The Trump administration is swinging hard at bureaucratic overreach, aiming to dismantle an Obama-era environmental program that’s been bleeding businesses dry.
On Friday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled a bold proposal to scrap the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), a move that could save American companies up to $2.4 billion. It’s a classic case of cutting red tape to let the free market breathe, but critics are already clutching their pearls.
The Daily Caller reported that the EPA’s plan would end the GHGRP, which forces companies to track and report greenhouse gas emissions, a program launched under Obama in 2010 after Congress tossed $3.5 million at it in 2008.
This deregulation aligns with President Trump’s push to unleash American energy and fuel what Zeldin calls the “great American comeback.” It’s a signal to industry: focus on growth, not paperwork.
Zeldin argues the GHGRP is a pointless burden, costing billions without delivering tangible environmental benefits. “The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is nothing more than bureaucratic red tape that does nothing to improve air quality,” he said on Friday. Sounds like a refreshing dose of common sense, though some eco-zealots might disagree, mistaking data collection for actual progress.
Congress set the stage for the GHGRP in 2008, handing the EPA $3.5 million to kickstart it under the Consolidated Appropriations Act. By 2010, Obama’s administration had it up and running, mandating emissions reporting from large facilities, fuel suppliers, and CO2 injection sites.
It’s been a regulatory albatross ever since, chaining businesses to endless compliance costs. The program requires companies to report detailed greenhouse gas emissions, a task Zeldin says isn’t tied to any meaningful regulation.
“Unlike other mandatory information collections under the CAA, the GHGRP is not directly related to a potential regulation,” the EPA stated on September 12, 2025. Why keep a program that piles on costs without cleaning a single puff of air?
If finalized, the rule would lift reporting obligations for most large facilities, all fuel and industrial gas suppliers, and CO2 injection sites.
This isn’t just a tweak—it’s a wholesale rejection of a system that’s more about control than conservation. Expect the usual suspects to cry foul, but businesses might finally get some relief.
Zeldin first hinted at scrapping the GHGRP back on March 12, 2025, signaling early that the EPA was ready to roll back Obama’s legacy. The September proposal is now open for public comment, part of the federal rulemaking process that ensures transparency, even if the left will likely flood it with complaints. It’s democracy in action, but don’t expect the progressive crowd to applaud.
The EPA insists this move complies with the Clean Air Act, balancing deregulation with legal obligations. “With this proposal, we show once again that fulfilling EPA’s statutory obligations and Powering the Great American Comeback is not a binary choice,” Zeldin said on September 12, 2025. That’s a polite way of saying you can protect the environment without strangling the economy.
Zeldin’s not stopping at the GHGRP; he’s also targeting the 2009 Endangerment Finding, another Obama-era relic used to hammer power plants with regulations.
On July 29, 2025, he proposed rolling it back, calling its repeal “the largest deregulatory action in the history of America” on the Ruthless podcast. Bold words, but they resonate with those tired of government overreach.
The GHGRP rollback fits Trump’s broader vision of energy dominance, prioritizing jobs and growth over bureaucratic box-checking. “Alongside President Trump, EPA continues to live up to the promise of unleashing energy dominance that powers the American Dream,” Zeldin declared on September 12, 2025. It’s a rallying cry for those who see regulations as shackles on prosperity.
Critics will argue this move blinds us to emissions data, but the EPA counters that the GHGRP doesn’t directly improve air quality. The program’s defenders, often steeped in climate alarmism, overlook how its costs drive up prices for everyday Americans. Data’s nice, but not when it’s bankrupting businesses and inflating grocery bills.
Zeldin’s proposal is a calculated strike against a program that’s more symbolic than effective. The GHGRP’s data might fuel academic papers, but it’s hard to see how it’s made the air cleaner since 2010. Meanwhile, companies have been drowning in compliance costs that could’ve been spent on innovation or jobs.
The EPA’s push to eliminate the GHGRP is now in the public’s hands, with the rulemaking process inviting feedback before finalization. This isn’t a backroom deal; it’s a transparent effort to rethink a program that’s outlived its usefulness.
Still, expect environmental groups to paint this as the end of the planet. Zeldin’s deregulatory zeal, including his attack on the Endangerment Finding, shows a commitment to dismantling what many see as government overreach.
“Instead, it costs American businesses and manufacturing billions of dollars, driving up the cost of living,” he said of the GHGRP on September 12, 2025. That’s a zinger aimed at the heart of progressive overregulation.