Will JD Vance save the Great Lakes from Trump?
Lake Michigan | Susan J. Demas
'This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist's weekly newsletter here.'
This coverage is made possible through a partnership between Grist, Interlochen Public Radio in Northern Michigan, and WBEZ, a public radio station serving the Chicago metropolitan region.
Last year, Vice President JD Vance, then an Ohio senator, was part of a bipartisan coalition calling to increase funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, or GLRI — among the country's largest investments aimed at protecting and restoring the Great Lakes.
'The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative delivers the tools we need to fight invasive species, algal blooms, pollution, and other threats to the ecosystem,' said Vance, who was co-chair of the Senate Great Lakes Task Force when the reauthorization bill was announced. He voted to extend and increase funding for the project until 2031.
'This is a commonsense, bipartisan effort that I encourage all of my colleagues to support,' Vance said.
Advocates hope he hasn't changed his mind.
The five Great Lakes — Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario — represent the largest freshwater ecosystem in the world and a source of drinking water for about 10 percent of the country's population. Since 2010, the massive GLRI spending package has helped fund everything from microplastics research to algal bloom elimination to climate-resilient shorelines. Just this week, Democratic Senator Gary Peters of Michigan and Republican Senator Todd Young of Indiana introduced a bill that would reauthorize funding at $500 million per year for the next five years. Politicians often point to the initiative as proof that they can agree on conservation and environmental issues.
But its future may be at risk. The last time Trump was in office, his administration tried and failed to slash or even eliminate GLRI funding several times. Now, Trump is taking aim at environmental spending, including funding for programs tied to environmental justice and climate change. Vance has changed course on environmental issues as he has risen through the political ranks, such as his support for coal, electric vehicles, and even what he's said about human-caused climate change. He also invested in and sat on the board of the disastrous indoor farming operation AppHarvest. Advocates hope that Vance might save the GLRI despite a hostile political environment.
Already, the Trump administration has frozen billions of dollars from two major initiatives passed under former president Joe Biden: the Inflation Reduction Act and the bipartisan infrastructure law. Amid escalating uncertainty around federal support, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker preemptively halted construction earlier this week on a billion-dollar megaproject to prevent the spread of invasive fish in the Great Lakes. But Trump's blocking of federal funds for climate and DEI initiatives could put him at odds with longstanding bipartisan support for the Great Lakes — including from Vance.
'We know [Vance] supports Great Lakes restoration and protection,' said Laura Rubin, the director of Healing Our Waters–Great Lakes Coalition, a Michigan-based advocacy organization for federal environmental policy. 'He was a champion of it, and we're hoping that translates into his role as vice president.'
The vice president's office did not respond to Grist's requests for comment.
The GLRI began as a bipartisan response to mounting environmental problems in the early 2000s: rampant industrial and agricultural pollution, declining fish stocks, and growing threats of invasive species.
Recently retired Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow helped launch the initiative 15 years ago, during the Obama administration. 'We need a fund that has broad jurisdiction, that can be activated immediately when there is a crisis,' she said at a policy conference in January.
The GLRI was preceded by a 2004 executive order from former president George W. Bush to create a regional task force — an attempt at improving coordination among federal agencies, states, and tribes to remediate freshwater ecosystems.
Since it began, the GLRI has funded over 8,000 projects, with the federal government spending approximately $5 billion over the last 14 years, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
'That [funding] goes to cleaning up some of the most contaminated properties in our harbors and cities,' Rubin said. 'It goes to improving habitats and removing invasive species. It goes to reducing phosphorus and nutrient runoff, and it goes to education and outreach.'
Many lawmakers support the GLRI for its economic benefits, such as increased tourism, job creation, and commercial development. A 2018 economic analysis from the Great Lakes Commission and the Council of Great Lakes Industries found that every federal dollar spent through the landmark program resulted in about $3 of additional benefits.
Bill Huizenga, a Republican representative from Michigan, co-sponsored the latest push to reauthorize the GLRI. He recently posted a video from a regional environmental summit, urging a plan for how to 'parlay the relationships with JD Vance and people who are familiar with' the GLRI and explain what this investment means ecologically and economically. Huizenga's office didn't respond to requests for comment.
But funding can't protect the Great Lakes if there's nobody to direct it.
The Trump administration, as part of a broader campaign, has begun an aggressive push to gut federal agencies, including the EPA, which oversees the GLRI. Last week, EPA workers were notified that more than 1,000 positions filled within the previous year could be terminated at any time. Not long after, a total of 168 employees who work on environmental justice projects were placed on paid administrative leave.
Both deal a major blow to the EPA office that regulates much of the Midwest and Great Lakes, according to Nicole Cantello, president of the union that represents regional EPA workers. She estimated the Trump administration's cuts could cost the office approximately 200 employees — one fifth of its entire workforce.
