PAD 633 (8-2)

Multilevel Governance and Implementation Challenges of U.S. Climate Change Policy: A Case Study of the SunShot Initiative Student's Name Institutional Affiliation Course Number and Name Instructor's Name Date Multilevel Governance and Implementation Challenges of U.S. Climate Change Policy: A Case Study of the SunShot Initiative The SunShot Initiative of the U.S. Department of Energy, begun in 2011, was an aggressiveness this nation took toward fighting climate change, promoting a sea change in the energy landscape of America. According to Fieldman and Bolinger (2016), this ambitious initiative aimed to drive down—and wildly nearly succeeded in—reducing installed solar energy costs to acceptable levels so that, sans subsidy, it would be cost-competitive with traditional forms of energy in 2020. The overall goal of the initiative was to reduce, by 75%, the total costs associated with solar energy systems, dropping the cost of utility-scale solar energy down nearly $0.06 per kilowatt-hour anywhere (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). The SunShot Initiative covers a holistic approach involving funding research and development, manufacturing process improvements, installation time shortening, and issues about grid integration. It offers multi-sectoral assistance from the hallways of academia through laboratories and private industry, stimulating the innovation and collaboration necessary to drive down the price of solar energy to enable more comprehensive assimilation (Wiser et al., 2016). The constitutional framework within which the SunShot Initiative has to operate is necessarily complex because of the system of federalism and separation of powers of the United States. The policy finds its constitutional grounding primarily in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. It is drawn directly from the Constitution, which empowers Congress to "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States," a sweeping mandate interpreted to encompass efforts to meet a wide range of national challenges on issues like energy security and the environment (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). Another constitutional anchor can be situated in the Commerce Clause, which authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce. Because energy production and distribution often occur across state lines, this clause contributes to the previous constitutional justifications for federal involvement in energy policy. Article II vests executive power in the presidency and charges it with faithfully executing the laws, providing a basis for congressional-executive role-playing connected with implementing the SunShot Initiative (Wiser et al., 2016). That constitutional provision and subsequent legislative acts, notably the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, vested in the Department of Energy as part of the executive's power to manage the initiative. Thesis statement: The SunShot Initiative is one of the cases that have been trying to revolutionize America's energy landscape through complex interplay within the constitutional framework of federal, state, and local governance in the country. It shows the challenges and opportunities inherent in multilevel policy execution, fiscal federalism, and seeking efficient and ethical public service delivery. Constitutional Framework * Constitutional Framework The SunShot Initiative has a complex constitutional framework that spells out the powers of the three branches of the federal government. Both explicit and inferred powers of these three branches prove to be significant in developing and enforcing such policy. The legislative branch, more commonly known as Congress, holds explicit power in making laws and authorizing the appropriation of funds that support federal programs (Wiser et al., 2016). This power is founded on Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, wherein Congress has the right to "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"(Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). That was applied with the SunShot Initiative when Congress authorized and appropriated monies for the DOE to execute the program. Many of these explicit (powers clearly stated in the Constitution, such as the President's authority to execute laws) and implied powers (powers not explicitly stated but inferred from the Constitution, like the ability to issue executive orders or make regulatory decisions) granted to the executive branch, which is run by the President and includes DOE, apply to the SunShot Initiative. One of the explicit powers of the President stated in Article II of the Constitution, is to execute laws, which allows for the execution of the initiative. Furthermore, the executive branch entails implied powers through regulatory actions and executive orders, which can significantly impact policy implementation (Bromley-Trujillo & Holman, 2020). For the judicial branch, even though it does not seem to be an implementer of policy, it still maintains judicial review power. That implied power, developed in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, authorizes courts to ascertain the constitutionality of legislation and executive decisions. Concerning the SunShot Initiative, this power would be utilized in the instance of judicial review regarding the policy's constitutionality or encroachment on state rights or individual liberties (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). B. Division of Power and Leading Tensions It sets up the separation of powers between the three branches of government and between the federal and state governments, a series of fundamental tensions within which the SunShot Initiative occurs in its practical application. These are organizational principles proper to the American system of governance, ensuring no accumulation of this power in any single entity. One big area of tension arises from this balance of federal and state authority in energy policy (Sharma & Sharma, 2023). Although the federal government is endowed with expansive powers related to regulating interstate commerce and promoting general welfare, states still maintain significant authority over energy policy and regulation. That division may yield to intergovernmental conflict whenever federal initiatives like SunShot delve into state policy or regulations (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). For instance, some states have implemented renewable energy standards or solar incentive programs that could complement and clash with the federal initiative. Then, ambitious renewable energy targets by California and its Cap-and-Trade Program make for a good match with the purposes of the SunShot Initiative but could create unwanted complexities in policy harmonization (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). Another source of friction stems from what the legislative and executive branches of government do in practical policy implementation. While Congress authorized the SunShot Initiative, the executive branch, through the DOE, is responsible for its day-to-day execution. In case of disagreements with how the policy ought to be administered or when political control shifts from one branch to another, the possibility of high-level conflicts exists (Lessmann & Kramer, 2024). C. Checks and Balances Checks and balances in the U.S. Constitution are essential in implementing and evolving policies within the SunShot Initiative. Any one branch is prevented from gaining power, and institutions are set up to ensure proper oversight and accountability. Congressional oversight is one of the main counterbalances under the SunShot Initiative to executive execution (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). Congress will be able to shape the initiative's direction and enforce accountability of the DOE concerning its performance through hearings, investigations, and control over the appropriations process. For instance, if Congress believes that the DOE does not have proper management or the program's goals are not met, it will adjust its funding level and include provisions concerning implementing changes in the program's structure (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). Through its regulatory authority and discretion in executing the law, the executive branch can shape the SunShot Initiative. The President can either issue executive orders or direct the DOE to undertake changes in focus or impact of the program by focusing on specific aspects, thereby changing the program without involving Congress (Dean et al., 2020). These discretionary actions make for an executive check on legislative power by allowing the administration to adapt to changing circumstances or shifts in priority. In the event of legal suits about how some aspect of the SunShot Initiative is being carried out or its overall impact on state rights or individual liberties, the courts can try to further constrain or grow this program through case law. For instance, funding priorities or emphasis of programs may be revised with a new congressional makeup or presidential administration Bromley-Trujillo & Holman, 2020). Trump's focus on fossil fuels translated to proposed budget cuts for renewable energy programs like SunShot, and the Biden administration has tried to reinvigorate and build upon such efforts. It is also possible for policy gridlock or, at best, compromise to ensure out of this system of checks and balances. Suppose sharp disagreements exist between the legislative and executive branches over either direction or funding for the SunShot Initiative (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). In that case, it may result in drag time in the implementation or even changes to the goals or structure of the program. The enumerated and implied powers, separation of powers, and checks and balances in the constitutional framework create a complex environment that the SunShot Initiative can realize. To a small extent, these structures would create tensions and delays; however, they ensure that the policy undergoes numerous levels of scrutiny and accountability. It can help balance the need for an effective national energy policy to coexist with democratic principles and the rights of states and individuals (Bergquist et al., 2020). Constitutional dynamics will endure. On its very face, the SunShot Initiative leaves an indelible mark as it evolves. Hence, this dynamic interaction between federal and state authority, and thus legislative oversight, executive implementation, and possible judicial review, will continue to dictate the pathway this policy takes in finding complete remediation for the twin challenges of climate change and energy security. Federalism A. Models of Federalism Federalism is a salient feature of the United States government, crucial to shaping the implementation of the SunShot Initiative policy. Few models of federalism evolved with time; each model had features that determined how power-sharing was to be done between the federal and state governments regarding implementation (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). Dual federalism was the hold of the model that dominated the republic's early years and proceeded under the assumption of two sovereigns competing at different levels within pretty separate spheres. Unlike cooperative federalism, which began in the middle of the 20th century, it is an approach to federalism stressing cooperation between the federal and state governments regarding ill-defined and complex problems at the national level (Fieldman & Bolinger, 2016). This model is very relevant to environmental and energetic policies—like the SunShot Initiative—by which coordination between different levels of government is almost mandatory. The other model is competitive federalism, in which states compete against each other and the federal government in delivering public services and conducting policy. That is evident in the different state renewable energy standards and incentives, which at some point complement or rival central efforts like SunShot to an extent, as indicated by Bromley-Trujillo and Holma...