During the last month, President Barack Obama has stuck to his State of the Union vow to advance his agenda “with or without Congress,” pushing new standards and regulations to combat and mediate climate change.

Due to the pressing nature of overarching environmental issues and the polarization of politics, this decision-making power shaped and utilized by the federal government’s executive branch is necessary.

While other elected politicians may not see the urgency of dealing with climate change, Obama surely sees the difference Americans have to make. During his first term, the president gave up on climate change through legislation when it stalled in the U.S. Senate.

But this did not stop executive action on climate change.

Even while climate change legislation was stuck and dying, the Obama administration and the Environmental Protection Agency were beginning to produce their own solutions to the problems at hand.

While the EPA made some announcements of regulations before the State of the Union this year, such as the increase in car gas mileage standards to 50.4 miles per gallon by 2025, February has seen a roll of new solutions one after another.

In the beginning of February, the Obama administration announced the creation of seven regional “climate hubs,” which will work to aid the country’s farmers to adapt to climate change, including changing weather patterns and increased pests.

The following week, the president revealed a $1 billion “climate resiliency” fund for communities affected by central California’s drought.

That same week, Secretary of State John Kerry directed all American diplomatic missions to make climate change a priority issue. With this, Kerry also started talks with Indonesia, which struggles heavily with deforestation, and encouraged the country to sign a major climate treaty.

Obama continued on with new regulations, ordering the EPA to develop new, tougher fuel standards for heavy-duty trucks, which transport most of our resources and goods across all parts of the country, according to a Feb. 18 New York Times article.

With new regulations in the transportation sector, our country can begin to make major cutbacks on our greenhouse gas emissions, as transportation emissions are one of the top sources for greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.

Combining the efforts to reduce our environmental effects while creating plans to deal with the effects we have already set into play shows our government is looking out for the future of its people.

While it is unfortunate that leadership on these issues has fallen solely on the executive branch, it is not a sign of a tyrant in office or a new “big brother” state. It is a sign that other branches are not taking science seriously and are not looking out for their constituents.

Climate change will not only affect our environment, it will affect our nation’s human health and our economy. It will hurt our livelihoods and our society. In some cases, even in our own country, these changes are already hurting or endangering our lives.

When Congress is stuck in the mud, at least we have the executive office to keep our nation’s health and happiness in the forefront of planning and policy for the future. The president must continue with these endeavors while other policymakers refuse to make changes, for the sake of both the planet and the people on it.

Meg Callaghan is an environmental studies major at SUNY-ESF. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at mlcallag@syr.edu. 

Published on February 27, 2014 at 1:00 am