House Republicans warn that steep EPA cuts are 'a bridge too far'

The top Republican on the House spending panel overseeing the Environmental Protection Agency said President Trump’s plan to drastically slash EPA spending will likely be rejected by the GOP-led Congress.

Rep. Mike Simpson, chairman of the Appropriations’ environment subcommittee, said the president’s 2026 proposal to cut EPA funding by 54% “may be a bridge too far to be achievable.”

The Idaho Republican’s response to the administration’s budget request represents one of the first signs of pushback from GOP lawmakers against Mr. Trump’s budget buzz cut.

The president’s 2026 request reduces nondefense discretionary spending by $163 billion — a 23% drop from 2025 levels. 

The EPA, which is tasked with protecting people and the environment from health risks, would see its funding cut by more than half, reduced by $5 billion from 2025 levels. More than $2 billion in spending would be eliminated from the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund programs, which the Trump team said are duplicative and result in projects that “bypass states’ interest and planning.”

Democrats are appalled by the proposed cuts, which they say will gut the agency and eliminate critical environmental protections. 

Their GOP counterparts are also skeptical.

Mr. Simpson said the cuts envisioned by the Trump administration “might not be able to be fully replicated” in the spending bill Congress ultimately approves. He said lawmakers also likely cannot agree to the administration’s proposed $1 billion in cuts to state grants that assist American Indian tribes, for example. 

The House-passed measure last year called for cutting EPA spending by 20%. The president’s current proposal, however, would put EPA spending at pre-1985 levels. 

“I’m not opposed to significantly reducing the size of the EPA,” Mr. Simpson said. “A 54% cut may be a bridge too far to be able to achieve, but we’ll see.”

The agency had been flush with funding from the Biden administration, which provided the EPA with more than $100 billion through two major green energy measures passed by Congress when Democrats were in control.

The agency spent most of the money, distributing it in grants to nonprofits aligned with climate change and social justice advocacy. 

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin clawed much of the money back by canceling the grants, which he said lacked proper scrutiny and were handed out in a rush as President Biden’s term came to an end. 

The EPA operating budget amounted to more than $9 billion in 2025, but Mr. Zeldin said he can accomplish more with the $4.2 billion budget proposed by Mr. Trump.

“By reducing the EPA budget by billions of dollars, the president’s 2026 budget demands maximum efficiency from the EPA while we continue to fulfill all of our statutory obligations,” Mr. Zeldin told lawmakers. 

Republicans have signaled they won’t cut spending as significantly as Mr. Trump wants. 

They’ve begun asking department and agency heads what they would do if provided funding above the president’s lower request.

The question was posed to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday at a hearing about Mr. Trump’s proposed 26% cut to HHS funding. Mr. Kennedy told lawmakers he’d spend whatever money they send him.

Mr. Zeldin gave a more nuanced answer.

“We will absolutely follow the law. It’s also my commitment to Congress that we have a zero-tolerance policy towards wasting any tax dollars,” Mr. Zeldin said. “We also want to make sure that every dollar that’s appropriated by Congress is spent efficiently. We don’t want to spend money just to spend it.”