Introducing Public Policy 0321088832, 2007012014, 9780321088833

Citation preview

Introducing Public Policy

Jay M. Shafritz University of Pittsburgh

Christopher P. Borick Muhlenberg College

£ PEARSON L(

New York San Francisco Boston

London Toronto Sydney Tokyo

Singapore Madrid Mexico City Munich Paris Cape Town Hong Kong Montreal

Editor-in-Chief: Eric Scano Supplements Editor: Brian Belardi Media Supplements Editor: Melissa Edwards Executive Marketing Manager: Ann Stypuloski Production Manager: Eric Jorgensen Project Coordination, Text Design, and Electronic Page Makeup: Pre-Press PMG Cover Design Manager: John Callahan Cover Designer: Maria Ilardi Design Cover Photo: Image Courtesy of Getty Images, Inc. Photo Researcher: Clare Maxwell Senior Manufacturing Buyer: Dennis J. Para Printer and Binder: Courier Corporation Cover Printer: Coral Graphic Services

Page 6: Eric Draper/The White House; page 26: Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS; page 30: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 38: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 59: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 79: CORBIS; page 94: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 110: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 127: John Springer Collection/CORBIS; page 135: Ted Spiegel/CORBIS; page 147: Taylor Jones/ The Hoover Digest; page 158: Reuters/CORBIS; page 164: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 175: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 186: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 214: Shawn Thew/CORBIS; page 243: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 276: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 304: CORBIS; page 311: Bettmann/CORBIS; page 351: CORBIS; page 359: Wally McNamee/CORBIS; page 364: MO/CORBIS Sipa. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Shafritz, Jay M. Introducing public policy / Jay M. Shafritz, Christopher R Borick. p. cm. ISBN 0-321-08883-2 1. Policy sciences. I. Borick, Christopher P. II. Title. H97.S485 2008 320.6—dc22 2007012014 Copyright © 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. Please visit us at www.ablongman.com ISBN 10: 0-321-08883-2 ISBN 13: 978-0-321-08883-3

12345678910—CRW—10 09 08 07

Brief Contents Preface

xv

PART I

The Framework

Defining Public Policy 1 The Study of Public Policy 22 The Public Policymaking System 49 Formal Policy Development 75 Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation 105 The Doctrinal Approach to Understanding Public Policy 132

Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6

PART II

of Public Policy

Public Policy Areas

Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Chapter 14

Economic Policy 154 Education Policy 181 Environmental Policy 211 Welfare Policy 241 Civil Rights Policy 266 Foreign and Defense Policy 301 Criminal Justice Policy 328 Health Care Policy 357

Glossary 382

Index 387

iii

!

;

Detailed Contents Preface

xv

PART I

The Framework of Public Policy

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy 1 Keynote: Forging a Doctrine During in September 2

io

Days

The Core Vocabulary of Public Policy 7 An Operational Definition of Public Policy 8

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy 9 The Ethical Approach 10 The Biographical Approach 12 The Case Study Approach 13 The Public Law Approach 14 The Systems Approach 15 Policy Paper Approach 16 The Formal Research Approach 17

Typologies 17 Summary 19 Key Concepts 19 Review Questions 20 Bibliography 20 Recommended Books 20 Related Web Sites 21

Chapter 2

The Study of Public Policy 22 Keynote: Jeremy Bentham— A Founder of Public Policy Studies 23 The Influence of the Progressive Movement on the Study of Public Policy 26 The Muckrakers 28 The Reform Movement 28

v

Vi

Contents

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia 30 Political Science 32 Public Administration 34 International Relations 35 Political Economy 37 Policy Science and Policy Studies 39

Pluralism Versus Elitism in the Study of Public Policymaking 41 The Paranoid Style 42 Group Theory Explains the Alliances of Interests 43 Summary 45

Bibliography 46

Chapter 3

Key Concepts 46 Review Questions 46 Recommended Books 47 Related Web Sites 48

The Public Policymaking System 49 Keynote: Sherlock Holmes— The World’s Most Famous Systems Analyst 50 The Policymaking System 51 Systems Theory 52 Open Systems Theory 53 Systems Analysis 55 The Public Policymaking Process 56

Agenda Setting 57 The Role of Public Policy Entrepreneurs 58 The Issue-Attention Cycle 62

Decision Making 62 Rational Decision Making 63 Incrementalism 64 Mixed Scanning 66

Implementation 68 Who Gets What 69

Evaluation 70 Efficiency and Effectiveness 70

Feedback 71 Summary 72 Key Concepts 72 Review Questions 73 Bibliography 73 Recommended Books 74 Related Web Sites 74

I

Contents

Chapter 4

Formal Policy Development

vii

75

Keynote: Why Did General MacArthur Take His Staff When He Ran Away to Australia? 76 The Nature of Staff

79

Help for the Line 80 Origin of the Modern Sta ff System 8 1 The Staff Concept 81 The Influence of the German General Staff

