Mississippi has cut funding to its environmental agency more than any other state in the past 15 years, a new report from the Environmental Integrity Project found. The study said the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality’s budget dropped 71% from 2010 to 2024, falling from $373 million to $107 million in inflation-adjusted dollars.
The report also noted staffing reductions. Mississippi ranked 10th nationally, with MDEQ employees decreasing from 523 in 2010 to 433 in 2024, a 17% drop. Neighboring states saw mixed trends. Alabama reduced its budget by 49% and Louisiana by 26%, while Arkansas and Tennessee increased funding by 31% and 30%, respectively. South Dakota had the second-highest cut, reducing its environmental budget by 61%.
MDEQ Executive Director Chris Wells has described the agency as understaffed. “Employees in certain areas of the agency are stretched pretty thin,” he said in April. “They’re working more than 40 hours a week, barely keeping up, and in many cases not meeting external expectations for permit processing.” Wells estimated the agency has lost around 50 employees since he took over in 2020.
MDEQ’s responsibilities include conserving public and natural resources, regulating pollution into air, water, and soil, overseeing sewer systems, monitoring aquifers, and managing projects funded by the BP oil spill settlement. Any business discharging pollutants in the state must first obtain permits from the agency.
The EIP report warned that federal budget cuts could put additional strain on state agencies. The White House has proposed a 55% cut to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget next year, reducing funding to levels not seen since the 1980s. Jen Duggan, EIP executive director, said the reductions would endanger public health and environmental protections. “The implementation of our environmental laws depends on both a strong EPA and adequately funded state agencies. Many states have already cut their pollution control budgets, so further federal cuts will put more Americans at risk,” she said.
Mississippi’s significant reductions highlight growing concerns about the state’s ability to monitor and manage environmental protection effectively. Advocates argue that restoring funding is critical to safeguarding water, air, and land resources for residents and future generations.
