__ Gambling laws are different from state to state Unlike in Nevada, in Texas, slot machines are only legal on Native American Reservations, like Pass. This is an example of: A. Concurrent Powers B. Cooperative Federalism C. Reserved Powers D. Bicameralism

## Step 1<br />The problem is asking us to identify the type of power that is being demonstrated in the given scenario. The scenario describes a situation where gambling laws vary from state to state, with Nevada having different laws than Texas. Specifically, in Texas, slot machines are only legal on Native American Reservations, like Pass.<br /><br />## Step 2<br />The options provided are:<br />A. Concurrent Powers<br />B. Cooperative Federalism<br />C. Reserved Powers<br />D. Bicameralism<br /><br />## Step 3<br />Let's analyze each option:<br />A. Concurrent Powers: These are powers that are shared by both the federal and state governments. This doesn't apply to the scenario because the laws are not shared but vary from state to state.<br />B. Cooperative Federalism: This refers to a system where the federal and state governments work together to solve problems. This doesn't apply to the scenario because the laws are not a result of cooperation but vary from state to state.<br />C. Reserved Powers: These are powers that are not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution, and therefore, are reserved for the states. This seems to fit the scenario because the laws vary from state to state, indicating that the states have the power to make their own laws.<br />D. Bicameralism: This refers to a legislative body with two chambers. This doesn't apply to the scenario because the laws are not about the structure of the legislative body but vary from state to state.