In Short : California Governor Gavin Newsom is considering declaring climate change a public health emergency. This move would highlight the immediate and significant health risks associated with climate change, such as extreme heat, air pollution, and natural disasters. By declaring climate change a public health emergency, the state can mobilize resources and efforts to address climate-related health challenges more effectively. This initiative aligns with the growing recognition of climate change as a critical public health issue, prompting urgent action to mitigate its impact on communities and individuals.
In Detail : While organizations and activists continue to call climate change a global emergency and public health crisis, there has been little movement to issue an official declaration in the United States. As California Governor Gavin Newsom establishes himself as a leader in the area, he is positioned to declare climate change a public health emergency, utilizing the tools of the office to force additional change. If he will take that action is yet to be determined.
A state of emergency is normally used for an imminent threat that requires a quick response. Representative government is cumbersome and slow moving. The formalities of parliamentary procedure through regular meetings, public input, and political debate delay decisions by months or years. There are times that process must be usurped for the public well-being.
Traditionally, the use of a state of emergency has been limited to natural disasters. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes require immediate action and quick decision making to save lives and help in recovery. The process varies by jurisdiction and is outlined in law, but normally the governor, mayor, or the highest ranking official for the impacted area can unilaterally declare a state of emergency. That action triggers a predetermined response where certain decisions can be made outside the normal legislative process. The legislative body always reserves the right to override a state of emergency, however that is rarely seen. Normally, the emergency runs its course and declaration expires on its own within a few weeks.
Beyond natural disasters, a state of emergency may also be used for a public health emergency, like COVID-19. A public health emergency generally refers to an infectious disease, but the U.S. Health And Human Services frequently declares them in the wake of hurricanes and other natural disasters where there is a longer-term threat to the health of those residing in the area.
The COVID-19 pandemic tested the boundaries of government oversight and power. Elected and appointed officials discovered the authority to consolidate power under a declaration of a state of emergency, and were slow to relinquish it when the immediate threat passed. The state of emergency extended beyond the traditional timeframes, continuing to be renewed indefinitely with no clear end. In response, Florida and other conservative states enacted legislation that limited the usage of a declaration of emergency. However, not everyone agrees with the limited approach, and it has become a tool for other policy issues.
On September 7, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham declared gun violence a public health emergency. She then used her consolidated power to suspend open and concealed carry of firearms. While her actions will most likely be held unconstitutional, it reveals a controversial approach that may be politically expedient for other governors. Specifically, it could be a way for a Democrat governor to bring attention and resources to climate change.
While I may not personally agree with the approach, the idea is not without merit. The World Health Organization continues to advocate that climate change is a public health emergency, as does the United Nations. In June 2022, the American Medical Association issued a proclamation “declaring climate change a public health crisis that threatens the health and well-being of all people.” This followed a joint proclamation made in January 2021 by 26 medical associations, including the American Lung Association, American College of Physicians, and the National Medical Association, making a similar declaration and calling for action by President Biden.
Since 2010, the Centers for Disease Control has had a Climate and Health Program that “supports state, tribal, local, and territorial public health agencies as they prepare for the health impacts of a changing climate”, but falls short of declaring an emergency. In August, President Biden stated he had “practically” declared a state of emergency, but no formal declaration exists. With the calls for movement in this area rising, it is surprising no Democrat governor has taken the initiative at the state level.
The most likely candidate is Gov. Newsom, who has been proactive in the climate change arena. In 2022, he signed the California Climate Commitment, a $54 billion investment in climate action. In October 2023, he signed climate change disclosure requirements for large corporations that align with those imposed by the European Union. In the end of October, he will embark on a trip to China to promote cooperation on climate change.
The political timing is ripe for action by Newsom. The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference, commonly called COP28, takes place November 30 – December 12 in Dubai. A declaration of emergency would get noticed. Additionally, the third Republican Presidential Debate occurs November 8 in Miami, Florida. The move would invoke strong reactions from the right, specifically from Gov. DeSantis, garnering additional political attention that could only serve to further solidify Newsom’s status with the Democrat base.
A declaration that climate change is a public health emergency is politically inevitable, the only question is which Democrat will go first. While Newsom may be the most probable, other Democrats looking for national exposure could seize the opportunity to lead on a top issue.