Essay Question 2: Should policy choices be driven by the national government or by the states? Has the increased nationalization of policy been good or bad for the country?
In 2006, then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill that would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by year 2020. He worked with British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to get a trans-Atlantic market in carbon dioxide emissions, to assist British and California firms in cutting their pollution as efficiently as possible (page 89, The Logic of American Politics). However, in 2007, Schwarzenegger was not given the federal waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that he needed to go through with his plan. Reason being that Schwarzenegger was implementing regulations for California, for a problem that exists in more states, than just California. EPA chief Stephen L. Johnson argued, on page 90, “The Bush Administration is moving forward with a clear national solution, not a confusing patchwork of state rules.” One state should not act alone on an issue that “extends far beyond the borders of California.” Chief Johnson is arguing that California is not the only state that needs a solution for the pollution, so California should not get special laws and programs for their state; and he is absolutely right. Choices, that affect our nation, should be driven by the nation, not the states. We need our nation to stay as one whole, not as fifty separate nations, living under one roof, called America. If every state made their own decisions, every state could lobby to be their own nation, and that’s where the down fall of the United States would begin.
Chief Justice John Marshall said it best, “The power being given is in the interest of the nation to facilitate its execution.” (McCulloch v Maryland court case). He’s saying that Congress and the Supreme Court have been given the power to rule over all other courts, so that the nation can move smoothly and efficiently; so that no...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document