The connection between Federal Government and the state of Texas

The relationship between the state of Texas and the cities of Texas is similar to the relationship between the federal government and the state of Texas. Texas and the federal government have already had disagreements. Their constitutions vary, and the Texas legislature has fought with the federal government over control issues including environmental legislation and the implementation of voting rules. The Federal Government's relationship with the State of Texas was similar to that of Texas cities in that there has already been friction between the Texas state and Texas cities. Texas is more traditional than Texas counties, which are more progressive. A governor of Texas known as Gregg Abbott accused Texas cities and claimed that they were trying to make Texas like California by introducing bans on bags, fracking, and tree cutting. He claims that the bans are interfering with the ideal Texas model.

Fracking is a means of extracting shale gas. It involves a large quantity of water being pumped under high pressure inside channels which are drilled into the rock so that gas is released (Weaver 214). The residents of Denton decided to place a ban on fracking which the Texas government highly disagreed with. Texas argues that by denying owners of mineral the chance to access their property, their rights are being violated. Fracking is seen to have revolutionized energy sector in Denton city. Members of the city, however, argue that it has a negative impact on the environment. Fracking is seen to be a nuisance for people residing close to the sites (Davis 180). Texas is, however, willing to find a solution to the issue but claims that banning should be out of the question. Any person seen denying others access to the site is arrested.

Ordinances whose aim is to create protection for trees have come up in up to 50 cities in Texas. The rules are set such that the owner of a property is charged with the responsibility to pay a certain fee once they cut a tree. In cases where they do not pay, they are required to replace the tree by planting another tree. This is an effort to conserve the environment. However, Abbott, Republican law enforcers and Texas public policy demand an end to the local laws. Their argument is based on the fact that such laws and ordinances are unconstitutional. That is viewed as violating the rights of private property. According to Abbott, it would be interfering with the freedom of a landowner. Those who have trees should have the right to do as they wish with their trees.

The cities introduced a ban on plastic bags that was not taken well by Texas. Texas argued that the cities were turning into socialists. Enforcers of the laws and regulations claim that the idea of Texas model does not lie in a polluted environment. About four legislators aim at coming up with a bill that will bring nullification any equal rights ordinances brought forth and passed by Texas cities. Civil rights enhanced by the cities will be removed from the records. Democrats, however, claim to have minimal interest in fighting back. They aim to stick to the argument which views local control as the best control.

Attorney general Abbott has led Texas in fighting the federal government over control issues. Texas has filed several lawsuits as a result. The United States Supreme Court set up a provision under the voting rights act. It impacted two lawsuits which were against federal government. They were based on the voter id law and being involved in legislative redistricting of maps without seeking federal approval. A lawsuit which was meant to challenge health officials who got rid of funding for a program on women health in Texas was brought to dismissal.

The environmental protection agency is Texas’ biggest opponent in legal matters. In 2011, Texas failed to adhere to environmental protection agency order where they were supposed to come up with new standards for greenhouse emissions, EPA took it upon themselves to be involved in the process involved in permitting of greenhouse gas emissions in the state. A federal appeal court failed to consider Texas’ request to temporarily stop the federal government from being part of the permitting exercise. Texas’ attorney general claims that EPA has gone against the federal act on clean air, which entitles the state with the responsibility to come up with a regulation on air pollution. The attorney general claims that what the EPA did was risk the livelihood and working opportunities for several Texas’ families. The EPA claims that it is adhering to the clean air act. According to them, the act has permitted a step in for the agency should a state fail to adhere to federal standards. It is a means intended to protect the health of Americans, and the rule should be adhered to immediately since Texas is the greatest emitter of greenhouse gas. This is due to the large size of the state and the fact that it is very industrialized.

Conditions of emergency in Texas underscore Texas’ poor and troubled relationship with assistance from the federal government. In a situation where flooding had affected Texas, Washington was expecting a request for federal aid, but even with several people missing, Texas had not made any request. In reality, Texas relies heavily on the federal government for assistance in disaster funds. However, Texas’ legislature will see to it that a bill on allowing cities to take charge of rebuilding houses when natural disasters occur, reaches its expiration date.

Texas is found to suffer the most when natural disasters arise. This is due to its geographic nature and big size. According to research done by the center for American progress, Texas takes in the largest amount of funds for assistance when compared to other states( Bland 198) Due to the tragedy that constantly catches up with Texas; it is not fit for Governor Abbott to endorse skepticism about the federal government. During a period when Texas is not in a position to make provisions related to flood control, and neither can it pass a law allowing cities to be leaders of emergency housing response, the state should not develop an attitude of fear towards the federal government.

Disasters in Texas make it evident that the state is unable to effectively plan so that its residents are more prepared for disasters and tragedies before they strike. As much as Texas is insecure and feels that they cannot trust the federal agencies, they heavily rely on them when caught by the disaster.

In conclusion, the relationship between the Texas state and Texas cities is analogous to the relationship between the state of Texas and Federal Government. Texas is caught in a situation where it is unable to establish a stable relationship with the federal government and Texas cities. The fact that it is very conservative is a major cause. However, as much as Texas has not established a good relationship, it relies on the federal side for assistance.













Work cited

Davis, Charles. "The politics of “fracking”: Regulating natural gas drilling practices in Colorado and Texas." Review of Policy Research 29.2 (2012): 177-191.

Weaver, Jacqueline Lang. "The Federal Government as a Useful Enemy: Perspectives on the Bush Energy/Environmental Agenda from the Texas Oilfields." PaCe envTl. l. Rev. 19 (2001): 1.

Bland, Robert, Jessica E. Short, and Simon A. Andrew. "9 Financial Resiliency by Local Governments to Natural Disasters." The Future of Disaster Management in the US: Rethinking Legislation, Policy, and Finance (2016): 195.















.