82

Presidential Staff 84 The Brownlow Commitee 84 The White House Staff Structure 86 The Chief of Staff 88

Policy Advisors 89 Formal and Informal Advisors 90 Presidential and National Commissions 91 Cabinet Advisors 94

Think Tanks 95 Nonacademic Think Tanks 96 The RAND Corporation as an Exemplar 97 RAND Expands 99 Governmental Think Tanks 99 Think Tanks for Profit and Not 100 Summary 101

Key Concepts 102 Review Questions 102 Bibliography 103 * Recommended Books 104 m Related Web Sites 104

Chapter 5

Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation 105 Keynote: Who Really Made the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima? 106 Policy Analysis as Dissent 110 Everyday Policy Analysis 112

Formal Policy An alysis 112 Policy Analysis Is Policy-Neutral 113 What Policy Analysis Should Do 113 What Policy Analysis Should Not Do 115

viii

Contents

Models for Policy Analysis 116 Types of Models 117 Brainstorming 119

Game Theory 119 Zero-Sum Games 120

Program Evaluation 120 Policy Analysis Is Not Program Evaluation 121 Legislative Program Evaluation 122 Types of Evaluation 123 Evaluation Standards 125 Management Control: Evaluation in Microcosm 126 Evaluation and the Democratic Process 126 Summary 128 Key Concepts 129 m Review Questions 129 Bibliography 130 * Recommended Books 130 Related Web Sites 131

Chapter 6

The Doctrinal Approach to Understanding Public Policy 132 Keynote: The Fall and Rise of the Doctrine of Preemption 133 A Doctrinal Explanation of Public Policy 136 The Doctrine of Republicanism 136 From Doctrine to Policy 137

The Role of Doctrine in Policy Development 141 Leading with Doctrine 141 Deviating from Doctrine 143

The Doctrinal Development Cycle

146

Ever-Evolving Doctrinal Innovations 148 The Doctrinal Template 150 Summary 151 Key Concepts 151 Review Questions 152 Bibliography 152 Recommended Books 152 Related Web Sites 153

PART II

Chapter 7

Public Policy Areas Economic Policy 154 Keynote: Friedrich A. Hayek— The Guru of Public Choice Doctrine 155

Contents

ix

The Origins of Modern Public Choice Politics 159 Goldwater: A Choice, Not an Echo 160 The Reagan Revolution 162 The Bush Revival of the Reagan Legacy 163

Why Public Choice 164 Public Choice as Economics 165 Public Choice as Doctrine 166 The Theory of Public Choice 166

The Managerialist Impulse 168 Beware the Budget-Maximizing Bureaucrat Capture Theory 172

169

Budgeting and Economic Policy 172 Monetary Policy 173 Fiscal Policy 173

Tax Policy 174 Progressive Taxation The Flat Tax 176

175

Summary 178 Key Concepts 178 Review Questions 179 Bibliography 179 Recommended Books 180 Related Web Sites 180

Chapter 8

Education Policy 181 Keynote: How Brown Changed Plessy’s Doctrine 182

Who Makes Education Policy 186 A Short History of American Education Policy 188 Governmental Machinery for Education Policymaking 190

Financing the Public Schools 191 Efforts to Equalize School Funding 1 92 Since Rodriguez 195

Labor Policy Confronts Education Policy 196 How Unions Work 197 Collective Bargaining 197 Impasse Resolution 197 School’s Out When They Strike Out 199 The Contract 200

X

Contents

School Choice 203 Public School Choice 203 School Vouchers 204 The Pros and Cons of School Vouchers 205 The Politics of Vouchers 206 Summary

208

Bibliography 209

Chapter 9

Key Concepts 209

Review Questions

Recommended Books 210

209

Related Web Sites 210

Environmental Policy 211 Keynote: The Rove Doctrine and Environmental Policy

212

The Environmental Decade Meets the Reagan Revolution 215 American Federalism and the Evolution of Environmental Policy 216 Dual Federalism and the Emergence of American Environmental Policy 217 Cooperative Federalism: Federal-State Partnerships in Land Management 219 Creative Federalism: The Rise of Federal Leadership in Environmental Protection 220

The Environmental Decade and New Federalism 222 New Federalism and the Roots of Environmental Policy Devolution 224

The New Era of Environmental Protection and the Role of Intergovernmental Relations 227 The Rise of Transboundary and Global Environmental Issues 228 Approaches to Environmental Management: Command and Control Versus the Market 232 The Sprawling of America: Growth Management in a Decentralized Government Setting 235 Summary 237 Key Concepts 238 Review Questions 239 Bibliography 239 Recommended Books 239 * Related Web Sites 240

Chapter 10 Welfare Policy 241 Keynote: Don’t Blame Bismarck for Age-65 Retirement 242

The Evolution of the Welfare State 244 Social Insurance as an Alternative to Socialism 246

