies to carry out their roles in safeguarding the environment, protecting public lands and waters, and developing cutting edge technology and clean energy to slow the impacts of climate change.

Because Ohio’s Environmental Protection Agency depends on federal funding for 19 percent of its budget, budget cuts at the EPA could mean $11 million less for Ohio’s environmental programs. These cuts would hinder the state’s ability to monitor and clean up contaminants, such as the elevated lead levels found in Ohio’s drinking water 61 times since 2012.

Cuts to programs that discourage polluters and reduce pollution could also put Superfund sites—locations identified as containing significant amounts of hazardous waste that pose a danger to people and the environment, such as volatile organic compounds in the East Troy Contaminated Aquifer, radioactive waste at the U.S. Department of Energy Feed Materials Production Center site, and industrial waste at the Industrial Excess Landfill—at risk of not being cleaned up, exposing Ohioans to toxic chemicals.

The Trump budget also attacks weatherization and state energy planning programs at the Department of Energy, eliminating $14.4 million directed to Ohio alone. These programs increase residential energy efficiency for low-income families, who spend over 16 percent of their income on energy costs, and help them save $283 per year on average on their utility bills. The state energy program planning funds help governors prepare for natural disasters and electricity or fuel disruptions, increase efficiency for consumers, and deploy clean and alternative energy, including at schools and other public buildings.


Major funding reductions for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Energy would put Ohioans at risk of exposure to environmental hazards and dent Ohio’s economic growth. The cuts to environmental and energy programs in this budget are just one way that the budget would force major shortages across an array of programs that Ohioans depend on. Elected officials representing Ohioans in Washington must take notice of the impact that the Trump budget would have on Ohio families.

Ryan Erickson is the Associate Director for Economic Campaigns at the Center for American Progress. Harry Stein is Director of Fiscal Policy at the Center. The authors would like to thank Erin Auel and Kate Kelly for their assistance with this column.

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.


Ryan Erickson

Associate Director, Economic Campaigns

Harry Stein

Director, Fiscal Policy

Explore The Series