Cantellos said that's bad news for offices like the EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office, which leads GLRI implementation. 'I don't know how strong that program will be after all this round of resignations and dismissals.' she said.
The program — which has relied on funding from the the bipartisan infrastructure law to clean up some of the most environmentally damaged areas of the Great Lakes region — has a much lower percentage of obligated funds compared to many others. This means it could be at a greater risk of clawbacks; less than half of the appropriated $597 million had been obligated as of January 6, according to an EPA report.
Last year, when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives was cutting overall spending levels, it didn't touch the GLRI, according to Don Jodery, director of federal relations for the nonprofit Alliance of the Great Lakes.
Jodery said it's fair for new administrations to review federal funding and agency staffing. 'But some of these programs are really, critically important,' he said,' 'and they really shouldn't be up for debate as to whether or not they need to be funded.'
This article originally appeared in Grist at https://grist.org/politics/will-j-d-vance-save-the-great-lakes-from-trump/.
Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
L.A. immigration protests latest: California sues Trump admin. over National Guard deployment, president says he would support arresting Newsom
California is suing the Trump administration over its National Guard deployment in Los Angeles without the consent of the state's governor amid immigration protests that escalated over the weekend, leading to dozens of arrests. The Los Angeles Police Department has since declared all of downtown L.A. an unlawful assembly area. The lawsuit was filed Monday by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and accuses President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of "unlawfully" federalizing the state's National Guard, and infringing on California Gov. Gavin Newsom's authority as commander-in-chief of the state's military reserve force. "Every governor, red or blue, should reject this outrageous overreach," Bonta said. "It is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism. We will not let this stand.' Bonta also alleged in a televised statement Monday that protests escalated after National Guard troops arrived on Sunday. 'We'll never know what might have been had the president left our state and local authorities to continue the important work they were already doing and were more than capable of doing,' Bonta said. Before the lawsuit was announced, Trump on Monday said he would support his border czar arresting Newsom over possible obstructions to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions in the state amid protests. At least 44 people were arrested by federal ICE agents during a raid at several locations around Los Angeles on Friday, including Ambiance Apparel in the garment district and a Home Depot in the Westlake District. These areas are known to have significant migrant populations and labor-focused industries. Protests then erupted in Los Angeles in response to Trump's immigration crackdown that has seen federal agents arrest a student on his way to volleyball practice and erroneously deport a man to El Salvador. Sunday marked the third straight day of protests over the wave of immigration raids. Crowds gathered in downtown Los Angeles and Boyle Heights. Protesters marched from Boyle Heights to the Metropolitan Detention Center, a federal building in downtown L.A. This led to the LAPD declaring the area an unlawful assembly. Protesters moved from outside the federal building and walked onto the 101 Freeway around 3:30 p.m. local time. Police fired tear gas and other projectiles into the crowd and cleared the area by 5 p.m. Meanwhile, another protest started on Sunday outside of Los Angeles City Hall Protesters outside the city's prison in the Alameda neighborhood of L.A. were arrested, according to the LAPD. Around 300 National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles County on Sunday after Trump deployed them to protect federal property and personnel, without the consent of Newsom, a Democrat with whom he often spars. As governor, Newsom would normally retain control and command over the California National Guard. The White House said the deployment was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in the state, and initially stated that 2,000 troops were being deployed. About 500 Marines are also prepared to deploy to the area, the Northern Command said. It's the first time in nearly 60 years that a president has called in the National Guard without a state's request or consent. The last time was when President Lyndon Johnson sent the Guard to protect a 1965 civil rights march in Alabama. Newsom said California is suing the Trump administration over the federal mobilization of the National Guard. Newsom told MSNBC that Trump's federal mobilization of the National Guard was 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' The governor also alleged that Trump is the one to blame for the escalation in California, saying, 'He's exacerbated the conditions. He's lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire.' Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, told NBC News that anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement would be arrested. When asked if that would include Newsom or Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, he replied, 'I'll say it about anybody. … You cross that line, it's a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' Newsom responded to Homan's NBC interview on Sunday by saying: 'He knows where to find me.' Homan later clarified those remarks in an interview with Fox News. 'The reporter asked me, well, could Governor Newsom or Mayor Bass be arrested? I said, 'Well no one's above the law — if they cross the line and commit a crime, absolutely they can.'' He added: 'There was no discussion about arresting Newsom.' Meanwhile, Trump said he would support the arrest of Newsom. "I would do it if I were Tom. I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity but I think it would be a great thing," Trump said Monday. In response, Newsom said: "This is a day I hoped I would never see in America." "I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism," he wrote on X. The peaceful protests escalated into vandalism, autonomous cars set ablaze, fireworks and other objects thrown at law enforcement, police firing rubber bullets (including at an Australian journalist), and dozens of arrests by the LAPD. 