Contents

The Critical Role of the Social Security Act of 1935 Old Age Pensions 249 Social Security Reform 250 Unemployment Insurance 251 Aid to Families with Dependent Children 252

xi

248

Welfare Reform 253 Changing Welfare Doctrine 255 The Nonprofit Sector’s Welfare Role 257 The Bush Administration’s Faith-Based Initiative 259 Voluntarism and Philanthropy 259 Race and Poverty 262 Review Questions 264 263 Key Concepts 264 Bibliography 264 Recommended Books 265 Related Web Sites 265

Summary

Chapter 11 Civil Rights Policy 266 Keynote: The Biblical Problem of Sexual Harassment Is Dealt with by the U.S. Supreme Court 267

What Is Social Equity? 270 Mandating Social Equity

270

The Challenge of Equality 271 Racism 272 The Bitter Heritage of Slavery 273 From Reconstruction to Second Reconstruction An Administrative Fix for Racism 276

Equal Employment Opportunity 277 Origins of Affirmative Action 278 The Case for Affirmative Action 279 The Case Against Affirmative Action 281

Representative Bureaucracy

282

Reverse Discrimination 282 Justifying Diversity 287

Other Forms of Discrimination Sex Discrimination

289

289

Sexual Harassment 290 Pregnancy Discrimination 293 Age Discrimination 293 Disabilities Discrimination 294

275

xii

Contents Sexual Orientation Discrimination 29.5 Immigration and Discrimination 296 Summary 297 Key Concepts 298 Review Questions 299 Bibliography 299 Recommended Books 300 Related Web Sites 300

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy 301

—

Keynote.- Thucydides Pioneer of Political Realism 302 Defining Power 305 Elements of National Power 306 Balance-of-Power Doctrine 307 The Power to Persuade 308 The Two-Presidencies Thesis 309

The Unsettled and Unsettling Constitutional Doctrine on War Powers 310 The Decline of the Declaration of War 312 The War Powers Resolution 313

Defense Doctrines 316 How the Doctrine of Containment Won the Cold War

316

Leading Through the Hierarchy of Doctrine 320 Grand Strategic Level 320 Strategic Level 321 Operational Level 322 Tactical Level 324 Summary 325 * Key Concepts 326 Review Questions 326 Bibliography 326 Recommended Books 327 Related Web Sites 327

Chapter 13 Criminal Justice Policy 328 Keynote: How Your Right to Remain Silent and Consult a Lawyer if Arrested Is Related to Your Right to Go Bankrupt Paying Legal Fees 329

Who Makes Criminal Justice Policy? 331 The Criminal Justice Process 332

The Police and the State 333 Two Kinds of Police 334

Contents Police Behavior 335 The “Broken Windows” Doctrine

xiii

336

The Courts 338 The Supreme Court 338 State Courts 339 The Courts as Policymakers 340 Bail or Jail 342 Trials Are a Trial 343 Plea Bargaining 345

Corrections 345 Prison Doctrine 346 Prison Populations 347 “Three Strikes” Laws 347 Prison Crowding 348

The Doctrine of Deterrence: The Core Policy of the Criminal

Justice System 349 The Death Penalty 349 The Constitutionality ol the Death Penalty 351 Review Questions 355 Summary 3S4 * Key Concepts 3S4 Related Web Sites 356 Bibliography 355 Recommended Books 356

Chapter 14 Health Care Policy 357 Keynote: Free to Choose and the Demise of the 1994 Clinton Health Care Reform Plan 358

Health Care in America: The Current Diagnosis 361 Health Care Costs 361 Health Insurance Coverage 363 Physician Availability 364

Federal Health Care Policy 365 Medicare 366 Medicaid 368

Back to the Future: Health Care Reform Revisited 370 The Rise of the HMO and the Introduction of Government as the Protector of Individual Choice 371 Malpractice Reform 373

xiv

Contents Medicare Reform: The 800-Pound Gorilla of American Health Care 374 The States Take the Lead 378 Summary 379 Key Concepts 379 m Bibliography 380 Recommended Books 381 Related Web Sites 381

Glossary 382

Index 387

Preface VVTith college, university, and public libraries bulging from tens of thousands of W new books published each year and the ever-increasing concern for the whole¬ sale destruction of forests to make paper, the would-be authors of today should have a definite reason for bringing a new book into the world. “It’s madness, just madness,” we were assured by some of our academic col¬ leagues, to attempt a new public policy text. There were already too many! But, as Hamlet happily said, “Though this be madness, yet there is method in it.” We saw a need or, as they say in advertising a niche in the market. Although it is generally accepted that tjie doctrines of the political parties heavily influence the specific poli¬ cies they advocate, no introductory public policy text has sought to present the policymaking process within this overall context. Until now.

