The administration is definitely firm on their stand regarding climate change, which is made clear in their latest move in the U.S. Department of State's website. It's not a subtle change in wording and sends a clear message as to how the United States will be handling climate change under the administration or at least under the department's new secretary, Rex Tillerson.
An Unsurprising Change
It's not surprising anymore to see changes regarding the U.S. position as the leading country in fighting climate change. This is made apparent in the changes that they made in the department's website. During the Obama era, the Global Change webpage on the site clearly stated how the United States is taking the lead on actions against climate change both in and out of the country.
Though they did not entirely dismiss the country's position on the matter, in its place now is a generic statement that simply states what the office is responsible for. While the change in wording is simple paraphrasing for some, it does connote a more passive America when it comes to climate change and its cooperation with UN. Essentially, it's not really a surprising move from the administration and the department's new head.
Even before he was officially announced as the department's new head, Rex Tillerson has already raised some eyebrows for his apparent connections with the oil industry, and he is not the only one whose appointment had many questioning the administration's intentions. The Environmental Protection Agency's new head Scott Pruitt has recently gotten into hot water after his statements about his uncertainty on climate change.
Not a lot of these things are surprising anymore, especially since the president has been very vocal about his position on climate change even before he got elected. The lack of surprise, however, does not equate to a lack of damage.
His latest environmental policies and orders have been a cause for major concern for many that even prominent theoretical physicist and scientist Stephen Hawking has expressed his concerns about the possible damage that these movements can have to America.
Though a change in wording could just state the country's official position on the matter, the administration's concrete movements such as cutting the budget for science agency National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration by 26 percent could lead to more direct adverse effects on Americans.