Ugh. Just.... ugh.
As someone who worked for the research wing of a government agency, I will say that under Obama the EPA did get too big, but not for the reason everyone keeps talking about. Obama's EPA gave the agency incredible oversight capabilities across other agencies in the USFG, which seemed fine on paper. However, I worked for the USDA, which for the longest time worked WITH the EPA to develop its own specialized environmental protocols that were unique to its various field stations, research programs, etc. When we had to, for example, dispose of an experimental fertilizer or a GMO seedline, we had the equipment for it on site. The new EPA rules, however, made what we had obsolete and required us to spend tens of thousands of dollars on new tech and training to do things that had been done for over a decade with no recorded environmental impact. We didn't have that budget and were grounded for over a month while the Agency lawyers duked it out, only for all our projects to be nixed until we got the new stuff. In our independent tests these new policies showed no improvement and were just a money drain. And don't get me started on the three-way regulation clusterfuck that was chemical disposal - USDA vs EPA vs OSHA, all with completely different protocols that all said they had higher authority than the other 2. What a shitshow.
So in short, yes, the EPA needed to be reeled in, but only for specific, inter-government policy silliness. What Trump is pushing is incredibly dangerous and will have long-term complications on not just the US, but the entire planet for decades to come.