—

—

The Doctrinal Approach

—

—

To the extent feasible, this text takes a doctrinal not a doctrinaire approach to introducing public policy. Although we will explain the evolution and implementa¬ tion of policies! in terms of their underlying doctrines, we are not doctrinaires of the right, left, or center. We are simply teachers who find doctrine a useful tool with which to weave our explanations of the public policy process. Thus our doctrinal approach is not ideological but rather methodological. Doctrine, a teaching, is a mediating force between philosophy and policy. It, in effect, takes philosophy, often so vague and theoretical, and makes it operational, so that specific policies can be derived from it. Thus, public policy is the implementa¬ tion of a governing doctrine. In the United States, this governing doctrine is republi¬ canism. Note the small “r.” Doctrine which encompasses and provides direction for strategy, tatties, and principles is a state’s (or any large organization’s) operat¬ ing philosophy of policy development and administration; it is the accepted notions of how things are to be done. This text is divided into two parts, totaling 14 chapters. In the first half of the book, we examine the nature of public policy and the ways in which policy is devel¬ oped, implemented, and evaluated. In the second half, we examine contemporary areas of public} policy in more detail. Here we apply the doctrinal approach to a variety of contemporary areas of public policy. Part I, “The Framework of Public Policy,” includes the first six chapters, and emphasizes ho>v people from philosophers to politicians have been thinking about, writing on, ancj analyzing public policy processes from ancient times to the present.

——

Chapter 1, “Defining Public Policy,” introduces the core vocabulary of public policy, develops an operational definition of public policy, reviews the seven xv

XVi

Preface major approaches to the study of public policy, and assesses the utility of typologies. Chapter 2, “The Study of Public Policy,” explores the historical origins of the study of public policy, reviews the major academic disciplines that focus on public policymaking, and examines the influence of pluralism and elitism in assessing public policymaking. Chapter 3, “The Public Policymaking System,” uses the traditional systems model of input, throughput, output, and feedback to explain the public policy¬ making process in a free society. Chapter 4, “Formal Policy Development,” explores the origins of modern staff systems, how the staff concept evolved to develop new doctrines and policies, how the White House staff grew from an anonymous few to a publicity-seeking many, the role of a chief of staff, and the evolution of public policy think tanks in and out of government. Chapter 5, “Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation,” is a survey of the ori¬ gins and politics of policy analysis and program evaluation, why policy analy¬ sis ideally should be politically neutral, what policy analysts should do as well as what they should not do. Chapter 6, “The Doctrinal Approach to Understanding Public Policy,” explains the role of doctrine in policy development, reviews the doctrinal development cycle, and introduces the doctrinal template.

Part II, “Public Policy Areas,” includes eight chapters. This section of the text applies the doctrinal framework to the eight policy areas in the chapters that follow. These chapters offer very familiar topics:

Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Chapter 14

Economic Policy Education Policy Environmental Policy Welfare Policy Civil Rights Policy Foreign and Defense Policy Criminal Justice Policy Health Care Policy

Each of these area chapters has two purposes: (1) to offer a brief reconnaissance of each policy area and (2) to use these policy areas as examples to which we can apply our doctrinal template. Use of this template is hardly limited to these areas. It is expected that in reviewing these chapters, the student will become adept enough in using doctrinal lenses in looking at the policy world using the perspective of the doctrinal approach to be able to use them in critically viewing other public policy areas as well.

——

xvii

Preface

Keynote Stories We sought to create a text that would bridge two worlds, one that would be informal enough to be accessible to undergraduates yet comprehensive enough for beginning graduate students. Public policy is an exciting and fascinating field of study, full of the stuff of fiction except that it’s true. We try to capture this sense of drama and excitement by beginning each chapter with a story what we call a Keynote that highlights a major aspect of the subject. These accounts deal with a rich variety of topics: from the development of the Bush Doctrine to fight terrorism, to the influence of the Progressive Movement on the study of public policy, and the decision to drop the atomic bomjb on Japan, for example. About half of these keynotes take a biographical approach: Jeremy Bentham’s advocacy of utilitarianism, Thucydides’ development of the balance-of-power doc¬ trine, General Douglas MacArthur and the modern staff system, Friedrich A. Hayek and public choice doctrine, and President Harry Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb. All of the keynotes have significant public policy implications, which are developed further in the chapter itself. We trust that they will lead to many stim¬ ulating class discussions. To facilitate this we have included “For Discussion” ques¬ tions at the end of each keynote. The material presented in each chapter should not surprise anyone familiar with public policy. The selection of topics reflects how we and many others teach the course. What is radically different is our doctrinal and storytelling approach. We have made every effort to keep the tone lively, so that students as well as their professors might take some pleasure in reviewing the information.

