Download Public Policy: An Introduction to Fundamental Concepts and Processes and more Study notes Public Policy in PDF only on Docsity!
MJA 5305- Public Policy Lecture Notes and Study Guide
Chapter One
Chapter 1 is an introduction and discussion of the fundamental concepts of the study of public policy. It begins with the ubiquitous nature of American public policy and explores the reasons for learning about
the subject. First, public policies have significant impacts on people’s everyday happiness and well- being. Second, scientific policy studies enhance the knowledge of governance and political behavior. A
third reason is the recent proliferation in professional careers in policy analysis. Finally, the study of public policy assists the many citizens who seek to politically engage in policy advocacy to pursue goals
that serve their purposes.
This book utilizes a scientific policy studies approach by examining the five stages of the public policy
process or cycle: problem identification and agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation. The stages of the public policy process are inherently political encompassing conflicts among
competing sides. Although there is not one single process in which policy is formed, the policy cycle is a valuable conceptual framework for the formation of public policy and provides several advantages, such
as focusing on public policy-makers and the factors that influence them.
Public policy could generally be considered anything that the government chooses to do or not to do.
However, this book more precisely defines it as a purposive course of action or inaction by governmental bodies and officials in dealing with a problem or matter of concern. This definition has
many implications. First, public policy is goal-oriented rather than random. Second, policies are patterns of action over time, not merely individual decisions. Third, public policies arise from policy demands
upon government officials who respond with policy statements. Fourth, policy involves policy outputs , the actions actually taken by the government in pursuance of policy statements. Fifth, public policy may
either be an overt government action (positive) or the decision by the government to do nothing (negative). Lastly, public policy in its positive form is based on law and has an authoritative quality that
private policy lacks.
Due to the enormous number of American public policies and their complexities, political scientists have
created typologies that categorize public policies based on characteristics and purposes. This chapter discusses three such typologies.
- Constituent, distributive, regulatory , self-regulatory, and redistributive policies delineate the diverse effects public policies can have on society.
- Material and symbolic policies differentiate the kind of benefits allocated by public policies. Material policies impose real, tangible advantages or disadvantages whereas symbolic policies mainly appeal to people’s values.
- Some public policies provide collective (indivisible) goods and others involve private (divisible) goods. The distinction between the two is a cause for debate over the role of government. Conservatives, in particular, argue that public policies should only encompass collective goods because they believe the private sector is more efficient and effective in delivering private goods.
The chapter then surveys the theoretical approaches used by political scientists for analyzing
policymaking.
- Political systems theory views public policy as a political system’s outputs (laws, rules, judicial decisions, etc.) in response to the inputs (demands and supports) arising from its environment.
- Group theory upholds that public policy is the result of the struggle among groups with access to decision-makers.
- Elite theory maintains that public policy is really the reflection of the values, preferences, and leadership of societal elites.
- Institutionalism focuses on the legal and structural aspects of governmental institutions and how they affect public policy.
- Rational-choice theory espouses that participants in policy formation are indeed rational actors pursuing their own self-interests.
Although each of these approaches is beneficial for certain aspects of the study of policymaking, they each have their limitations.
Chapter 1 finishes with the methodological difficulties that encumber the study of public policy. Such problems range from the difficulty of acquiring and lack of availability of conclusive data to the
limitations of questionnaires and case studies.
Key Terms from Chapter One
access In group theory, the opportunity for persons or groups to express their viewpoints to decision-
makers.
antitrust policy A public policy intended to prevent monopoly and maintain competition in the
economy.
collective goods Goods such as national defense or clean air that are indivisible and must be
provided to all or to none. They are “nonrivalous.”
competitive regulatory policy This controls entry into an industry and the quality of goods or services
provided.
deregulation Proposals and actions to eliminate or severely reduce economic regulatory programs.
elite theory The view that public policies are determined by a small segment of society, such as an upper class, uncontrolled by the mass of citizens.
group theory A theory holding that policies result from conflict and struggle among political interest groups.
institutionalism A theory stressing the importance of organizational arrangements and rules in shaping public policies.
regulatory policy A policy that imposes limitations, restraints, or mandates on persons, groups,
and businesses, thus reducing their discretion to act.
symbolic policy A policy that expresses desired values but has little if any material impact on people.
