Lee Zeldin Rejects Whitehouse’s Morality Lessons in Senate Hearing
Lee Zeldin clashed with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse on Wednesday during a Senate hearing that centered on the EPA budget request and the cost-benefit analysis of coal plants. The exchange came as lawmakers weighed President Donald Trump’s 2027 EPA budget request, which Democrats said would cut the agency’s funding by 50%.
Whitehouse Challenges Coal Costs
Whitehouse pressed Zeldin on whether hospital bills and insurance claims should count in the EPA’s calculations under Trump’s leadership. He said one plant in Michigan has already cost Michiganders $600 million in excess health costs and asked, “Are you even tracking the consumer costs of those coal plants?”
Zeldin answered, “We’re going to get to talk about math?” and then, “Oh, this is great; I don’t even know where to start.” He also said, “We just want to stick to the truth,” and, “We want to stick to the science.”
Zeldin’s Bailey’s Beach Club Remark
The exchange sharpened when Zeldin told Whitehouse, “If you don't agree with them, you don't follow their logic, then they'll want to vilify you… and I'm not going to take morality lessons from people who join all-white country clubs,” referring to reports of Whitehouse’s family membership at Bailey’s Beach Club, formerly known as Spouting Rock Beach Association.
Whitehouse had said in 2017, “I think the people who are running the place are still working on that and I'm sorry it hasn't happened yet,” referring to allowing minority members at the club. That history gave the hearing a personal edge, but the budget issue remained the substantive fight.
Trump EPA Budget Fight
The hearing unfolded while lawmakers weighed Trump’s 2027 EPA budget request. Democrats said the proposal would slash EPA funding by 50%, and Whitehouse argued Zeldin was ignoring secondary costs tied to fossil fuels.
The immediate next step is the budget process itself, where the 2027 request still faces congressional scrutiny. For readers following the EPA fight, the hearing showed that the dispute now runs through both the agency’s funding level and how its costs are counted.
