Climate change is an imminent threat to humanity and the planet, and we are running out of time. This is as settled as science can be, yet Congress continues to hem and haw and fail to take meaningful action.
President Joe Biden must show much-needed resolve and declare a national emergency to work on what lawmakers won't.
The move would be politically fraught and face strong organized opposition, but the power of the presidency can send a critical signal that half measures are no longer enough to confront this looming crisis.
Speaking on Wednesday, however, Biden fell short. He called climate change a "clear and present danger" and enumerated the toll it's already taking on America, including extreme weather events — worsened by a heating world — that tallied $145 billion in damages last year.
"The health of our citizens and our communities is literally at stake," he said. "Our national security is at stake as well. Extreme weather is already damaging our military installations here in the states. And our economy is at risk. So we have to act."
Instead of the emergency declaration, he announced allocation of $2.3 billion to help build climate resilient infrastructure, development of federal workplace heat standards and touted a $3.1 billion investment in helping weatherize homes and make them more energy efficient. These are all commendable actions but will hardly make a dent in the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change.
Biden's reticence is politically explainable. Even in Washington state, where lawmakers have taken stronger action to try to curb carbon pollution, climate change is hardly top of mind for voters.
A recent Seattle Times poll found likely state voters in the upcoming election consider abortion and inflation as most important. Climate placed a distant fifth among all respondents and independents, fourth among Democrats and represented virtually zero concern for Republicans polled.
Under a national emergency, Biden could take decisive action to limit the production of fossil fuels — such as ending offshore production of oil and gas — but any such move would likely result in even higher gas prices, an area where the president should tread lightly.
More likely are actions such as the ones suggested by a group of U.S. senators led by Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. In a letter to Biden, they urged him to use the National Emergency Act to redirect spending to build out renewable energy systems on military bases, implement large-scale clean transportation solutions and finance distributed energy projects to boost climate resiliency.
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., is not a part of that letter but pointed to the impacts of climate change on Washington when asked if she would support an emergency declaration. She cited the wildfires in Chelan forcing people from their homes, last summer's heat wave that made roads buckle, and longer and more severe droughts affecting the state.
"Short of congressional action, we need the president to use the full force of his executive authority to mobilize a whole-of-government approach that will tackle the climate crisis in every way possible," she said.
The danger of climate change demands that whole-of-government approach. Biden says he understands the urgency — that means hurry up and do something.