Chapter Two
Chapter 2 is an examination of the multitude of public policy-makers and their environment. It begins with an overview of the American political system. By constitutional principle and political practice, power in the United States is fragmented and dispersed. This is primarily due to a separation of power among three branches (executive, legislative, and judicial) with a system of checks and balances. The effects are the decentralization of power, the need for compromise, and an inefficient operation of government. Power is further dispersed by federalism, which gives separate national and state governments power derived from the Constitution. The national government is granted delegated and implied (necessary and proper) powers , whereas the states are given unspecified reserved powers. The Constitution also limits the powers of government over the people. Over time, the scope of the national government has expanded into the domain of state governments, but state and local governments continue to be significant policy-makers for many issues. Because analyzing policymaking at three levels of government is too extensive, the focus of the book is on the national government’s domestic policy.
Policymaking must be studied within its environment, which guides and constrains political leaders and citizens. Two environmental factors that are useful for policy analysis are political culture and socioeconomic conditions. Political culture is the widely shared values, beliefs, and attitudes of a society in regards to the nature and use of political power. In the United States, values such as self- assertiveness, individualism and private property, and future-oriented and participant cultures have significant implications for policymaking. Socioeconomic conditions are the inseparable social and economic factors (such as urbanization, industrialization, income, and education) that influence political activity. Although there is much debate whether socioeconomic factors are more important than political factors, both must be taken into account to understand policy decisions.
Official policy-makers, both primary and supplementary, have the legal authority to engage in the public policy process. Primary policy-makers have direct constitutional authority to act, whereas supplementary policy-makers operate under authority granted by primary policy-makers. Primary policy-makers are legislatures, executives, and courts. Legislatures in the United States have an independent decision-making function. The independence of Congress has been enhanced by extensive staff assistance (personal, committee, and institutional staffs). Executives have important roles in both the formation and execution of policy. The president, who has greater authority in foreign policy than in domestic policy, is advised and assisted by several staff agencies of the Executive Office of the President. America’s courts play the largest role in policy decisions anywhere. National and state appellate courts, with their use of judicial review (determining the constitutionality of government actions) and statutory interpretation, are increasingly characterized by judicial activism, as well as positive decision making (specifying what must be done to meet legal or constitutional standards). Administrative agencies are supplementary policy-makers. Although they are most associated with implementation, they are significantly involved in policy formation with their discretionary authority for extensive rulemaking, legislative proposals, and lobbying.
Official policy-makers are greatly influenced by a variety of nongovernmental participants. Although they often are significant players in the policy process by providing information and seeking to persuade, nongovernmental participants do not have legal authority to make binding policy decisions. Interest
groups supply much technical information and express demands and alternatives for policy action (interest articulation). Political parties , while being more interested in power than policy, perform interest aggregation (packaging demands into general policy alternatives). Private research organizations, known as think tanks, provide data and develop alternatives for policy issues, as well as evaluate public policies. The communications media transmits policy information, helps set the policy agenda, and shapes attitudes on policy. Finally, individual citizens can play an important role in policymaking, most notably through the initiative (citizens voting directly on legislation) and intellectual and agitational activism.
The chapter concludes with a discussion of the levels of politics. Micropolitics seek distributive policy decisions applicable to one or a few people. Subsystems politics focus on functional policy areas and their resulting relationships among legislative committees, administrative agencies, and interest groups ( iron triangles ). Macropolitics involve policy issues that attract wide interest and participation from both citizens and political leaders.
