Where you are born should not determine if you live or die

According to a Feb 12, 2026, AP News article entitled,”“What to know about EPA decision to revoke a scientific finding that helped fight climate change,” The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoked its own 2009 “endangerment finding,”  which is “a scientific conclusion that for 16 years has been the central basis for regulating planet-warming emissions from power plants, vehicles and other sources.” 

At the core of the finding is a basic scientific truth: carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which are caused by burning fossil fuels, endanger public health and welfare via pollution of the air, drinking water and communities of Americans. Scientific truths such as the one found in the EPA’s 2009 endangerment funding, rather than solely economic concerns, must be taken into consideration when making policy decisions.  

It was adopted after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases are air pollutants that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. President Trump argues that this regulation hurts the fossil fuel industry, and thus the economy, and should therefore be done away with.  

However, if we unilaterally put the needs of the fossil fuel industry above the needs of the planet, we will not have clean water to drink or clean air to breathe. People cannot have a high quality of life, no matter how much money they have, if they are forced to breathe dirty air or drink dirty water. 

According to a Feb 20, 2026 AP News article entitled “Trump climate health rollback likely to hit poor, minority areas hardest, experts say,” the finding’s reversal will affect many Americans of many different races, ethnicities, and socioeconomic positions. However, “overburdened communities, which are typically communities of color, Indigenous communities and low-income communities, they will, again, suffer most from these actions,” according to Matthew Tejada, senior vice president for environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council and a former deputy with the EPA’s office for environmental justice.  

These overburdened communities often not only live in areas near fossil fuel plants, such as Louisiana’s infamous Cancer Alley, but also tend to have fewer resources, such as access to healthcare, to protect against and recover from the effects of pollution and climate change.  

According to a November 2025 study conducted by researchers from universities such as Harvard and Boston University, found via the National Institute of Health’s website, which is entitled “High populations near fossil fuel energy infrastructure across the supply chain and implications for an equitable energy transition,” more than 46 million people in the U.S. live within a mile of at least one type of energy supply infrastructure, such as an oil well, a power plant or an oil refinery.  

The study found that “persistently marginalized” racial and ethnic groups were more likely to live near these sites and thus more likely to experience the negative health consequences associated with exposure to fossil-fuel-related pollutants. 

It is a travesty that people are being exposed to chemicals that are carcinogenic or otherwise harmful in order to further line the pockets of the wealthy. Where you live should not be a life sentence to an existence filled with health issues due to exposure to pollutants. Where you are born should not determine if you live or die.