Environmental Polling Roundup – June 5, 2026
Headlines
Pew – Most Americans agree that the federal government is doing too little on climate change and that extreme weather in the U.S. is more frequent and severe than in the past [Website, Report, Topline]
Environmental Protection Network (EPN) – Voters want to strengthen the EPA and strongly oppose EPA rollbacks; voters overwhelmingly agree that the EPA should focus on protecting public health over reducing regulatory costs [Release, Deck, Topline]
[Battleground Districts] LCV + Climate Power + EDAF + NRDC Action Fund – Battleground voters rank gas prices and utility costs as two of the most important issues for them in the midterm election [Website, Deck]
Navigator – Getting PFAS out of drinking water is the most popular policy in the “MAHA” agenda, even as the Trump administration is doing the opposite [Website, Deck, Topline]
Key Takeaways
Voters are deeply troubled by cuts and changes at the EPA under Trump–if they hear about them. The Environmental Protection Network finds that voters continue to have positive general impressions of the EPA, even as they have mixed and uncertain views about its current direction. Voters are split in their attitudes about the current direction of the EPA and the performance of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, with many voters unable to offer an opinion.
Voters also have only a vague awareness about major changes at the EPA during Trump’s second term, including budget and staffing cuts, reduced enforcement of environmental laws, and the repeal of the endangerment finding. Awareness of the EPA’s actions to cater to polluting industries–including appointing former chemical industry officials to the agency and inviting corporations to request exemptions from EPA regulations–is particularly low.
However, voters have strongly negative reactions when they learn more about the EPA’s current direction. Following a balanced, simulated argument on the topic, voters widely oppose efforts to remove EPA scientists and shut down the EPA’s research office.
Voters also overwhelmingly agree that the EPA should prioritize public health over reducing regulatory costs. In fact, after exposure to arguments for and against the EPA reducing regulatory costs, voters reject the argument that reducing regulations will make things more affordable for them. On the contrary, voters are more inclined to believe that these regulatory cuts will end up costing them more in medical bills and other knock-on effects from increased pollution.
Gas prices and utility costs are now top voting issues. The cost of living continues to rank far ahead of other issues as Americans’ top priority. And while polls typically only ask about inflation and the cost of living as one item, a new survey of voters in battleground U.S. House districts by LCV, Climate Power, EDF Action, and NRDC Action Fund separated out different types of costs in asking which issues were most important to voters in this years’ elections.
The poll finds that gas prices and utility costs rank among the top few issues for battleground voters, along with the costs of food and groceries and health care, and ahead of hot-button issues such as immigration and the war in Iran.
Good Data Points to Highlight
[Climate Action] 73% of Americans support the U.S. participating in international efforts on climate change, including 54% of Republicans [Pew]
[Climate Action] 60% of Americans say that the federal government is doing too little to address climate change [Pew]
[Extreme Weather] 68% of Americans recognize that extreme weather events in the U.S. are happening more often than in the past [Pew]
[Extreme Weather] 62% of Americans recognize that extreme weather events in the U.S. are more severe than in the past [Pew]
[EPA] 62% of voters say that the EPA should be strengthened or expanded, compared to just 8% who say that it should be weakened or eliminated [Environmental Protection Network]
[EPA] By a 77%-9% margin, voters agree more with an argument that the EPA “should prioritize protecting people’s health from toxic chemicals and pollution, even if it means higher costs” (77%) over an argument that the EPA “should prioritize reducing regulatory costs, even if it means higher levels of toxic chemicals and pollution” (9%) [Environmental Protection Network]
Full Roundup
Pew – Most Americans agree that the federal government is doing too little on climate change and that extreme weather in the U.S. is more frequent and severe than in the past [Website, Report, Topline]
Americans say that the federal government is doing too little on a variety of environmental priorities, including climate change and water quality. Climate change is one of several environmental issues that Americans want the federal government to take more action on: three in five (60%) say that the government is doing too little to reduce the effects of global climate change, while 24% say that the government is doing “about the right amount” on climate change and just 15% say that the government is doing too much.