Key Terms for Chapter Two
checks and balances The constitutional right of the branches of the national government to interfere with and to limit the exercise of power by one another.
common law Law based on judicial decisions and custom and usage rather than on statutes.
cooperative federalism All levels of government—national, state, and local—interacting and cooperating in the formation and execution of public policies.
delegated powers Those powers assigned to the national government in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution.
delegation of power Action by Congress authorizing the executive or administrative agencies to take action on specified topics, often by rule-making.
dual federalism The theory that the national and state government have distinct and separate spheres of action. Now outdated.
initiative A process available in some states by which a proposed law is put on the ballot by citizen petition for voter approval.
interest group A private organization or group that strives to influence the actions of governmental officials.
iron triangle A political subsystem comprising a government agency, congressional committees, and some interest groups that is resistant to external influences.
issue A problem or matter on which there is disagreement as to what should be done about it.
issue network A political subsystem marked by its loose amorphous character and the inclusion of many policy experts.
judicial review The power of a court to determine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
lobbying The transmission of information to public officials by pressure group representatives hoping to influence government decisions.
are disagreements over what should be done. There are two basic types of policy agendas. Systemic agendas include all the issues that are being discussed within a political community and are deemed to be within governmental authority. For most of these issues, specific solutions are not being explored and many will never be addressed with governmental action. Institutional agendas , where issues do have a greater chance to be acted upon, encompass matters to which political officials are giving serious attention. Institutional agendas contain mandatory items, such as the reauthorization of current programs and minor and major discretionary items, or notably new legislation.
The agenda-setting process is the various ways in which issues attract the attention of policy-makers and gain a place on the agenda. To be sure, it is a competitive process and is not a matter of precise content. There are number of factors that can converge to make an issue more likely to achieve agenda status. These factors consist of, but are not limited to, interest group support; political leadership of the president, activist legislators and other policy entrepreneurs ; policies of other government entities; Supreme Court decisions; consequences of crises; protest activities; communications media’s reportage; changes in statistical indicators; and political changes, such as election results and shifts in public support. Issues can also be intentionally kept off the agenda by opposing forces, known as nondecision - making. Some issues will disappear from the agenda due to changes in conditions that created the problem, the emergence of more pressing problems, problem acclimation, and cultural changes toward the problem.
The second stage of the policy-making cycle is policy formulation. This entails creating relevant courses of action (alternatives, proposals or options) for addressing public problems. Policy-makers may devise their own alternatives or look at the vast number of ideas that have already been developed. Most policy alternatives suggest incremental, rather than radical, changes to deal with a problem. Formulators must keep in mind several factors for creating successful proposals, such as what will work, budgetary costs, political acceptability, and public compliance. Just because an issue reaches the policy agenda, does not mean that positive action will be taken. During formulation, policy-makers may decide to propose nothing or are unable to agree on what can be done.
There are a number of competing, and sometimes cooperating, actors in policy formulation on the national level in the United States. The president has been the leading source of major policy proposals, which has become the expectation of both Congress and the public alike. With expertise in a particular policy area, administrative agencies are also in a good position to create alternatives. Presidential commissions, task forces, and interagency committees are employed to develop proposals or to at least create the appearance of government interest. With increased staff resources, legislators have become more involved in developing policy alternatives. Finally, interest groups play a major role in policy formulation, often presenting specific options for legislation.
The chapter concludes with a discussion of the technical aspects of policy formulation. Legislation must be drafted in a manner that ensures the agreed-upon principles will appropriately go into effect. It must
be carefully written to avoid confusion, loopholes, unfavorable judicial interpretations, and improper implementation.
Key Terms for Chapter Three
agenda-setting The various ways by which problems can gain a place on an agenda and attract the attention of policy-makers.
attentive public Those persons who are especially interested in and informed about a public policy.
discretion The capacity of administrative officials to exercise choice on some topics because of authority delegated to them.
environmental movement A social movement comprising many persons and organizations advocating environmental interests.
formulation The development of proposed courses of action or alternatives for dealing with public problems.
institution A regularized pattern of human behavior that persists over time and that performs an important task. The political party is an institution.
institutional agenda A set of problems of interest to the member of a particular governmental body, such as a legislature.
nondecision The failure of government to take action on a problem or condition or to even meaningfully consider it.
policy agenda A set of problems that public officials feel they should act on in some way.
policy entrepreneur A person who, through effort, persistence, or expenditure of resources, promotes action on policy issues, often successfully.
policy formation The total process by which public policies are developed and implemented.
policy problem A condition or situation in society that causes people distress or dissatisfaction and for which relief is sought through government action.
pollution The discharge of substances into the environment that interfere with or prevent socially desired uses of the environment.
private problems Matters that are of real concern to only one (or a few) person(s).
public problems Problems that have a broad effect, including consequences for persons not directly involved.
terrorism The unlawful use of force, violence, and intimidation against civilians in a society to advance political or ideological goals.