—

—

Text Features Many features of this text are designed to make it easy to learn from as well as easy to teach with. When a word appears in boldface in the text, it is defined at the bot¬ tom of its page. The “Key Concepts” at the end of each chapter supplement rather

than duplicate these boldfaced definitions. The chapters all begin with a list of chapter objectives. Page numbers follow each objective so that the chapter discussions of them can be easily located. The objectives are reinforced by chapter summaries at the end. Readers will also find a list of recommended books and a separate list of related web sites at the end of each chapter. These have been included as guides to further information on chapter topics for any interested reader student or instructor. Throughout the book we have placed a variety of “In the News” boxes that take concepts from the core of the chapter and relate them to current events. Similarly, we use “Alternative Theories” boxes to compare contrasting positions on policy issues. And note that most photos have extensive captions that bring out

—

important points. The endpapers of the text (inside the front and back covers) contain the “Key Events in Public Policy,” a ready reference chronology of many of the intellectual, legislative, legal, and political landmarks in public policy.

XViii

Preface

Hvery effort has been made to keep the material as current as possible. Thus there is extensive coverage of the war on terrorism, welfare reform, privatization, school vouchers, and contracting out. Because American public policy is being increasingly influenced by practices in other countries, such as managerialism in Great Britain, a comparative perspective has been added wherever appropriate. There are no traditional footnotes in this book. Generally, if a work or author is referred to in a chapter, the corresponding full citation will be found in that chapter’s bibliography. The major exceptions are works or statements so famous and existing in so many formats such as the Bible and Shakespeare’s plays that further bibliographic information was deemed unnecessary. Most long quotations are kept in boxes, separate from the main body and rhythm of the text. This infor¬ mal format was used very successfully through five editions of the text Personnel Management in Government (New York: Marcel Dekker, 1978-2001) by Shafritz and others and five editions of the text Introducing Public Administration (New York: Longman, (1997-2007) by Shafritz, Russell, and Borick. Sometimes it was too awkward to incorporate a reference to a citation in the main body of the text; in such cases the source is identified in parentheses at the end of the quotation. The text is accompanied by an Instructors Manual/Test Book (ISBN 0321115503) that includes overviews, learning objectives, key terms, and discussion and multiplechoice questions for each chapter.

—

—

Classics of Public Policy Classics of Public Policy edited by Jay M. Shafritz, Karen Layne, and Christopher Borick, offers an edited collection of the best work in the interdisciplinary field of public policy. Organized to match the table of contents of standard policy textbooks and lauded by reviewers for ably filling a long-standing void in the field, this supplementary reader brings the most important writings in public policy together in one place. Bundle this reader with Introduction to Public Policy and receive a discount on the package price. Contact your representative for more information at www.ablongman.com/replicator. (ISBN 0205553710)

Acknowledgments No book is born without debts. We are happy to acknowledge the helpful encour¬ agement and suggestions of the following reviewers, who commented on this book in various stages of its development: Michael Baranowski, Northern Kentucky University; Robert Blair, University of Nebraska, Omaha; Breanna Coates, U.S. Army War College; Michael Coulter, Grove City College; R. Steven Daniels, California State University, Bakersfield; Kenneth Fernandez, University of Nevada - Las Vegas; Jeffrey Greene, University of Montana; John Grummel, University of South Carolina; Michael Grunenwald, University of Dayton; Jeffery K. Guiler, Robert Morris University; Justin Halpern, Northeastern State University; John Howell, Southern University; Albert C. Hyde, Brookings Institution; Karen Kedrowski, Winthrop University; Glenda Kirkland,

Preface

xix

Bloomfield College; Fred Kramer, University of Massachusetts - Amherst; Karen S. Layne, University of Nevada Las Vegas; Michael Licari, University of Northern Iowa; Matthew Lindstrom, Siena College; David Meyer, University of California Irvine; Michael Nojeim, Ohio University - Eastern; Mark O’Gorman, Maryville College; J. Steven Ott, University of Utah; Gene Rainey, University of North Carolina - Asheville; Jim Riley, Regis University; E.W. Russell, University of Melbourne, Australia; Brett Sharp, University of Central Oklahoma; Samuel Shelton, Troy State University; Christopher Simon, University of Nevada - Reno; lfeyinwa Udezulu, Deleware State University; Damien Yaghi, Kennesaw State

-

University

We would also like to thank Sarah Niebler, Jill Batdorf, and Steven M. Fischer of Lehigh University for their help in gathering material for this book. Finally we offer our appreciation to Lanethea Mathews-Gardner of Muhlenberg College for her work in developing the Intructor's Manual for our text.

This has been a collaboration of two friends. Although separated by both gen¬ erations and geography, we have a common interest in politics and policy that bridges our differences. We hope that our work will provide readers with an interesting and insightful perspective on a field that touches so many aspects of our daily lives. Naturally all omissions, mistakes, or other flaws that may be found herein are solely our responsibility. We are hopeful that this will find sufficient acceptance that subsequent editions will be warranted. Thus, suggestions for improvements and enhancements will always be welcome.