Below are the environmental priorities that Pew asked about, ranked by the percentage of Americans who say that the federal government is doing too little on each:
- Protect the water quality of lakes, rivers, and streams – 66% too little / 29% right amount / 4% too much
- Protect air quality – 63% too little / 30% right amount / 6% too much
- Protect animals and their habitats – 61% too little / 31% right amount / 6% too much
- Reduce the effects of global climate change – 60% too little / 24% right amount / 15% too much
- Protect open lands in national parks and nature preserves – 58% too little / 36% right amount / 5% too much
Americans’ ratings of the government’s response to these issues are deeply polarized, with Democrats far more likely than Republicans to say that the federal government is doing “too little” on each. Still, substantial minorities of Republicans say that the government is doing too little on each priority. This includes three in ten Republicans (31%) who say that the government is doing too little on climate change and nearly half of Republicans (48%) who say that the federal government is doing too little to protect water quality.
Around half of Americans recognize that climate change is seriously harming people in the U.S. today. A bit less than half of Americans (46%) say that climate change is harming people in the U.S. today either “a great deal” or “quite a bit” (46%), which is three points higher than the last time Pew asked this question in 2023 (43%).
An additional 40% believe that climate change is having “some” or “a little” impact on Americans today, while only 14% say that climate change isn’t impacting Americans at all.
Democrats and Republicans have very different views about why the Earth is getting warmer, though a plurality of young Republicans recognize that humans are causing it. While few Americans outright deny that climate change or global warming is happening, Democrats and Republicans still disagree on the cause.
Overall, Pew finds that 48% of Americans say that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity while 22% say that it is mostly because of natural patterns. Only 12% say that there is no solid evidence that the Earth is getting warmer, and an additional 17% say that they aren’t sure.
While three-quarters of Democrats (75%) recognize that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity, only 21% of Republicans attribute the problem to human activities. The plurality of Republicans (37%) say that global warming is happening mostly because of natural patterns, and around one-quarter of Republicans (23%) deny that global warming is happening.
The youngest cohort of Republicans that Pew surveyed (Republicans aged 18-29), however, are more likely to say that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity (39%) than to say that it is happening mostly because of natural patterns (30%).
Majorities of Americans in every region of the country agree that extreme weather is both more frequent and more severe than in the past. Around two-thirds of Americans (68%) agree that extreme weather events are happening more often than in the past, including large majorities in the Northeast (67%), Midwest (68%), South (64%), and West (73%).
Most Americans (62%) also agree that extreme weather events are more severe than in the past, including majorities across every region (70% in the Northeast, 58% in the Midwest, 58% in the South, and 67% in the West).
Americans are increasingly pessimistic that the world will avoid the worst impacts of climate change, and there is bipartisan agreement that the U.S. should participate in international climate efforts. Only one-quarter of Americans (25%) believe that countries around the world will collectively do enough to avoid the worst impacts from climate change, which is eight points lower than the last time Pew asked this question in 2023 (33%). This drop has been particularly large among Democrats (from 41% to 27%), who were relatively more optimistic about the world’s efforts to address the problem when Biden was in office.
There is also broad and bipartisan agreement that the U.S. should be involved in worldwide efforts to combat climate change. Nearly three-quarters of Americans (73%) support the U.S. participating in international efforts on climate change, including 54% of Republicans.
Environmental Protection Network (EPN) – Voters want to strengthen the EPA and strongly oppose EPA rollbacks; voters overwhelmingly agree that the EPA should focus on protecting public health over reducing regulatory costs [Release, Deck, Topline]
Voters have generally positive feelings about the EPA but have mixed and uncertain views about its current direction. Voters feel more favorably than unfavorably about the EPA by a two-to-one margin (54% favorable / 27% unfavorable).
However, voters are split roughly evenly on whether the EPA is headed in the right direction (31%) or off on the wrong track (34%) and more than one-third (35%) don’t know enough to say. Similarly, voters are split in their approval of Lee Zeldin as EPA Administrator (27% approve / 26% disapprove) and nearly half (47%) admit that they don’t know enough to rate Zeldin’s performance.
