The environmental issue is the main challenge that could face federalism in the next decade. Federalism depends on a balanced government between the national and the state government. Being a national issue, the federal government will, at some point, have to deal with environmental issues by complying with international standards. Both governments would take up the initiative to enhance the implementation of the environmental sector’s expected regulations. It will be quite impossible for the state government to involve the local government in coming up with regulations over the issue. This will call for the state government to solely identify ways to solve the environmental issues and consult the other forms of government later.
There have been previous debates on the government level that should take a leading role in environmental policy in the future. As much as the two government levels are expected to work hand in hand in solving all kinds of issues, there is the likelihood that the centralized authority can enhance inefficient regulations that will not be uniform across the country (Konisky & Woods, 2018). For instance, when it comes to pollution issues, the national government works at the front line to ensure that the country is protected. It can come up with its regulations even without consulting the state government. The national government can take up such initiatives alone because the state government could be unwilling to impose extra costs on their firms to curb the high rates of pollution due to the fear that such forms could decide to relocate to other states that have lower regulations.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The state government could be unwilling to impose extra regulations on its firms, which could lead to a competition in the regulatory status. The National government would be better positioned to manage environmental issues as it can easily capture economies of scale. Therefore, the state government would view the national government as inefficient and rigid, especially if it does not involve the state government in the decision-making process. The state government has more knowledge about the local situation and can easily develop their solutions. However, this cannot be the situation for solving environmental issues because there could be resistance from the state authorities to raise environmental standards (Konisky & Woods, 2018).
The state policies concerning any issues should involve shared responsibilities between the national and the state government. Environmental issues, however, need to be addressed on the national level to enhance uniformity at the national and state level. Most of the environmental statutes have been delegated to the national government, which can lead to future federalism problems. In case the national government comes up with its regulations even without consulting the state government, the state government can only come up with additional standards that go beyond the national government standards and not below. The national government remains the most effective option for environmental issues, especially those that affect climate change.
The fact that the national government has adequate resources puts it in a better position to handle environmental issues single handedly. The state government can, therefore, feel like they are left out when it comes to the decisions concerning environmental matters as the national government is at the frontline in implementing the environmental policies. These prospects sum up the fact that environmental issues could become a big blow to federalism as such sensitive matters can not be delegated to the states but can only be dealt with at the national level.
References
Konisky, D. M., & Woods, N. D. (2018). Environmental federalism and the Trump presidency: A preliminary assessment. Publius: The Journal of Federalism , 48 (3), 345-371.
