Application Of The May, Can, Should Model Through Analysis Of A Specific Environmental Policy

Environment and Property Act

Defense of Environment and Property Act Policy Analysis Essay

Environment and property protection have been a hot debate in the United States. As a result, policies are being formulated to tackle the issue. Although some Americans believe that they have to give the federal government more control over their lives, The approach demonstrates that the government may intervene while maintaining the private property rights of Americans and the restrictions on federal authority set out in the Constitution. Kentucky's farmers and coal sector suffered due to the Obama administration's WOTUS law (Paul, 2021). The Trump regime overturned that rule, so it was vital to make a substantive reform to the legislation to remedy the problem and safeguard landowners and valued industries. As a response, the policy was reintroduced by Rand Paul to get the government of agricultural and landowners' backs. It is critical to examine the policy based on biblical principles, constitutional principles, and political, financial, and practical practicality.

The Biblical guidelines

The policy should be consistent with natural law. We must approach public-policy matters with humility and with our thoughts fashioned by biblically-based ideas rather than by the different political idols of our day (Monsma, 2008). The policy may support the notion that environmental exploitation is immoral since it is wicked. The individual property owners may plan for improvement and use, such as conserving land and water. The federal government has the Constitutional authority to get involved in the policy implementation. 

The Constitutional guidelines

The United States Constitution grants the federal government the authority to control the quality of the environment. Because human rights cannot be guaranteed in a dirty environment, soil deterioration and deforestation, and contaminated water endanger the fundamental right to life (WHO, n.d.). Hence the United States Constitution may control the environmental-related policy for environmental protection.

Political feasibility

Some criticize the program for gender and wealth disparities, and it is politically hazardous to alter owing to the great interest of older Americans. This demographic group votes at a higher rate than other demographic groups (Kraft et al.,2020). It can be a necessary expenditure, but political consequences also determine political feasibility, including lost votes and reduced energy stability (Jewell & Cherp, 2019). The policy can become popular as it has gained support from various government leaders such as Rouzer an American politician and a North Carolina congressional district representative, Senator Rubio, and Senator Cruz (Paul, 2021). They represent the political support that the policy has. 

Financial feasibility

Financial feasibility can be done to the federal government to increase expenditures on policy implementation. The House of Representatives passed a $2.2 trillion budget package that contains the highest federal government expenditures ever made to halt global warming and other climate-related challenges (Nytimes, 2021). The U.S. government already has a lot on its plate regarding environmental policy. Suppose the approach reduces a property's fair market value or economic viability, as established by an impartial assessor. In that case, the Federal agency issuing the rule will compensate the affected property owner double the amount of the loss (GovTrack, 2021). Furthermore, the regulation requires the Federal agency to reimburse the affected property owner for double the loss value. 


The Bible teaches that the Earth is God's property and that humanity is stewarded the responsibility for its upkeep. As a result, we are obligated to protect the environment.

The right of each citizen to clean and healthy air and water and protect the country's other natural resources is clearly stated in the Constitution. It shall not be infringed upon by anybody (Preston, 2018). The federal government should adequately be involved in environmental policy and property protection, and it is the right approach for the country.

The environment and property protection are now hot topics in the United States due to policies being formulated to tackle the issue. Evaluating the approach based on biblical values, constitutional principles, and political, financial, and practical considerations is necessary. The federal government is legally empowered to interfere in policy execution under the Constitution. It is the appropriate strategy for the country for the federal government to be adequately involved in environmental policy and property protection.


Jewell, J., & Cherp, A. (2019). On the political feasibility of climate change mitigation pathways: Is it too late to keep warming below 1.5°C? Wires Climate Change, 11(1). 

Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2020). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives. (7th ed.). vbk://9781544374598 

Monsma, S. (2008). Healing for a Broken World (1st ed.). Good News Publishers/Crossway Books. vbk://9781433521249

Nytimes. (2021). House Passes the Largest Expenditure on Climate in U.S. History.,government%20to%20slow%20global%20warming

Paul, R. (2021). Dr. Rand Paul Reintroduces the Defence of Environment and Property Act of 2021 | Senator Rand Paul. 

Preston, B. J. (2018). The evolving role of environmental rights in climate change mitigation. Chinese Journal of Environmental Law, 2(2), 131-164. 

WHO. Human Rights, Health and environmental protection: Linkages in Law Practice. Who? int.


Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post