In a surprising move, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a former environmental lawyer and vaccine critic, recently endorsed Donald J. Trump for a second term as president. Kennedy claimed that another Trump administration would prioritize clean water, safe food, and the elimination of hazardous chemicals in the United States. However, a closer look at the Trump administration's record reveals a stark contradiction to these promises.

During Donald Trump's presidency, more than 100 environmental policies were rolled back, including bans on toxic chemicals known to pose serious health threats. One particularly concerning decision was the allowance of chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to neurological damage in children, to continue being used on food crops. Despite clear evidence from their own scientists, senior officials at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rejected the finding that chlorpyrifos can stunt brain development in young children.

Moreover, the Trump administration withdrew proposed bans on methylene chloride, N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), and trichloroethylene (TCE) - chemicals found in paint strippers and cleaning products - despite evidence of the harm they cause to human health. These substances have been linked to miscarriages, reduced male fertility, and damage to vital organs. In contrast, the Biden administration has taken steps towards banning and limiting the use of these chemicals for public safety.

A significant concern is the role lobbyists played in shaping Trump's policies. Despite his promise to "drain the swamp," Trump appointed industry insiders and lobbyists to key positions in his administration. A former coal lobbyist led the EPA, an auto lobbyist ran the Energy Department, and a former oil and gas lobbyist headed the Interior Department. This pattern extended to senior officials responsible for chemical policy, such as Peter Wright, a former lawyer at Dow Company, and Nancy B. Beck, who came from the American Chemistry Council.

Critics argue that these appointments and policy choices were driven by corporate interests rather than public health and safety. Rena Steinzor, an expert in administrative and food safety law at the University of Maryland, described the Trump administration's compliance with industry demands as "laughable." The Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, found that the EPA under Trump approved over 100 products containing pesticides that are banned in other countries.

In response to Kennedy's endorsement, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign highlighted his inclusion in the Trump/Vance transition team but did not specifically address Kennedy's claims regarding food safety and chemical regulations.

While the Trump administration made promises to prioritize safe food, clean water, and the elimination of hazardous chemicals, its actions tell a different story. Critics argue that the rollback of environmental policies, the rejection of scientific evidence, and the appointment of industry insiders left a lasting impact on public health and safety. The upcoming legal challenges to some of these decisions demonstrate the need for increased scrutiny and a renewed commitment to protecting the environment and the well-being of the American people.