Texas Environmental Policies

0 / 5. 0

Texas Environmental Policies

Category: Controversial Essay

Subcategory: Political Science

Level: College

Pages: 4

Words: 1100

Texas Environmental Policies
The environment is among the natural resources that a community and individuals should take care of since the well-being of such reflects on other areas like the air and water. Every local administration of a state should put measures in place to protect and help preserve the environment. Policies and regulations act as a guideline on how the citizens will treat the environment in which they live in(McGarity 1783). Texas has many natural resources and if maintained well and used in moderation would last long. The national government has realized this and therefore takes hold of the control; however, the federal government feels it should be the one in control of the area since it is within its jurisdiction. The national constitution’s mandate is to protect each part of the country irrespective of availability of natural and other fabricated resources and despite who manages the area(Lyons 1620).
The Environment policies in Texas have ganged up to educate the public on the importance of taking care of the environment and the benefits that they rake from the care. They advocate for cleaner environments and clear water, air, and help improve the quality enjoyed by the public(Blais 18). The quality of all this has an indirect effect on the health of the people around the area. Clean air helps prevent air borne diseases and hence the importance of the policies and organized groups consideration.
Constitutional Disputes
The peaceful coexistence between the national government and federal government has been constrained with each wanting to take the supreme control of the policies governing Texas. The importance of both cooperating and working together leads to more benefits and having one voice improves the efficiency of the policies(McGarity 1800). The new energy formulation of renewable energy led to new changes in the governing of the environment.
The leaders of state advocate for new industries in the area around Texas, which directly affects the regulation on the environment policies. The main issue with the environment is air pollution and clean water supply(Lyons 1638). The state has taken over the control of the environment and has all the powers at the Texas Commission on Environment Quality where it favors most of development and advancement in the economic state at the expense of the environment.
Air pollution is a major concern for the EPA as the chemical plants emissions, natural gas infrastructure, and the pollution from refineries all contribute to spoiling the environment. All the emissions have adverse effects on the health and wellbeing of the environment and individuals. Policy changers have worked together to bring the attention of the state to curb out the negative effects. The dangerous levels of the pollution of air need to be manageable(Blais 13). For instance, in recent times there have been whistle blowers on the high levels of hydrogen sulfide from the Exxon Company, this type of gas in the environment is harmful as it is flammable and has a rotten smell and irritates the throats and eyes system(McGarity 1793). It is worse in high quantities as there are risks associated with respiratory diseases and in worse cases death.
The government agencies sometimes allow the ‘big and mentionable’ companies leave negative effects to the environment and they go unpunished. Sometimes these have political affiliations and policies and other non-governmental organizations have one common voice advocating for less political influence as the public health endangered in all this aspects.
Statement of current policy
The current state of the environment policy lies on the state and federal government where by any strain in the relationship between the two restrains the environment and effects felt by the citizens(McGarity 1797). Enforcement of the current polices, as the Clean Air Act will have positive effects on the air all people need to survive thereby reducing the risks of respiratory health.The problems come in between the two when none wants to back the other up hence the conflict of interest
Reasons for initiating changes
The changes in the policies and conflict of control over the environment are the effects that the actions of people have on the environment and the long-term effects that such have on the generations to come(Lyons 1642). Depleting the environment and the air affect the quality of life and with scientists claiming that the effects are on the ozone layer, which becomes weaker with emission of harmful gasses to the atmosphere.
The Clean Air Act has the sole responsibility of informing the state government of all policies and any other changes that it would like implement for the government to act. If the state is not in a position to make the suggested changes on the air pollution prevention, then the EPA assumes all the responsibility with the permission of the state government to enact changes that it feels will help preserve air.
Recommended course of action
The state government should leave the environmental laws and regulations to the federal government. The federal government is in touch with the people on the ground and has fewer issues to deal with hence will have their priorities focused on the clean air mandate. With more focus on the environment, the federal government will implement and involve the community in the welfare and educate the public on the importance of taking care of the environment. It will be more successful than having the state have the mainstream control.
The federal government can form local groups in the community to go around creating awareness of the proper control of the environment and soon the whole community will have the same goals and objectives in preserving the environment(Lyons 1648). Industries should then have proper disposal of their waste to reduce the impact of air pollution to the environment. Collective responsibility of all that pollute the air will have a significant reduction in the end.
Reasoning for selecting that course of action
The justification for selecting that particular course of action is that the states sometimes have many issues that it deals with. Delegating some powers and duties to other bodies will help ensure that the public gets the kind of quality service that they deserve(Lyons 1640). This will in turn help the federal and state government work together avoiding irrelevant conflicts that hurt the environment. Policies implemented by the federal government will touch on all areas and states irrespective of any political affiliation that an industry has. This will help regulate the pollution to the environment.Proper laws put in place to regulate the air pollution by the federal government better than the state government.
Works Cited
Blais, Lynn E. “The Legitimate Reach Of The Environmental Revolution.” Harvard Journal OfLaw & Public Policy 37.1 (2014): 13-22. Academic Search Complete.Web. 30 Nov. 2015. 
Lyons, Daniel A. “Federalism And The Rise Of Renewable Energy: Preserving State And Local Voices In The Green Energy Revolution.” Case Western Reserve Law Review 64.4 (2014): 1619-1668. Academic Search Complete.Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
McGarity, Thomas O. “Science And Policy In Setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Resolving The Ozone Enigma.” Texas Law Review 93.7 (2015): 1783-1809. Academic Search Complete.Web. 30 Nov. 2015.