Posted originally on Feb 12, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |  

The Environmental Protection Agency under the Trump administration is on the verge of repealing the 2009 “endangerment finding” that formed the legal and scientific basis for regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. That finding, first issued early in the Obama administration, concluded that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations,” and it became the linchpin for federal climate regulations ranging from motor vehicle emissions standards to power plant and industrial restrictions.

Carbon dioxide is not toxic, and the attempt to regulate it under the Clean Air Act was always a legal and scientific stretch designed to bypass Congress. This single regulatory maneuver became the foundation for vehicle mandates, power plant restrictions, fuel standards, and a never-ending assault on fossil fuels. The economic consequences were predictable. Higher energy costs ripple through everything from transportation, food, manufacturing, and housing. It has been reducing real living standards while politicians congratulate themselves for “saving the planet.”

Climate policy has become a secular religion rather than a scientific discipline. Dissent is not tolerated, data is selectively presented, and every weather event is blamed on carbon emissions regardless of historical precedent. Governments have used this narrative to justify de-industrialization, energy insecurity, and the transfer of wealth and control to centralized authorities. Europe is the clearest example. Net Zero policies have devastated industrial competitiveness, forced reliance on foreign energy sources, and driven capital out of the continent. The United States has been heading down the same path, and this regulatory rollback is one of the few rational course corrections we have seen.

The legal challenges that will follow this repeal are inevitable, but the broader trend is already clear. The climate narrative is unraveling under the weight of its own contradictions. If carbon were truly the existential threat portrayed, there would be consistent global action rather than selective enforcement aimed at Western economies while China and others expand emissions without restraint. The reality is that climate policy was never about climate. It was about control, taxation, and restructuring society from the top down.

From a cyclical perspective, climate regulation accelerated the loss of confidence in government. People see rising utility bills, higher food prices, and declining real wages while being told it is all necessary for their own good. That is precisely how confidence collapses. When government policy openly works against the interests of the population, capital flees, productivity falls, and social unrest rises. This move signals a recognition that economic survival ultimately overrides fashionable doctrine, and that markets, not mandates, are the foundation of progress.