Lee Zeldin, E.P.A. Head, Shuts National Environmental Museum
On Monday, Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said he had shuttered the museum, which was inside the agency’s headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington.
In a statement, Mr. Zeldin said the move would save taxpayers about $600,000 annually.
This museum appears to be a flagrant waste of public money. Any politician who thinks the EPA museum should continue to operate, should have the opportunity to make the case.
The EPA museum had 2000 visitors in 9 months, and cost $600,000 per year to operate. The museum averages 7.4 visitors per day. Based on ongoing expenses per visitor, the EPA museum should be closed.
That doesn’t consider the cost of the real estate. The EPA museum is a 1000 feet from the White House grounds. Surely there is a better use for such a valuable location. The museum is in the EPA headquarters building. Why is the EPA there? Let’s put EPA headquarters a few miles away, in a less expensive location.
The EPA is a legislative agency that doesn’t do anything dramatic. There isn’t anything in an EPA museum that couldn’t be put on a website.
When the EPA museum was established in 2016, there must have been some justification.
The museum included exhibits on all the previous E.P.A. administrators, including two from Mr. Trump’s first term, Scott Pruitt and Andrew Wheeler.
Washington, D.C. runs on power and prestige. There are a variety of ways to demonstrate power and prestige. In the corporate world, it’s having a company car, corner office or a large staff. In government, it’s having a security clearance, Secret Service protection or other privileges. The EPA museum exists to solidify EPA administrator legacies.
The museum did include a number of exhibits focused on environmental justice and efforts to address climate change, both of which were priorities of Mr. Biden’s. But those displays were designed in a way that allowed panels to be removed if, for example, an administrator wanted to focus on different issues.
The museum also provides a stage for administrations to market their priorities.
Closing the EPA museum isn’t likely to get much coverage in corporate media, but any coverage it does get will portray the closure as a sinister plot. Let’s close more of these vanity projects.