Chapter Four
This chapter centers on the third stage of the public policy process: adoption. Adoption encompasses policy decisions that are the actions taken by an official policy-maker to select, modify, or reject a favored policy alternative. A policy decision, such as legislation or an executive order , is usually a culmination of many decisions made during the policy cycle. The formal authority to make public policy choices rests with executives, administrators, judges, and most particularly legislators in a democracy. During adoption, legitimacy is very important for the development of public support and acceptance of a public policy. Legitimacy directs citizens’ attention to the appropriateness of government action for how something is done, as well as what is being done.
Although there is much disagreement on how to best study decision making, three theories are presented. The rational-comprehensive theory, perhaps the best known, espouses that decisions should be made based on the full analysis of all the alternatives to achieve the optimal attainment of goals. Although the result is a rational decision, there are many criticisms of this theory, ranging from the unrealistic demand of having enough information to predict consequences to the assumption of a
command The ability of those in hierarchical positions to make decisions that are binding on subordinates.
constituency Those groups, officials, and others that an agency or its officials take into account when making decisions.
decision rules Guidelines or rules of thumb that simplify decision-making on particular topics.
deference A form of decision-making in which a person accepts, or defers to, the judgment of someone else.
executive order A legally binding policy statement issued by the president on the basis of his or her constitutional or delegated authority.
ideology A more or less systematic set of values and beliefs that serves as a guide to action and understanding.
incrementalism A theory of decision-making holding that decisions are usually based on limited analysis and involve marginal changes in existing policies.
legitimacy The quality of rightness or appropriateness that may characterize a government or a policy and enhance its acceptability and authoritativeness.
logrolling The exchange of support by persons interested in different matters often called “mutual back-scratching.”
majority building The use of bargaining and other means to create the various numerical majorities needed to pass or kill legislation.
persuasion The use of reason, facts, and logic to convince others of the correctness of one’s position on an issue.
public interest What is of interest or benefit to people generally rather than particular groups or segments of the population.
public opinion Expressions of public attitudes or beliefs on political issues that public officials find it prudent to heed.
routine decision A comparatively minor or limited decision that falls within the bounds of settled policy.
sunk costs Previous decisions and actions that limit what one can do in the future.
transition rules Special provision in tax laws that lessen the impact of tax changes or increases.
values Strongly held preferences or standards that guide the conduct of people.
Chapter Five
Before the Budgeting and Accounting Act of 1921, national budgeting was a fragmented process. With this reform, the budgetary system was centralized through the use of the executive budget, giving the president the responsibility for the formulation of the budget. This chapter focuses on the policy implications of the budgetary process. First, it examines how the budget and budget decisions affect public policies. Second, the chapter clarifies the structure and operation of the national budgetary process. Finally, it discusses the political struggle over budget deficits and debt.
A budget is a document of estimated revenues and proposed expenditures. It is also a political document as it shapes the direction, intensity, and impact of most public policies. The budget is a summary of the government’s total set of policies for a given fiscal year and is a reflection of the choices among competing social values. In recent decades, the national budget has proliferated in size and complexity with only a few policy areas responsible for most of the growth—national defense, social and income security, medical care, and interest on the national debt. The budgetary process also provides the opportunity for regularly reviewing government programs. Those that waste money or misconstrue policy may suffer cuts, whereas preferred programs are likely to be rewarded. In addition, the budget can be used to stabilize the economy. Fiscal policy entails the deliberate use of government spending and taxing to curtail inflation or recession. However, large budget deficits and strong antitax sentiments have shifted economic stabilization to the Federal Reserve and its monetary policy , the manipulation of interest rates and the money supply.