JAY M. SHAFRITZ shafri [email protected] CHRISTOPHER P. BORICK [email protected]

CHAPTER 1

Defining Public Policy Chapter Outline Keynote: Forging a Doctrine During

io

Days in September

2

The Core Vocabulary of Public Policy 7 An Operational Definition of Public Policy 8

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy 9

The Ethical Approach 10 The Biographical Approach 12 The Case Study Approach 13 The Public Law Approach 14 The Systems Approach 15 The Policy Paper Approach 16 The Formal Research Approach 17 Typologies 17

Chapter Objectives To illustrate how the Bush Doctrine was developed after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (p. 2)

To define the essential words used in discussing public policy (p. 7) To offer an operational definition of public policy (p. 8) * To review the major approaches to how public policy has always been studied: the ethical, biographical, case study, public law, systems, policy paper, and formal research approaches {p. 9) To demonstrate the utility of typologies in examining public policies (P- 17)

1

2

PART I

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

Keynote: Forging a Doctrine During 10 Days in September Before September 11, 2001, the United States had a policy toward terrorism. It was a criminal justice policy. Thus those committing terrorist acts were to be arrested, prose¬ cuted, and sent to jail just like other criminals. This is what happened in 1995 when the

—

Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was bombed. The murderers of 168 federal employees, citizens seeking government services, and children in the building's day care center were sought, caught, and imprisoned. The leader, Timothy McVeigh, was sentenced to death and executed by lethal injection, with many of the relatives of his victims approvingly in attendance. Similarly, when Islamic terrorists in 1993 detonated a rental truck full of explosives in the underground garage of the World Trade Center in New York City, some of the con¬ spirators were caught and imprisoned for life. New York State did not offer the option of the death penalty. Although more than a thousand were injured in the blast, only six died. The World Trade Center suffered no major structural damage and was quickly repaired. However, it did close its underground garage to visitors. On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists once again struck the World Trade Center as well as the Pentagon in suburban Washington, D.C. They murdered almost 3,000 inno¬ cents by crashing hijacked airliners into the buildings. This was a greater death toll than that of the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941, which brought the United States into World War II. Now the United States would have a new policy. No longer would terrorists be arrested, read their Miranda rights, and placed in jail pending trial. Now the Federal Bureau of Investigation and local police would yield jurisdictional responsibility to the Armed Forces of the United States. Now those terrorists who conspired against the United States and resided abroad were to be military targets, to be killed on sight if they didn't immediately surrender. The new goal was not to send them to jail but to remove them from the face of the planet. How American policy toward terrorism was changed, operationalized, and pre¬ sented to the world after September 11 is a story that illustrates the general nature of doctrine and policy development. This change started shortly after President George W. Bush learned of the attacks; it was fully formed and presented to the nation 10 days, later on September 20, when the president addressed a joint session of Congress. In 1919, American journalist John Reed published Ten Days That Shook the World, his insider's account of the Russian Revolution. From January 27 to February 2, 2002, Dan

Pentagon The headquarters building of the U.S. Department of Defense. sneak attack A surprise attack by one state on another when they were presumably at peace; an attack prior to a formal declaration of war. Miranda rights The set of rights that a person accused or suspected of having committed a crime has during interrogation and of which he or she must be informed prior to questioning, according to the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1966 Miranda v. Arizona decision. joint session A combined meeting of both houses of Congress; usually held in the House Chamber because it is larger.

Keynote: Forging a Doctrine During 10 Days in September

—

Balz and Bob Woodward published a series of articles in the Washington Post what amounted to a small book on the Bush administration's first efforts to rally the nation for the war on terror. They were granted access to all the top decision makers because the president wanted to get "on the record" his version of what happened on those first 10 days. They might well have called their series "Ten Days That Shook the World's Terrorists." Their work is an insider's quick history. The following analysis uses their history as the main source of the facts and quotations. As soon as George J. Tenet, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), heard of the attacks on September 1 1, he said: "This has bin Laden all over it." The CIA had been expecting a major attack by Islamic terrorists. They knew something "big" was in the offing. By later that evening. Tenet was able to tell the president that the evi¬ dence was overwhelming: the Afghanistan-based al Qaeda network of Osama bin Laden was responsible. But the problem was bigger than Afghanistan. "We have a 60-country problem," Tenet told the president. The president responded: "Let's pick them off one at a time." He was determined for war. He felt that the plane that crashed into the Pentagon was probably headed for the White House— to kill him, his family, his staff, and his two little dogs. In addition to whatever else hit feelings were at the time, this had to be personal. The president made two crucial decisions that first day. First, war. As soon as he heard of the second plane hitting the World Trade Center, he thought: "They had declared war on us, and I made up my mind at that moment that we were going to war." But with whom? This was the second momentous decision, one that he made him¬ self without consulting his foreign policy advisors or Congress. In a speech to the nation at 8:30 that evening he stated what would be called the Bush Doctrine: "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." So within one working day the president pledged himself and his nation to war with an amorphous enemy located in dozens of countries. The president had put forth a grand strategic vision around which his people could rally. But all such visions are worthless unless they can be operationalized, unless they can be implemented. Grand strategies can be sliced into almost infinite levels. They go in a straight line from top to bottom. At the top is Bush deciding for war; at the bottom are the U.S. Army Special Forces deciding whether or not to call in an air strike on a sus¬ pected enemy position in Afghanistan, in between are the almost countless levels of the military and foreign policy bureaucracies, each seeking to tweak the larger overall strat¬ egy into whatevor directions it thinks best. Over the next several days, the crucial next step, the operational doctrine, would be developed. Although Bush wasn’t yet sure how he wanted to wage the war, he knew what he didn't want to do. As he told British Prime Minister Tony Blair on September 12, he didn't want to "pound Sand with millions of dollars in weapons." This was a dig at his prede¬ cessor, President Bill Clinton, who sent cruise missiles into abandoned terrorist training

