1

The Selected Legislation or Regulation

Pramila KC

University of Cumberland

A01 Legal & Regulatory Framework of Blockchain

Brian Houillion

2/28/2024

2

The Selected Legislation or Regulation

In recent years, the US has encountered economic inequality, environmental issues, and

public health disasters. To solve these concerns and enhance society, officials have proposed

legislative and regulatory changes. A 2023 proposal, the “Social Equity and Environmental

Justice Act (SEEJA),” sought to promote social and environmental justice nationally.

The SEEJA Act promotes fairness, inclusivity, and sustainability to address social

inequality and environmental deterioration. Allocating funds, especially for underprivileged

neighborhoods, tighter environmental controls, and greater community participation processes

underpin the SEEJA legislation’s effort to reduce disproportionate environmental risk and

equalize access to resources and opportunities for all.

This policy research study examines SEEJA legislation using Eugene Bardach and Eric

M. Patashnik’s “eightfold path” approach. This document examines the proposed policy from

different perspectives, including problem definition, success criteria, alternative approaches, and

implementation strategies, to help policymakers, stakeholders, and citizens understand the

expected gains and challenges. This work seeks to bridge gaps in social equity vs environmental

justice conversations and policymaking using evidence-based research.

Problem Definition

The “Social Equity and Environmental Justice Act (SEEJA),” initially titled, addresses

social inequality and environmental deterioration. In the US, most communities, especially the

most vulnerable, are subjected to pollution, toxic waste sites, and air and water contamination

(Gochfeld & Burger, 2021). Environmental injustices put people at risk of health problems,

economic hardship, and low living standards. This is common in low-income communities.

Legal and environmental measures often fail to safeguard underprivileged communities,

when lack of resources, representation, and decision-making increase inequality. Over time,

systematic features like unfair practices, discriminatory policies, and unbalanced resource

allocation have favored environmental injustices and increased race, ethnicity, and social class

imbalances.

Social equity and environmental justice should guide measures to address these past

injustices, according to the SEEJA Bill. Targeted policies, rigorous oversight of laws, and

national community initiatives are used by the SEEJA to address environmental unfairness,

particularly in low-income neighborhoods, and empower those peoples with clean water, air, and

natural sites. Everyone, regardless of geopolity, is equal under this goal.

Criteria for Success

To evaluate the “Social Equity and Environmental Justice Act (SEEJA),” specific and

measurable standards should reflect the policy purposes and the results. These factors will yield

the successful evaluation of this law:

1. Reduction in Environmental Disparities:

 Measure: Reduction in the disproportionate burden of environmental hazards and

pollutants on marginalized communities.

 Indicator: Decrease in the incidence rates of environmentally-related health issues

(e.g., respiratory illnesses, cancer) among vulnerable populations.

 Data Source: Epidemiological studies, health surveys, environmental monitoring

reports.

2. Promotion of Social Equity:

3

 Measure: Improvement in socioeconomic conditions and empowerment of

disadvantaged communities.

 Indicator: Increase in access to resources, opportunities, and decision-making

processes for historically marginalized groups.

 Data Source: Socioeconomic indicators (e.g., income levels, educational

attainment), community surveys, participatory evaluations.

3. Enhancement of Environmental Justice:

 Measure: Strengthening of regulatory mechanisms and enforcement efforts to

address environmental injustices.

 Indicator: Increase in compliance with environmental regulations and equitable

distribution of environmental benefits and burdens.

 Data Source: Regulatory compliance reports, environmental impact assessments,

community feedback mechanisms.

4. Mitigation of Climate Change Impacts:

 Measure: Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to climate

change impacts.

 Indicator: Decrease in carbon emissions, improvement in resilience to extreme

weather events, and implementation of sustainable practices.

 Data Source: Greenhouse gas inventories, climate vulnerability assessments,

sustainability reports.

5. Cost-effectiveness and Fiscal Responsibility:

 Measure: Efficient allocation of resources and fiscal responsibility in

implementing the SEEJA.

 Indicator: Cost-benefit analysis demonstrating the economic feasibility and long-

term financial sustainability of the policy.

 Data Source: Economic impact assessments, budgetary analyses, financial audits.

6. Stakeholder Engagement and Collaboration:

 Measure: Meaningful engagement of diverse stakeholders and collaboration

across sectors.

 Indicator: Participation of community members, advocacy groups, industry

representatives, and government agencies in policy development and

implementation processes.

 Data Source: Stakeholder feedback, partnership agreements, collaborative

initiatives.