From the initiation of budget preparation through the close of a fiscal year, some thirty months pass. The budget also covers the nine years following the fiscal year at hand. The national budgetary process is marked by four distinct stages—preparation, authorization, execution, and audit (which is not discussed). Executive preparation of the national budget begins with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) providing agencies instructions for developing their budget requests. Once the requests are submitted, the OMB reviews and revises them based on the policies and programs of the president. The OMB exercises discretion as presidents do not normally get involved in budgetary details. Budget decisions are constrained by the fact that two-thirds of expenditures are mandatory in nature (entitlements and debt interest) and much of the discretionary one-third entails national security. That leaves just one-sixth of total expenditures for domestic discretionary spending.
Congressional authorization involves two steps. First, legislation has to be enacted to establish a policy and to allow the expenditure of money for it. Second, the money has to be made available through appropriations legislation. The former is handled by substantive committees and the latter by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Once sent to Congress, the president’s budget is divided into twelve appropriations bills. The bills are then referred to the House Appropriations Committee’s twelve subcommittees for extensive hearings. The subcommittee’s recommendations are usually accepted by the full committee and the full House with few changes. The Senate Appropriations Committee tends to focus on disputed items and to act as an appellate body. Conference committees are used to resolve the differences between the House and Senate versions. Then the president, without line-item veto authority, must accept or reject each appropriations bill in its entirety. While incrementalism (marginal changes in expenditures) continues to substantially characterize budgetary decision-making, reforms such as the creation of the Congressional Budget Office and the reconciliation process (making adjustments to conform to budget resolution ceilings) have improved the quality of budgeting.
Budget execution rests with administrative agencies. An agency must secure from the OMB an apportionment, appropriations by time periods and by activities. The discretion the agency has in spending funds is greatly impacted by the language included in the appropriations laws. In addition, committee and subcommittee reports are commonly attached to specify how Congress thinks funds should be spent. Although these reports are not legally binding, it would be impolitic for officials to ignore them. Impoundments are also used to prevent expenditures with which a president disagrees.
This chapter concludes with the case study on “The Struggle to Balance the Budget.” Although economists disagree on the impacts of deficits, they have become a major policy issue. Balanced budgets, although a rarity at the national level, are perceived as effective management, restraint on the government, and the lessening of a burden on future generations.
reconciliation A process by which Congress adjusts the amounts in tax, spending, and debt legislation to conform to ceilings in the budget resolution for a given fiscal year.
rescission Action by the president and Congress to cancel previously granted appropriations authority.
Chapter Six
Once adoption is completed, the accepted alternative is now called public policy. However, policymaking is still not finished as further development is almost always required. Chapter 6 focuses on what happens after adoption—the fourth step of the policy cycle, implementation. Implementation entails whatever is done to carry out a policy, apply it to the appropriate population and accomplish its goals. Administrative agencies and their procedures, techniques, and politics are at the center of implementation study. Although much of what agencies do may appear routine, the implementation consequences for policy content and success are vital. American federalism further complicates these consequences for national policies through cost shifting and mandates.
Policy implementation is the official responsibility of an intricate web of administrative agencies. While doing the day-to-day work of government, these agencies have much discretion as the legislative process often results in broad and vague policies. Consequently, agencies become enmeshed in policy politics. Although agencies are the primary implementers, the president, legislatures, courts, pressure groups and community organizations are either directly involved in policy execution or try to influence agencies’ decisions, creating competition for political power. The assortment of participants in the implementation process will vary among policy arenas.
The national executive branch is organized into roughly seventy-five separate administrative entities, varying in structure, operating style, political support, expertness, and policy orientation. There are four types of agencies. The fifteen executive departments each has a secretary with cabinet rank appointed by the president. Most of the work in departments is done by administrative units known as bureaus. Independent regulatory commissions are plural-headed agencies that regulate private economic activities. Government corporations engage in businesslike activities by providing goods and services. Independent agencies are created for a special purpose that would not fit well in a department. Deciding which agency implements a policy is not only technical, but political as well.