Voters nearly unanimously agree that the EPA should focus on ensuring clean air and water, conducting scientific research, protecting people from toxic chemicals, and holding corporate polluters accountable. When it comes to EPA priorities, overwhelming majorities (84%+) say that the EPA should do each of the following:
- Monitor air and water pollution (93% say that the EPA should do this)
- Ensure clean and healthy air and water for all communities (91%)
- Ensure safety of chemicals that are used where we live, work, and play (91%)
- Ensure corporations comply with environmental laws (89%)
- Conduct scientific research on chemicals and environmental threats (88%)
- Conduct research on what levels of exposures to specific toxic chemicals and pollutants are dangerous to babies, children, expecting mothers, and adults (87%)
- Bring legal action to hold polluters accountable (84%)
A majority of Americans (56%) also say that the EPA should make the U.S. a world leader in addressing climate change, and around half (48%) believe that the agency should advance environmental justice and civil rights.
Meanwhile, few voters support the new priorities that the EPA has pursued under Trump. Only 36% believe that the EPA should be involved in “restoring American energy dominance,” and just 16% believe that the EPA should be involved in “making the U.S. the Artificial Intelligence capital of the world.”
Most voters want the EPA to be strengthened and expanded, and a plurality feel that it is currently doing too little to protect the public from pollution and toxic chemicals. Three in five voters (62%) say that the EPA should be strengthened or expanded, compared to just 8% who say that the agency should be weakened or eliminated. An additional 17% say that the EPA should “remain the same.”
Many voters see room for improvement in the EPA’s traditional functions, with nearly half saying that the agency is doing “too little” to protect the public from water pollution, air pollution, and toxic chemicals (5% too much / 25% just the right amount / 46% too little).
Voters have only a vague awareness of major EPA actions during the second Trump administration. Most voters say that they’ve heard at least “a little” about each of the following:
- Reductions in the EPA’s staffing and budget (61% heard at least “a little”)
- Deregulation of environmental rules (55%)
- Reduced enforcement of environmental laws (55%)
- The reversal of the EPA’s scientific finding that climate change endangers public health and welfare (55%)
However, no more than 22% say that they’ve heard “multiple times” about any of these changes to the EPA and its work.
Awareness is lower for other actions that the EPA has taken to cater to polluting industries and undermine public health protections, including:
- A completed EPA report on the health risks of PFAS, sometimes called “forever chemicals,” that has not been publicly released (40% heard at least “a little”)
- Corporations being invited to request exemptions from complying with the EPA and environmental laws (38%)
- Former chemical industry officials being put in charge of reviewing the safety of chemicals at EPA (38%)
- Changes to how the EPA calculates the benefits of environmental protections, including how it weighs health benefits like reduced deaths and illness (37%)
Voters have a strong negative reaction to learning about EPA cuts, even when they see the administration’s stated rationales for them. Voters overwhelmingly oppose efforts to remove EPA scientists and shut down the EPA’s research office (22% support / 60% oppose, including 46% who “strongly” oppose) after reading the following summary and simulated arguments about the topic:
“Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency has reduced staffing and reorganized its research office, which studies how toxic chemicals and pollution affect human health and how to monitor and reduce those risks. This office has played a key role developing ways to detect substances like PFAS—often called ’forever chemicals’—in drinking water and air.
The EPA says these changes will save money for taxpayers and improve coordination.
Scientists who once worked at the EPA warn the move will jeopardize the agency’s ability to identify health risks before it’s too late.”
Voters overwhelmingly agree that the EPA should prioritize public health over reducing regulatory costs. When asked which should be a higher priority for the EPA, three-quarters (77%) say that the EPA should “prioritize protecting people’s health from toxic chemicals and pollution, even if it means higher costs” while only 9% say that the EPA should “prioritize reducing regulatory costs, even if it means higher levels of toxic chemicals and pollution.”
Even among conservative voters, there is an overwhelming preference for the EPA to focus on its traditional mission instead of cost-cutting. Conservative voters say that the EPA should focus on public health over reducing regulatory costs by a more than 50-point margin (66% public health / 14% reducing regulatory costs).
Voters reject the argument that removing EPA regulations will help them financially, as they are more moved by an argument that the health impacts of EPA rollbacks will lead to higher costs. A core weakness of the arguments in favor of the EPA reducing regulatory costs is that voters believe that these cuts are likely to have the opposite effect for them financially.