'In recent days, many protests across the city have been peaceful and we thank the community for expressing their views and their frustration in a responsible manner,' LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell said in a Sunday news conference. 'However, when peaceful demonstrations devolve into acts of vandalism or violence, especially violence directed at innocent people, law enforcement officers and others, we must respond firmly.' McDonnell said that a total of 39 people had been arrested — 29 on Saturday and 10 on Sunday. He also said the LAPD was not given advance notice that federal operations would occur in the area. On Sunday, several Waymo driverless vehicles were vandalized and set on fire in downtown Los Angeles. A Waymo spokesperson told USA Today Monday morning that its autonomous vehicles have been removed from the area and the company has temporarily suspended its ride-hailing service 'out of an abundance of caution.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass told CNN on Monday that the situation has since calmed in the city. 'If you dial back time and go to Friday, if immigration raids had not happened here, we would not have had the disorder that went on last night,' Bass said. 'We do not know where and when the next raids will be. That is the concern because people in this city have a rapid response network.' 'If they see ICE, they go out and they protest, and so it's just a recipe for pandemonium that is completely unnecessary,' she added.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
IAEA chief relays Iran warning against Israeli strikes on nuclear facilities
CAIRO (Reuters) -International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi said Iranians warned him that an Israel strike on the country's nuclear facilities could cause Iran to be more determined about developing a nuclear weapon, according to an interview broadcast and published on Monday. 'A strike could potentially have an amalgamating effect, solidifying Iran's determination – I will say it plainly – to pursue a nuclear weapon or withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,' Grossi said in the interview, published on the Jerusalem Post website and broadcast on i24 TV on Monday. Grossi, however, doubted that Israel would strike Tehran's nuclear facilities, the Jerusalem Post reported. The Iranian nuclear program "runs wide and deep," Grossi told the Jerusalem Post. "Disrupting them would require overwhelming and devastating force." Tehran and Washington have recently engaged in Oman-mediated nuclear talks. Iran is set to hand a counter-proposal for a nuclear deal to the United States via Oman, Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday, in response to a U.S. offer that Tehran deems "unacceptable". Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump said he had warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to take actions that could disrupt nuclear talks with Iran. "I told him this would be inappropriate to do right now because we're very close to a solution now," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "That could change at any moment." Trump and Netanyahu are expected to speak over the phone on Monday.


The Hill
33 minutes ago
- The Hill
NIH scientists condemn Trump research cuts
Hundreds of staffers from across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are speaking out against the politicization of their research and termination of their work while demanding that the drastic changes made at the agency be walked back. In a letter addressed to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya, more than 2,000 signatories stated, 'we dissent to Administration policies that undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe.' The letter was titled 'The Bethesda Declaration' in reference to where NIH's campus is located. The signatories cited Bhattacharya's stated commitment to academic freedom that he made in April and called on him to push back against the changes Trump administration has implemented at NIH under his leadership. 'Academic freedom should not be applied selectively based on political ideology. To achieve political aims, NIH has targeted multiple universities with indiscriminate grant terminations, payment freezes for ongoing research, and blanket holds on awards regardless of the quality, progress, or impact of the science,' they wrote. They pointed to U.S. law and prior research that has shown that the participation of diverse populations in studies is necessary for NIH's work. The NIH staffers further blasted the canceling of nearly completed studies. 'Ending a $5 million research study when it is 80% complete does not save $1 million, it wastes $4 million,' they wrote. The researchers called on Bhattacharya to restore foreign collaborations with the global scientific community, put independent peer reviews back in place, bring back terminated NIH staffers and rethink the 15 percent cap on indirect study costs that the Trump administration enacted. 'Combined, these actions have resulted in an unprecedented reduction in NIH spending that does not reflect efficiency but rather a dramatic reduction in life-saving research,' they stated. 'Some may use the false impression that NIH funding is not needed to justify the draconian cuts proposed in the President's Budget. This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research.' NIH research is not solely centered in Bethesda. The agency is responsible for funding research projects across the country and abroad. Numerous lawsuits have been filed to combat the pulling back of billions of dollars in NIH funding. Last week, a federal judge allowed a suit filed by university researchers and public health groups challenging the cuts to move forward. Bhattacharya responded to the letter on the social media platform X. 'We all want @NIH to succeed and I believe that dissent in science is productive. However, the Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions NIH has taken in recent months,' he wrote. Bhattacharya said the actions taken at NIH have been to 'remove ideological influence from science' and further argued the agency hasn't halted international scientific collaboration but is instead 'ensuring accountability.' 'Claims that NIH is undermining peer review are misunderstood. We're expanding access to publishing while strengthening transparency, rigor, and reproducibility in NIH-funded research,' he wrote. 'Lastly, we are reviewing each termination case carefully and some individuals have already been reinstated. As NIH priorities evolve, so must our staffing to stay mission-focused and responsibly manage taxpayer dollars.'