Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Problems with pollution in Texas
Conservatism in today's society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Problems with pollution in Texas
Texas, being the very conservative, right-wing state that it is, has long had problems compromising and working with the federal government and when it comes to environmental policy, this is no exception. Republicans in the state of Texas tend to clash frequently with federal Democratic leaders and this has been especially noticeable within the last few years. The state of our environment is a national problem and has gotten to the point where federal law must intervene when it comes to regulation of how each state deals with the problems of air quality, water pollution, and conservation of land and resources, to name a few. It seems as though when it comes to issues regarding the environment, the states and federal government have been unable to see eye to eye. In the past, there was a focus on meeting the minimum federal standards when it came to the environment but states are leaning towards more aggressive policies. While each state may choose to handle this policy in the way they feel best benefits them, it is an issue that affects the whole country and should be handled as if it were as important as any other. Single states often become catalysts for others to adopt their regulations, rather than using the federal government as a leading example, but it is important that these catalyst states are being led in the right direction in the first place. Before the 1970s, environmental policy was not the more publicized issue that it is today. After the Santa Barbara oil spill in 1969, the environmental movement really took off. The federal government took the situation into their hands and paid more attention to environmental policy than they had been doing in the past. While the states still have quite a bit of power when it com... ... middle of paper ... ...nation and to decide the best way to compromise. While each state should be aware of the environmental needs that are most important to address, environmental policy should be beneficial to all. This means that Texas and the federal government need to learn how to work together more efficiently. “As is often the case in environmental policy, environmental outcomes occur at a rate incompatible with political agendas: In addition, a multitude of possibly confounding variables makes it difficult to correlate collaborative governance processes with environmental outcomes.” (Biddle) It is crucial for Texas to drop its “Don’t Tread on Me” state of mind for the greater good of our environment. Selfishness has no place here. Without any compromise, the destruction of Texas’s environment could very well impact other states and become a landslide effect throughout the country.
The idea of Texas secession is not a new one. The decision in the 1869 Supreme Court Case Texas v. White set a precedent that states could not secede from the union (Rothman), but recent events show that not everyone in Texas believes this to be the case. There was a petition to the White House for the secession of Texas in 2012 (Diaz) but, more recently, support has been growing in the Republican Party. This spring the Republican platform committee voted to put the topic of secession up for discussion during the Texas State Republican Convention in early May (Baddour). While the idea still has only a small amount of support, none of that support comes from the party’s leaders (Associated Press). It’s clear from comments made in the articles that no one thought the vote would pass. Many people are surprised the movement has as much support as it does. Yet according to the article from The Washington Post, the discussion at the GOP convention was, “two votes shy of going to a floor
Daniel Elazar created a classification scheme moralistic political culture of individuals, and traditionalistic to describe the political culture of the state. According to Elazar, Texas can be described as traditionalistic and individuals. Historically, the Texas political parties demonstrated a strong tradition, provincialism, and business dominance. The models, however, may weaken as the Republicans increase its power in the state and urbanization continues. Texas is the second largest state in the country and there are four different geographical regions: the Gulf coastal plain, the interior lowlands, Great Plains, and the basin and range province,
The American way of living and thinking in Texas have changed tremendously over the past century. Political ideals are one thing that changes with time, and have transformed with the changing times well. The Texas constitution of 1876 was a landmark for the state and has been part of the state’s history since then. The Texas constitution of 1876 is still in use today but with all its harsh restrictions it is considered one of the most confusing of all the state constitutions. The constitution became one of the most prominent changes to Texas education system and politics.
The people of Texas are diverse and carry their “big can-do attitudes and accents” (Pearson); making Texas a bigger than life state. The political culture of Texas is impacted by two different subgroups of individualistic and traditionalistic characteristics. The combination of traditionalism and individualism has had a huge impact on the state and Texas’ seven different constitutions. The shift in power between 1827 and 1876 has impacted the political diversity Texas has today. Looking at the specifics of these subcultures, the traditionalists believe government should benefit the wealthy and powerful, and that government services must be limited.
Newell, Charldean. "Inflexibility, Traditionalism, and Partisanship: The Texas Response to New Federalism." Review. Annual Review of American Federalism 12 (1981 (1983): 185-95. Publius. Oxford University Press. Web. 23 Mar. 2011.
