We study how representatives decide on behalf of others regarding climate change mitigation. What behavioral biases are present when citizens cannot directly decide? Through an experiment, we study the gap between deciding for self vs. others, and the role of paternalism, risk preferences, and pro-social dispositions. Our findings highlight how monetary versus physical consequences influence behavior, along with the role of social norms and individual traits. We also analyze self-selection into decision-making roles, identifying characteristics of those who act for others. These insights inform climate policies that promote cooperation and accountability in collective decision-making.