—

Special Forces Military units trained for unconventional operations. cruise missile A pilotless jet aircraft that flies, by a combination of radar guidance and preset com¬ puter control, hundreds of miles to a target. These missiles can be armed with either nuclear or conventional Warheads, and are considered very accurate.

3

4

PART I a Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy camps in Afghanistan in retaliation for the bombings of American embassies in Africa. Later Bush asked Secretary of Defense Donalcf Rumsfeld what the military could do immediately. Rumsfeld answered, "Very little, effectively." Whereas the Department of Defense had not been anticipating a war in Afghanistan, the CIA had. The next day, September 1 3, Cofer Black, the leader of the CIA's counterterrorism unit, briefed the president and his advisors on what the CIA had been doing in Afghanistan (working with the Northern Alliance) and what it could do (become the "eyes on the ground" for the regular U.S. forces). Black assured the president that if he unleashed the CIA, "we'll rout 'em out," and America's enemies would have "flies on their eyeballs." The president was impressed. It was Secretary of State Colin Powell's opinion that "The president wanted to kill somebody." And the CIA was the only agency immediately prepared to let the killing begin. On September 14, the president met with the entire cabinet for the first time since the crisis began. As was Bush's custom, the meeting would open with a prayer prepared ahead of time by one of the cabinet members. On this day Defense Secretary Rumsfeld prayed aloud for the group to have the "patience to measure our lust for action." That afternoon Bush was to speak at a National Cathedral memorial service for the victims. Bush offered the usual words of comfort and included this note of resolve: "This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others. It will end in a way, and at an hour, of our choosing." Almost all agreed that it was one of Bush's finest moments as a public speaker and national comforter. On Saturday, September 15, Bush ordered his defense and foreign policy advisors to come to Camp David to present him with all the options that would feed his "lust for action." Here specific operational plans for the Bush Doctrine were offered. Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill presented his plan to go after the enemy's financial assets. Attorney General John Ashcroft put forth a legislative package for more legal authority to fight terrorist efforts within the United States. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld offered his military plans, and Secretary of State Colin Powell summarized his intentions to create a diplomatic alliance against terrorism. But the most dramatic presentation came from CIA Director Tenet. He advocated a worldwide antiterror effort involving 80 coun¬ tries. It would start with covert action teams in Afghanistan, which would eventually coop¬ erate with the Special Forces to work with the Northern Alliance opposition fighters. At the heart of the CIA proposal was a request for "exceptional authorities," the ability to do whatever was needed, including deadly force. There were no agents 007 cabinet The heads of the major departments of government in the executive branch. crisis A foreign policy problem involving a threat to the security of the state and dealt with by the highest level of a government forced to make crucial decisions within a short time frame. Camp David The U.S. president’s private resort in the Catoctin Mountains in Maryland. Called Shangri-La by President Franklin D. Roosevelt (after James Hilton’s mystical place of enchant¬ ment in his 1933 novel Lost Horizons), its name was changed to Camp David by Dwight D. Eisenhower in honor of his grandson. Camp David is no Spartan camp; it has a swimming pool, a bowling alley, tennis courts, and a movie theater, among other luxuries. agent 007 James Bond, the fictional British secret agent created by novelist Ian Fleming (1908-1964), who had a “license to kill” from his government.

Keynote: Forging a Doctrine During 10 Days in September involved, but the CIA clearly wanted a "license to kill." The main discordant note was Powell's warning that although the international coalition would be glad to go after the al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the coalition could start withering away once the United States extended the war to other countries. The president was adamant that he wouldn't toler¬ ate other countrips dictating to him about the war. "At some point we may be the only ones left. That's gkay with me. We are America," he said confidently. On Monday, September 17, President Bush and what had become known as his "war cabinet" reconvened at the White House. The president announced that he was signing a finding for the CIA to do all it said it could. There would soon be "flies on their eyeballs." All of the other departments were also given appropriate marching