7. Long-term Sustainability and Resilience:

 Measure: Sustainable management of natural resources and resilience to

environmental challenges.

 Indicator: Preservation of ecosystems, biodiversity, and ecosystem services, along

with the capacity to adapt to changing environmental conditions.

 Data Source: Ecological assessments, conservation plans, resilience strategies.

8. Equity in Access to Green Spaces and Environmental Amenities:

 Measure: Equitable distribution of green spaces, parks, and recreational amenities

across communities.

 Indicator: Improvement in access to nature-based recreational opportunities and

environmental amenities for underserved populations.

 Data Source: Spatial analyses, access mapping, community engagement surveys.

4

By assessing the SEEJA law against these comprehensive success criteria, policymakers,

stakeholders, and the public can assess its effectiveness in addressing environmental inequities,

social equality, and sustainable development goals. Furthermore, the policy requires monitoring,

evaluation, and feedback to adapt it if the problems and goals change and to fully utilize the

policy for the good of the present and future generations.

Alternative Approaches to Addressing Environmental Injustices

When writing the Social Equity and Environmental Justice Act (SEEJA), Alternative

environmental injustices and inequalities must be taken into account and discussed. Policy

changes, neighborhood-based programs, and regulatory changes that address environmental

injustices and promote social equality are some of these remedies. In the paragraphs that follow,

we address these methods in further detail and highlight their respective benefits.

Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR):

In community-based participatory research (CBPR), researchers collaborate with

community members or participants to address environmental challenges. According to Julian

McFarlane et al. (2021) CBPR is what helps communities identify environmental risks, assess

how they may affect the health of those who live there, and develop mitigation and preventative

measures. By involving the impacted communities in the research process, CBPR helps to create

research that is appropriate for the culture, pertinent to the situation, and beneficial to the

community.

. CBPR increases community resilience to environmental issues, researcher-community

trust, and civic involvement.

Feasibility: Community capacity, research infrastructure, and collaborations must be extensively

funded for CBPR. With proper resources and support, CBPR can be used in many situations.

Effectiveness: CBPR boosts environmental justice awareness, mobilization, and advocacy.

Community participation in environmental policymaking through CBPR promotes equity and

sustainability.

Potential Drawbacks: Resource constraints, power dynamics, and institutional barriers may

hamper CBPR. Effective community participation and collaboration require time, trust, and

ongoing relationship-building.

Green Infrastructure Investments:

Green infrastructure reduces air pollution, storm water, and urban heat islands. Green

infrastructure efforts increase access to green spaces, reduce environmental dangers, and

strengthen community climate resilience to address environmental injustice. Permeable

pavements, rain gardens, urban forests, and green roofs are green infrastructure. By adding green

infrastructure to urban growth, policymakers can improve social justice, sustainability, and

public health.

Feasibility: Government organizations, non-profits, business developers, and community groups

collaborate on green infrastructure. Green infrastructure projects may attract state funding,

incentives, business investments, or charity.

Effectiveness: Green infrastructure enhances biodiversity, ecosystem services, air and water

quality, and urban heat island impacts (Hewitt et al., 2020). By investing in disadvantaged

neighborhoods, policymakers can lessen environmental inequalities and enhance vulnerable

people’s lives.

Potential Drawbacks: Land, cost, and maintenance may limit green infrastructure development.

Institutional and socioeconomic barriers may limit green infrastructure investment equity.

Environmental Justice Mapping and Analysis

5

Environmental justice mapping and analysis uses geographic analysis to examine

environmental dangers, socioeconomic demography, and health outcomes to reveal

environmental injustice and disparity. Local environmental risk mapping and vulnerable

population identification can assist policymakers allocate resources and interventions.

Environmental justice mapping can also guide land-use planning, zoning, and regulation

enforcement to reduce environmental risks and promote equitable development.

Feasibility: Environmental justice mapping requires geographical data, analytical tools, and

GIS/spatial analysis competence. Technology and data make environmental justice mapping

easier and more scalable.

Effectiveness: Environmental justice mapping has informed policy debates, lobbying, and

understanding of environmental disparities (Boda et al., 2023). Visualizing environmental

injustice can help policymakers and stakeholders gain support for targeted initiatives and policy

improvements.

Potential Drawbacks: Data availability, quality, and accuracy may hinder environmental

justice mapping. To make policy recommendations from research, lawmakers, and community

advocates must work together.

