A significant faction within the coalition that helped elect the current administration is now publicly demanding the removal of a key environmental official, accusing him of betraying a core campaign promise to safeguard public health.
Leaders of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement have launched a formal petition calling for the dismissal of Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin. They allege that since his appointment, Zeldin has systematically advanced policies that weaken oversight of toxic chemicals and expedite the approval of pesticides, actions they claim prioritize corporate interests over the well-being of American families.
The petition marks an escalation in internal tensions, pitting the health-focused wing of the president’s base against appointees seen as aligned with the chemical industry. The president’s campaign prominently featured pledges to ensure clean water and a safe food supply, a message that resonated strongly with these advocates.
Signatories, which include several prominent conservative health activists, argue that the EPA under Zeldin has moved in the opposite direction. They cite specific regulatory changes that would reduce scrutiny for new and existing chemicals, along with decisions to continue permitting agricultural chemicals banned in other nations. Further controversy stems from moves to approve additional PFAS compounds—often called “forever chemicals”—for use in pesticides, even as the administration reviews drinking water limits for such substances established under the previous administration.
“Rather than supporting the mission to Make America Healthy Again, Administrator Zeldin has prioritized the interests of chemical corporations,” the petition states. It warns that his approach risks increasing chronic disease rates, driving up medical costs, and placing undue strain on the healthcare system.
In response to the criticism, an EPA spokesperson defended the administrator’s record, stating he is “working closely” with the president to implement health-focused policies. The agency attributed the backlash to “a significant amount of misinformation” that misrepresents legal and regulatory facts.
However, activists counter that their concerns are grounded in science and principle, not partisan politics. They note that frustration is coming from within the president’s own political coalition, rejecting the notion that criticism is solely from the political left.
“The president was elected on a promise of health,” said one activist involved with the petition. “If he were fully aware of how damaging these specific actions are to human health, we believe he would intervene.”
The petition concludes with a direct appeal for Zeldin’s removal and the appointment of a new EPA leader who will, in their words, “genuinely defend public health and truly put America first.” The growing dispute highlights a deepening policy divide that threatens the unity of the president’s core supporters.