In my analysis of the Texas Constitution I will assess the three branches of our State Government, the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch and finally the Judicial Branch. Our State Government resembles our National Government in various ways but also in very different ways which we will review in this essay. I will identify a handful of criticisms and problems associated with the provisions in each of these branches of our State Government and identify suggested reforms that many feel are needed.
Texas went through a great amount of political change from being dominated by the Democratic Party during the 1960s and 70s, from the Republican Party taking over in the 80s. One of the big reasons for this change was due to the political party’s views. Throughout this essay I will discuss the changes of the political stances in Texas as well as the present day factors that affect America.
The state of Texas was the 28th state added to the United States of America on December 29, 1845 . At the time, it was the largest state in the US and would remain that until the inclusion of Alaska into the US in January 3, 1959. Texas became a state because of the diverse political strife, military success, and because of nationalism , over the course of 80 years. It starts as just a province of Spanish Mexico empire, and would eventually become the Lone Star State.
In the United States, for the last four decades, from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan through the two Bush Presidencies, the Republican Party won the White House by amassing large margins among white voters (Lizza.) The state of Texas has been reliably Republican since the 1970s and there are various elements to Texas political culture that can be narrowed down to three essential ideological trends: economic liberalism, or faith in the free market economy, social conservatism, or favoring traditional values and moralism, and populism, or promoting the rights and worthiness of ordinary people (Texas Political Culture.) As a result, the dominant political mood in Texas favors low taxes, minimal government services, and policies that are pro-business. This phenomenon is not static, however, since changing demographics in the state are causing changes in the profile of Texas in reference to electoral politics, among other major issues. This paper will explore different perspectives about the changing demographics of Texas, and where they might lead the state politically, and will present a variety of viewpoints regarding this complex subject.
Texas politics is an interesting ecosystem of power, rules and regulations. Of course, in typical Texas fashion, most of the politics we engage in we do our own way. From governors who stay in office for a decade to our extremely diverse demographics, Texas is extremely unique. This uniqueness of course comes with its critics, benefits, and downsides. This is particularly true with the Texas Court system compared to both the federal courts and many other states.
When deciding what to do about federal mandates that are not funded, one must consider both sides. With federal mandates such as the Clean Air Act, Superfund cleanup and the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. government sets national standards that states and local governments don’t necessarily want. If the laws are necessary, taxpayers at the local level should approve them. Otherwise, the federal government should be expected to pay for the mandates they regulate. Unfunded mandates are one more way for Washington bureaucrats to transfer responsibility for their actions onto the backs of local taxpayers.
The government of the state of Texas is a difficult and complicated institution that is composed of many different levels. The question comes in to everyone's mind at one time or another whether or not to trust the government. It could be that people believe that the officials will take advantage of their power, or simply people don't like the idea of being controlled by someone who is not a family member or friend. To avoid this centralized power, the government is divided into stages and this is a reasonable ground for trusting the government. Government runs this state and it does deserve to be trusted.
... middle of paper ... ... Texas Democrats see greater government as necessary and good, and seek to solve these issues within the constructs of state and national programs. Conversely, Texas Republicans and Libertarians find this position cumbersome, and fear that increased government directives are wasteful, and will inevitably lead to the loss of choice and freedom.
The larger oil spills that occurred in the United States often resulted in a change in law regulation while the smaller oil spills were used as lessons to prevent the same mistake. As time progressed through the years, more oil spills became known to have occurred in the United States, this includes the most disastrous ones. For instance, the Santa Barbara Oil Spill of 1969 made way for the National Environmental Act of 1969, signed by then-president Richard Nixon (Give Earth a Chance), and for the California State Lands Commission to place a moratorium on newer drilling areas just three years later (“Chapter 8”). The Santa Barbara Oil Spill remained as the most devastating spill occurring in the U.S. until in 1989, the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
Moreover, the Clean Air Act, which imposed more federal authority over the states through the EPA program, provides a greater glimpse of how policy-making through more federal control can affect an economy and bring results. As discussed, the amendments added onto the Clean Air Act in 1990 ultimately increased federal authority as the EPA could set new regulations. Recently, the EPA has taken control of various state environmental programs thereby expanding its power. Nonetheless, the true question lies on whether these actions are detrimental to state sovereignty as well as their economies, or are they appropriate to fulfill the environmental protection agenda. According to the official EPA website, the Clean Air Act has successfully been