Environmental Justice Legislation and Policy Reforms:

The best way to address environmental injustices and promote social justice is through

policy and legislative changes. These themes inform environmental decision-making under

environmental justice laws. The 1990 CAAA Amendments, Environmental Justice EO 12898,

and state environmental justice laws are examples. Policy reform can also change regulations,

penalty, and budget allocations to promote structural inequality.

Feasibility: Environmental justice legislation and policy improvements require political will,

stakeholder cooperation, and advocacy to pass. With grassroots mobilization, coalition-building,

and public pressure, policymakers may institutionalize environmental justice.

Effectiveness: Environmental justice laws strengthen communities and hold polluters

accountable (Martin et al., 2020). Implementing environmental justice principles in policy

frameworks helps alleviate environmental inequities and ensure equitable outcomes for all

communities.

Potential Drawbacks: Environmental justice laws may have enforcement, implementation, and

resource allocation concerns. Industry groups, regulators, and politicians may also stymie

reform.

Recommendation

The Comprehensive Mental Health Reform Act will be advocated for and implemented

by policymakers after the framework evaluation. The policy analysis revealed multiple key

findings and options likely to improve mental health care delivery problems, increase access to

services, and lead to positive mental health outcomes.

First of all, the CMHRA understands the complex problems involved in the US mental

health care system the best. It can be described as the comprehensive legislation implemented to

address gaps and differences in existing systems and the mental illness burden on patients,

families, and society at large. The CMHRA addresses the complex nature of mental health care

delivery and improves outcomes across the entire sequence by widening access to evidence-

based treatments, integrating mental health care into primary care, and increasing support

services for the vulnerable population.

Also, it accomplishes the policy analysis program success factors. Human beings need to

make mental health treatment more accessible and provide equity. The CMHRA stresses the

6

augmentation of mental health insurance coverage, subsidizing community-based mental health

services, and incentivizing providers to practice in areas with less accessibility (WHO, 2023).

Through health equity promotion and reducing mental health inequities, the CMHRA provides

better care to underserved groups and those at the margins.

Elevating evidence-based practices and embedding mental health care within the standard

health care system are also significant. The CMHRA recommends evidenced-based interventions

like cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication-assisted treatment and advocates for

collaboration between mental health providers and primary care physicians (American

Psychiatric Association, 2021). CMHRA unites the provision of mental health care with primary

care in primary care settings and focuses on holistic well-being so that quality care coordination,

treatment results, and mental disease stigma are enhanced.

Another important consideration in this case is the CMHRA’s focus to budgets and

sustainability. Resources with an emphasis on early detection and prevention, crisis intervention

services, and supportive housing are recommended for financing by the CMHRA. This will

therefore result in a decrease in the price of institutionalization and long-term emergency care.

According to the CMHRA, the use of data analytical tools will allow policy makers to monitor

success, pinpoint areas for improvement, and implement well-informed adjustments to mental

health care programming.

Implementation Plan

The Comprehensive Mental Health Reform Act (CMHRA) requires planned timeframes,

accountable parties, funding distribution, and surveillance to succeed. Below is a CMHRA

implementation strategy:

Timeline: Over several years, the CMHRA will implement programs and alter systems and

procedures. Year one will establish interagency task teams and advisory committees. Years two

to three will improve mental health treatment through provider capacity, telehealth infrastructure,

and workforce development. Monitor and evaluate stakeholder feedback, program effectiveness,

and strategy changes in years four to five.

Responsible Parties: CMHRA implementation requires collaboration between government,

healthcare, community, and advocacy groups. HHS will oversee implementation and stakeholder

relations. Interagency task forces will handle care, workforce development, and data collection.

Budgeting: CMHRA implementation needs funding. Budgets will emphasize issues such:

1. Expansion of mental health services in underserved areas

2. Workforce development and training programs

3. Telehealth infrastructure and technology upgrades

4. Supportive housing and community-based services

5. Research and data collection initiatives

Funding will come from federal grants, state appropriations, and private-public

partnerships. Budgetary control will ensure money utilization transparency and accountability.

Monitoring and Evaluation: Successful CMHRA deployment requires continuous monitoring

and evaluation. Performance metrics will track essential goals like:

1. Increase in access to mental health services

2. Reduction in disparities in mental health outcomes

3. Improvement in patient satisfaction and quality of care

4. Cost-effectiveness of interventions

5. Adherence to evidence-based practices

7

Stakeholders will receive regular implementation progress and outcome reports.