orders. On Tuesday, September 18, the president, having launched his war on the previous day, turned his attention to the address he wanted to make before the Congress, the American people, and the world. His speechwriters were given the task of fleshing out his doctrine. Over the next 48 hours, the president, his speechwriters, and his war cabinet would review, revise, and polish the speech. Finally, on the evening of Thursday, September 20, Bush stood before a joint session of Congress to thunderous applause. He promised that "whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done." In the classic Orwellian tradition, he was using a relatively innocuous word to mean something far harsher. Only those not familiar with the innate subtleties of the English language failed to under¬ stand that his "justice" meant death to the terrorists. After all, only three days earlier he had told reporters that he wanted bin Laden "dead or alive." Then he promised, "I will not forget this wound to our country and those who inflicted it. I will hot yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for free¬ dom and security for the American people." The cheers within the Capitol were echoed by overwhelming approval from the nation's citizens. His favorable ratings in national opinion polls soared to new heights. Bush's promise amounted to a corollary to his doctrine. Not only would he seek out and destroy the terrorists and their hosts but would do so no matter how long it took. Bush was only one year into his first term as president. Time was on his side. So he thought. international coalition A group of international actors who temporarily combine to further a common interest such at the waging of war against a common enemy or the passing of a proposal in an international conference. finding A formal, written, signed-off-on presidential determination that a covert operation of the CIA is legal, important to national security, and (according to law) will be reported to the appropriate congressional committee in a timely fashion. Tide XXII of the Intelligence Oversight Act of 1980 mandates “a report to the Congress concerning any finding or determination, under any section of this chapter. That finding shall be reduced to writing and signed by the president.” Orwellian Reflective of the writings of George Orwell (1903-1950), the political essayist and novelist who often examined the rhetorical “swindles and perversions” inherent in the political use of the English language. corollary An addition to an existing doctrine. The meaning comes from mathematics and logic, where this word refers to a proposition that needs little or no proof because it so closely follows some¬ thing already proven.

5

6

PART I m Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

A {

.

i

m After President George W. Bush returns to the White House on September 11 , 2001 , he demonstrates to Vice President Richard B. Cheney how big a response he wants against the terrorist attackers. Both Bush and Cheney were undergraduates at Yale, but Cheney flunked out as a sophomore. After working as a power lineman for more than a year, he returned home to Wyoming, where he earned bachelor’s (1965) and master's (1966) degrees in political science from the University of Wyoming. He then moved to the University of Wisconsin to work on a Ph.D. After two more years, he won an American Political Science Association congressional fellowship to work for Republican Congressman William Steiger of Wisconsin. By 1964, he was a special assistant to Donald Rumsfeld in the Nixon administration's Office of Economic Opportunity. When Rumsfeld joined the White House staff the next year, he took Cheney along as his deputy. When Gerald R. Ford became president in August 1974, in the wake of President Richard M. Nixon's resignation and disgrace, Rumsfeld became chief of Staff, with Cheney in tow as his deputy. When Rumsfeld was named secretary of defense (for the first time) three months later, Cheney at age 34, became chief of staff. Not bad for a Yale dropout! Of course, George W. Bush, his boss, actually graduated from Yale, but with a decidedly minimal record. Thus he told Yale graduates during a 2001 commencement address: "To the C students, I say, 'you, too, can be President of the United States." Given the successful political careers of both Bush and Cheney it's hard to argue with the president's appraisal.

In June of 2001, three months before the war began, Peggy Noonan, a speechwriter for both President Ronald Reagan and the first President Bush, interviewed the new President Bush for a book she was writing on the character of Reagan. Talking of Reagan, Bush said: “If you really think about it, a president's job is to define the spirit of the nation. And to help define the soul. And Ronald Reagan knew that .... And he defined a vision and he carried out a vision.” Bush certainly defined the nation’s warlike spirit. The vision he offered, victory through justice not vengeance was originally overwhelmingly supported. Yet it remained quite unclear whether he would be able to

—

—

!

The Core Vocabulary of Public Policy

7

fulfill his vision. Reagan has received much credit for victory in the Cold War and the peaceful vanquishing of the Soviet Union. Will Bush be able to defeat worldwide terrorism? As the events in Iraq from late 2003 onward demonstrate, this question remains largely unanswered. The Bush Doctrine remains, yet the overwhelming support of the public demonstrated in the wake of September 1 1, 2001, has slipped away as the United States has become entrenched in Iraq. In its place is a remarkably divided public and a heated debate that will serve as our departure point for defining public policy.

For Discussion: Should citizens be suspicious of the official version of events coming of any presidential administration after a major attack on the nation? Would either of the other possible presidents close to that time (Bill Clinton or A1 Gore) have responded to the September 11 attacks any differently from President Bush? out

The Core Vocabulary of Public Policy From the earliest times to the present, public policy has begun with words. Whether it is Socrates inciting the youth of ancient Athens, the American revolutionary Benjamin Franklin urging the Continental Congress of 1776 to declare indepen¬ dence from England, or President George W. