Lawmaking in California State and Local Government

The lawmaking process in California’s State Legislature and the United States Congress have specific similarities while being drastically different at the core. This provision is explained by the varying conditions related to the voting procedures, the flexibility of the bills’ content, and the scope of responsibilities in general (Scarpelli, 2015). Therefore, it can be claimed that the above provisions clearly speak of the distinctions between California and the Congress and determine the mechanisms of their work.

The main differences between the two entities are determined by their authority in the context of the shared basis for principal procedures. Thus, the scope of California’s policymakers is limited to the 10^th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, whereas the Congress is accountable for global affairs (Scarpelli, 2015). In other words, the former’s capabilities include any issues which do not contradict the federal law. Moreover, both the Congress and California’s State Legislature cooperate with committees when proposing new bills while the latter’s practice of Gut-And-Amend results in its greater flexibility (Scarpelli, 2015). Meanwhile, the latter does not provide for any amendments and, generally, is voted for or against in its original form (Scarpelli, 2015). Also, voting requirements differ as the Congress is subject to a two-third rule in many aspects, whereas California is mainly guided by simple majority.

To summarize, the examination of California’s State Legislature and the United States Congress showed the principal difference between their procedures. In the former case, the decisions are made in a simpler manner while relying on the 10^th Amendment and readjustable content of bills. In contrast to it, the Congress’ activity is more rigid, subject to the rule of two-third when voting, and greater in scope.

Reference

Scarpelli, C. (2015). California state and local government. McGraw Hill.