>> Sreenivasan: A NEW REPORT

FROM THE INVESTIGATIVE

JOURNALISM ORGANIZATION PRO

PUBLICA, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE

"NEW YORK TIMES," REVEALS THAT

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS

SHRINKING THE SIZE OF THE

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

JUST AS IT SAID IT WOULD.

AMONG THE FINDINGS: 700 PEOPLE

HAVE LEFT THE AGENCY SINCE THE

START OF THE TRUMP

ADMINISTRATION, 200 OF WHOM ARE

SCIENTISTS, AND ANOTHER 96 ARE

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

SPECIALISTS.

LISA FRIEDMAN OF THE "NEW YORK

TIMES" JOINS US TO HELP EXPLAIN

WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE AGENCY.

LISA, 700 PEOPLE SOUNDS LIKE A

LOT OF PEOPLE, AND THE GOAL IS

EVEN HIGHER, RIGHT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN, THIS IS AN AGENCY OF

ABOUT 15,000 PEOPLE.

THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT BUT THERE

HAS BEEN AN INCREDIBLE DECREASE

SINCE THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION,

EVEN, BEING PUSHED BY REPUBLICAN

BUDGET CUTS.

WHEN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION

STARTED, THEY SAID THEY WANTED

TO CUT THIS AGENCY BY ABOUT

3,200 PEOPLE, AND THEY'RE WELL

ON THEIR WAY.

>> Sreenivasan: ALL RIGHT, SO

WHAT HAPPENS IF, AS ALL OF THESE

PEOPLE HAVE LEFT, WHAT ARE THE

REPERCUSSIONS?

IS THERE LESS SCIENCE BEING

PERFORMED?

ARE THERE-- IS THERE A DIFFERENT

TYPE OF RESPONSE THAT THE AGENCY

CAN PROVIDE AFTER A DISASTER, OR

PERHAPS BEFORE ONE?

>> ABOUT 700 PEOPLE-- A BIT MORE

THAN THAT-- HAVE LEFT THE AGENCY

SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR,

THROUGH A COMBINATION OF

BUY-OUTS AND RETIREMENTS.

AND SOME OF THEM HAVE JUST QUIT.

WE SPOKE TO DOZENS OF

CURRENT AND FORMER E.P.A.

EMPLOYEES WHO ARE REALLY WORRIED

THAT SCIENCE IS AT RISK AT THE

AGENCY, THAT THEIR ABILITY TO

UNDERSTAND HOW PESTICIDES ARE

AFFECTING OUR AIR AND WATER, HOW

INCREASED POLLUTION CAN BE

ABATED, ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS

THAT WILL INCREASINGLY BE AT

RISK.

NOT TO MENTION THEIR ABILITY TO,

TO DEAL WITH BIG-IMPACT ISSUES,

WHETHER THEY ARE SPILLS OR FIRES

OR OTHER THINGS THAT CREATE

HAZARDOUS, TOXIC ISSUES FOR

AMERICANS.

>> Sreenivasan: WHAT ARE THE

LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES FOR AN

AGENCY LIKE THIS?

BECAUSE, ON THE ONE HAND, YOU

HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE CLOSE

TO RETIREMENT, WHO ARE GOING TO

TAKE A BUY-OUT OR LEAVE EARLY,

BUT THEN WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT--

KIND OF, THAT INSTITUTIONAL

KNOWLEDGE, AND HOW IT GETS

PASSED DOWN TO THE YOUNGER

SCIENTISTS?

>> IT'S A SIGNIFICANT

BRAIN-DRAIN, IN PART BECAUSE IT

DOES NOT SEEM THAT IT IS GETTING

PASSED DOWN TO YOUNGER

SCIENTISTS.

PEOPLE ARE LEAVING, AND, WHEREAS

IN PAST YEARS THEY MIGHT PUT IN

YOUNGER EMPLOYEES WHO HAD

MENTORS WITHIN THE AGENCY AND

COULD LEARN FROM THEIR

EXPERIENCE AND GROW, AND BECOME

THE EXPERTS THEMSELVES, THAT'S

HAPPENING LESS AND LESS.

AND INCREASINGLY, THESE

POSITIONS ARE JUST GONE.

I THINK THIS IS, IN PART, A

REFLECTION OF MORALE.

BOTH I AND REPORTERS AT PRO

PUBLICA, WITH WHOM I DID THIS

STORY, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED TO

MANY, MANY EMPLOYEES IN THE

AGENCY, FORMER EMPLOYEES.

THEY SAID TO US, "WE HAVE BEEN

HERE THROUGH REPUBLICAN AND

DEMOCRAT ADMINISTRATIONS ALIKE,

AND WE HAVE NEVER SEEN AN

ATMOSPHERE LIKE THIS, WHERE WE

FEEL OUR WORK IS SO DEVALUED."

THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE IN THE

ADMINISTRATION WHO VEHEMENTLY

DISPUTE THAT CHARACTERIZATION,

OF COURSE, BUT THE SCIENTISTS

AND THE E.P.A.

EMPLOYEES WE TALKED TO SAID THAT

PART OF THE LARGE NUMBER OF

BUY-OUTS REFLECTS NOT ONLY THE

ABILITY TO RETIRE A LITTLE

EARLY, BUT ALSO A SENSE THAT

THEY FEEL THEY ARE NOT GOING TO

BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR

MISSION UNDER THIS

ADMINISTRATION.

>> Sreenivasan: ALL RIGHT.

LISA FRIEDMAN OF THE "NEW YORK

TIMES," JOINING US FROM

WASHINGTON, THANKS SO MUCH.

>> THANKS SO MUCH.