Final answer:
Thesis b) 25% of the federal budget should be spent on reducing pollution is stronger because it advocates for a specific action.
Step-by-step explanation:
Between the two thesis statements provided, b) 25% of the federal budget should be spent on reducing pollution is the stronger thesis because it takes a clear position advocating for a specific action regarding the allocation of the federal budget towards pollution reduction. In contrast, thesis a) Pollution has decreased significantly over the last ten years is a statement of fact that can be supported by data but doesn't offer a specific actionable stance or argument.
Support for the second thesis can rely on recent historical data provided by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) showing a 12% reduction in emissions from 2007 to 2012, which indicates a trend in decreasing pollution. Furthermore, discussing the effectiveness of command-and-control policies versus market incentive-based policies, like a state emissions tax or selling permits for emissions, can strengthen the argument for the specific allocation of funds to reduce pollution. The discussion can also touch upon the economic feasibility and environmental necessity of policies like mandatory recycling or pursuing a goal of zero pollution.