The environment in which administrative agencies operate contains multiple and varying forces that hinder or assist its effectiveness. These forces come from the accepted modes of procedure, the president, congressional oversight, courts, other agencies, other governments, interest groups, political parties, and media. The forces surrounding an agency will form its dynamic constituency. Clientele are the individuals or groups of the constituency that are directly served or regulated by the agency. Each agency also tries to shape, influence and placate these forces.
Two aspects of agency policymaking are decision-making and the patterns utilized to define policy content. Administrative decision-making is characterized by hierarchical authority, low visibility, political considerations, scientific and technical advice, and bargaining with whom they regulate. There are four patterns used by agencies to make policies. Rule-making, a primary instrument of American government, entails agencies making statements designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe vague laws. The procedures for rule-making employing the Federal Register are set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act. Adjudication is when an agency applies existing rules to individual circumstances on a case-by-case basis, especially involving novel or controversial situations. A third pattern is when
agencies shape policy by using their discretion in law enforcement. Finally, how agencies administer benefit and service programs also directly and indirectly determines policy.
Almost all policies incorporate control techniques to change people’s behaviors in the attempt to address targeted public problems. Such techniques used in implementation include noncoercive means; inspection; licensing ; loans, subsidies, and benefits; contracts; expenditures; market and proprietary operations; taxation; tax expenditures; directive power; services; informal procedures ; voluntary regulation; and sanctions. Although it is agreed that implementation should cause the least amount of disturbance in people’s lives and focus on compliance over punishment, there is much debate over the use of standards (command-and-control) versus economic incentives (rewards or penalties).
The chapter finishes with a discussion of compliance. Policy compliance is the result of respect for authority, reasoned acceptance, social values, legitimacy, self-interest, indifference, and sanctions. Policy acceptance seems to increase with the passing of time. Noncompliance is caused by conflicts with prevailing values and practices, selective disobedience, associates, pecuniary motives, ambiguity, difficulty, and ignorance. Agencies attempt to secure compliance by utilizing values people employ in making decisions, limiting the acceptable choices, and facilitating the ease of compliance.
Key Terms for Chapter Six
adjudication The application through judicial or judicial-like procedure of existing law or policy to particular cases.
bureau A major administrative subunit in a government department or agency, such as the Bureau of Reclamation or the National Park Service.
bureaucracy General term for administrative agencies that carry out public policy.
capture Said to occur when interest groups are thought to have too much control or influence over a government agency.
clientele The set of reasonably distinct or identifiable individuals and groups served or regulated by an agency, such as broadcasters and the Federal Communications Commission.
decision-making The process of making a choice among a number of alternatives.
executive department A large administrative organization, headed by a secretary, that is a basic component of the executive branch; for example, the Department of Health and Human Services.
federalism The constitutional division of power between a central or national government and a series of state or provincial governments.
government corporation Corporation established to administer businesslike or commercial activities, this agency has more operating freedom than other agencies.
hammers Provisions included in laws that are intended to compel agencies to take actions.
independent regulatory commission A plural-headed agency handling economic regulatory programs that is somewhat free from presidential control, such as the Federal Reserve Board.
informal procedures Agency modes of handling matters that are not specified by laws or other legal documents—for example, negotiated settlements and friendly persuasion.
The most used form of policy evaluation looking for factual bases is a systematic evaluation that rigorously measures policy results and determines cause-and-effect relationships. However, there are a variety of conditions that can make such a systemic evaluation problematic. These include uncertainty over policy goals, difficulty in determining causality, diffuse policy impacts, difficulties in data acquisition, official resistance, a limited time perspective, and evaluation lacks influence. The use and misuse of cost-benefit analysis, a quantitative technique that identifies the costs and benefits of a policy and translates them into monetary values for comparison, also presents additional challenges. Despite this, cost-benefit analysis has been a tool in government decision-making for several decades, and it can contribute to rationality in evaluation if used fairly.