When presented with the following competing arguments, voters are twice as likely to believe that rolling back EPA regulations will make things less affordable for them (54%) than to believe that these rollbacks will make things more affordable (26%):
- “Rolling back regulations at the EPA will make things less affordable for people like me because more pollution and toxic chemicals can lead to higher medical bills, higher insurance costs, and higher water bills as communities deal with contamination” – 54% agree more with this argument
- “Rolling back regulations at the EPA will make things more affordable for people like me because it lowers costs for businesses, which can help keep prices down” – 26% agree more with this argument
[Battleground Districts] LCV + Climate Power + EDAF + NRDC Action Fund – Battleground voters rank gas prices and utility costs as two of the most important issues for them in the midterm election [Website, Deck]
Gasoline prices and utility costs are now two of the top voting issues in the congressional battleground. In this survey of voters across 51 competitive U.S. House districts, voters rank gasoline and utility costs among the top issues that will decide their vote for Congress.
Below are the percentages of battleground voters who rank various issues among the top three or four for them in deciding their congressional vote:
- The cost of food and groceries – 65%
- The cost of gasoline – 41%
- Health care – 40%
- The cost of utilities, like electricity and heating – 35%
- The cost of housing – 31%
- Government spending and the national debt – 27%
- Immigration and the border – 26%
- The war in Iran – 26%
- Threats against democracy – 22%
- Taxes – 21%
- Crime – 15%
- Abortion – 12%
Majorities of battleground voters say that Trump and Republicans in Congress are making things worse on energy prices, following a sharp rise since the start of the year. Battleground voters are nearly three times as likely to say that Trump (22% making things better / 63% making things worse) and Republicans in Congress (20% making things better / 58% making things worse) are making energy prices worse for consumers as to say that they are making things better.
Battleground voters are comparatively much less likely to say that Democrats in Congress are making energy bills worse (43%), though only 20% say that Democrats in Congress are making things better for consumers on energy prices.
Battleground voters’ ratings of Trump and Republicans on the issue have grown much more negative since the start of the year. Compared to January, battleground voters are now 14 points more likely to say that Trump is making things worse on energy prices (from 49% to 63%) and 11 points more likely to say that Republicans in Congress are making things worse on energy prices (from 47% to 58%).
Voters continue to rate corporate greed as the biggest factor behind rising utility bills. Battleground voters attribute the most blame for the problem to utility companies’ greed, followed by the failure of state regulators and the policies of Republicans in Washington. Meanwhile, fewer voters blame “Democrats in Congress mandating the increased use of clean energy” than any other factor included in the survey:
- Utility companies raising rates on customers and making record profits – 48% say that this is “mostly to blame” for rising electricity bills and home heating costs
- State regulators that let utility companies charge customers high prices – 43%
- The decisions by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress to cancel solar power and wind energy projects – 40%
- Increasing electricity demand from artificial intelligence (AI) and computer data centers – 32%
- Rising prices for natural gas, the leading fuel source for electric power plants – 29%
- Democrats in Congress mandating the increased use of clean energy – 22%
Battleground voters trust Democrats over Republicans to hold corporations accountable for pollution and to lower monthly utility bills, but are mixed on which party has a better long-term energy plan and will do a better job of making the U.S. energy independent. Below are the margins by which battleground voters trust one party over the other to handle various issues related to energy:
- Hold corporations that pollute air and water accountable – Democrats +15
- Lower monthly utility bills – Democrats +9
- Lower the cost of gasoline – Democrats +5
- Upgrade and improve the reliability of the electric grid – Democrats +5
- Deal with the cost of electricity and home energy costs – Democrats +4
- Create good jobs in the energy industry – Democrats +3
- Have a long-term plan to meet the country’s energy needs – Democrats +2
- Make the United States energy independent – Republicans +2
Navigator – Getting PFAS out of drinking water is the most popular policy in the “MAHA” agenda, even as the Trump administration is doing the opposite [Website, Deck, Topline]
Banning PFAS from drinking water is more popular than any other “MAHA” policy. We covered this Navigator polling about MAHA and related issues in our last weekly roundup, though it’s worth re-upping now that Navigator has released its deck on the findings.
One particularly striking takeaway is that the most popular MAHA-related policies, including banning PFAS/“forever chemicals” in drinking water (supported by 76% of voters) and decreasing pesticide and herbicide use in commercial agriculture (supported by 75% of voters), are two that the Trump administration is directly contradicting with its recent actions to weaken drinking water rules and increase glyphosate production.
Related Resources
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 6th, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 23rd, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 27th, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.