Stakeholder feedback loops will gather input and incorporate lessons learnt into implementation

activities.

Evaluation

Comprehensive Mental Health Reform Act implementation requires continuous review

and monitoring. To evaluate the efficacy, efficiency, and impact of CMHRA policies and

initiatives, a comprehensive evaluation plan is needed. The evaluation plan should incorporate

these essentials:

1. Data Collection Methods: Data on CMHRA initiatives’ implementation and results will

be collected using various approaches. Quantitative data from surveys, administrative

records, and electronic health records can monitor changes in access, utilization, and

health outcomes. To capture diverse viewpoints and experiences on mental health care

delivery, focus groups and interviews with patients, clinicians, and community leaders

will be used.

2. Evaluation Criteria: To evaluate the CMHRA’s impact on important outcomes and

objectives, clear criteria must be set. They may include measures like:

 Increase in the availability and accessibility of mental health services, particularly

in underserved areas

 Reduction in mental health disparities among diverse populations

 Improvement in patient outcomes, including symptom management, quality of

life, and functional status

 Cost-effectiveness of interventions and healthcare delivery models implemented

under the CMHRA

 Adherence to evidence-based practices and guidelines in mental health care

delivery

3. Outcome Measures: Progress toward CMHRA aims and objectives will be measured

using outcome measures. Process measures like number of people served and services

delivered and outcome indicators like mental health outcomes and patient satisfaction

may be used. Baseline metrics acquired before the CMHRA will be used to create

benchmark data for comparisons throughout time.

4. Performance Indicators: Performance metrics for CMHRA-funded programs and

initiatives will be created. Identifying successes and areas for improvement will guide

programmatic adjustments and resource allocations. Performance indicators may include

service delivery, program utilization, physician performance, and patient outcomes.

5. Evaluation Timeline: To ensure regular data collection and analysis during

implementation, a timeframe will be set for evaluations. The CMHRA’s immediate and

long-term effects will be evaluated in short, intermediate, and long terms.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Comprehensive Mental Health Reform Act (CMHRA) is a major step

toward improving US mental health care accessibility and quality. This paper’s eightfold path

framework analysis revealed the CMHRA’s strengths, shortcomings, practicality, and possible

impacts. Policymakers must carefully analyze this analysis and act to alleviate mental health care

delivery disparities. Policymakers can improve access to care, eliminate inequities, and promote

national well-being by prioritizing evidence-based policies and strategic mental health

infrastructure investments.

8

References

American Phycological Association . (2021). Comprehensive mental health reform. Apa.org.

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/09/policy-brief

Boda, P. A., Fusi, F., Miranda, Gordon, Flax-Hatch, J., Siciliano, M. D., Apostolis Sambanis, Johnson,

L., Derrible, S., & Cailas, M. (2023). Environmental Justice through Community-Policy

Participatory Partnerships. Journal of Environmental Protection, 14(08), 616–636.

https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2023.148036

Gochfeld, M., & Burger, J. (2021). Disproportionate Exposures in Environmental Justice and Other

Populations: The Importance of Outliers. American Journal of Public Health, 101(Suppl 1),

S53–S63. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300121

Hewitt, C. N., Ashworth, K., & MacKenzie, A. R. (2020). Using green infrastructure to improve urban

air quality (GI4AQ). Ambio, 49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01164-3

Julian McFarlane, S., Occa, A., Peng, W., Awonuga, O., & Morgan, S. E. (2021). Community-Based

Participatory Research (CBPR) to Enhance Participation of Racial/Ethnic Minorities in Clinical

Trials: A 10-Year Systematic Review. Health Communication, 1–18.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1943978

Lowdermilk, T., & Hammontree, M. (2020). The Customer-Driven Culture: A Microsoft Story: Six

Proven Strategies to Hack Your Culture and Develop a Learning-Focused Organization. In

Google Books. “O’Reilly Media, Inc.”

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NZzSDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR4&dq=Mic

rosoft+has+refined+a+corporate+culture+&ots=AyfZvcrlWb&sig=CICxB4ZxXCbVyizr-

DbFEg30wKY

Martin, A., Armijos, M. T., Coolsaet, B., Dawson, N., A. S. Edwards, G., Few, R., Gross-Camp, N.,

Rodriguez, I., Schroeder, H., G. L. Tebboth, M., & White, C. S. (2020). Environmental Justice

and Transformations to Sustainability. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable

Development, 62(6), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2020.1820294

WHO. (2023). Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2030. Www.who.int.

https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789240031029

.