Evaluation of policies, programs and agencies may produce a variety of responses, including termination. However, there are many factors that make policy termination particularly difficult. Policies have political supporters that will strongly resist change and ignore adverse evidence. Additionally, critics of a policy are usually less intense, disorganized, and diverse in their interests. Also, the dispersed and fragmented power structure of government can serve to protect enacted policies as those with jurisdiction are more likely to be supporters. Moreover, termination is a drastic action with unpleasant consequences, especially for those who benefit, and creates avoidable political ill will. On the other hand, there are some factors that may contribute to policy termination, such as ideology, the desire to economize, altered political conditions, clear policy failure, and rarely, a damaging systematic evaluation. In all, policy evaluation is much more likely to reinitiate the policy process to make incremental improvements than to lead to policy termination.
Key Terms from Chapter Seven
administrative agencies Executive-branch organizations that implement public policies and carry on the day-to-day activities of government.
congressional oversight Actions by Congress to supervise and control the activities of administrative agencies.
experimental design A method of policy evaluation that employs classic experimental methodology to determine the effectiveness of a policy.
laissez-faire A term designating government inaction either on some aspects of economic activity or generally.
opportunity cost The value of the next best alternative to the one that a person has chosen.
policy evaluation Concerned with trying to determine the effects or consequences of actual public policies.
policy impact The effects or consequences of a policy, whether intended or unintended, on society.
policy outcomes The ultimate consequences that a policy has for society—for instance, its contribution to social contentment or security.
presidential commission A temporary group, created by the chief executive, consisting of public officials and/or private citizens who study and make recommendations on a problem.
program A set of rules, routines, and resources (including personnel) in an agency designed to carry out a policy or portion thereof—for example, the adult education program in the U.S. Department of Education.
revenues Taxes, fees, donations, and other sources of government income.
systematic evaluation A type of policy evaluation that employs social science methodology to measure the societal effects of policies or programs and the extent to which they are achieving their goals or objectives.
task force An informal or ad hoc group of citizens and officials used to examine and/or propose action on a problem. Used by some presidents.
Chapter Eight
Public policymaking is much too complex to be accounted for by a single, universal theory. Instead, the preceding chapters presented a general framework—the policy cycle—for the analysis of policymaking. This framework is useful in separating the process into wieldy segments for examination and study. Although analytical distinctions can be appropriately made, it is important to remember that the various segments of the cycle can blend together and what happens in one phase impacts later phases.
Chapter 8 mainly consists of various general observations about the public policymaking process. One, after the formation of public policy on a public problem has begun, the policy process is almost always ongoing rather than finite in duration. Two, in a modern, pluralistic society, policymaking is going to be untidy and unruly. Fragmented and dispersed power structures along with social, economic, and ideological diversity make policymaking complicated and often disorderly. Three, American policymaking tends to be marked much more by conflict than cooperation. This adversarial pattern is most evident in judicial proceedings and government-business relationships. Four, policy analysis and systematic evaluation have become widely utilized in the legislative and administrative arenas. Thus, the public policy process has become more technocratic and less accessible to generalists and average citizens. Five, conventional wisdom among political scientists contends that policymaking in the United States is essentially incremental (limited or marginal changes to existing policies ) to help reduce conflict. However, a small number of policies do make significant enough breakthroughs in the direction or content of policy areas to be warranted as basic (or fundamental ) decisions. Six, while conflict draws most of the attention in the public policy process, there is much routine policymaking characterized by low visibility, less public participation, and fewer controversies. Seven, change is a constant of the policy cycle. When change is deliberate and intended to improve the policy process, it is designated as reform. Change in one part of the process affects the other parts making successful reform not easily attainable. Finally, despite criticisms over policy failures, public policies en masse have achieved much to improve the quality and ease of life. Even policies that have fallen short of goal attainment, in many cases, have at least mitigated targeted public problems.
Key Terms from Chapter Eight
basic decision A decision that makes a major change in the direction or content of public policy. Also called a “fundamental decision.”
incremental policy A new policy that makes limited or marginal changes to an existing policy.
policy decisions Choices made on whether something should be adopted as public policy.
reform A change to policy that takes the form of a deliberate effort to improve the operation of the policy process.
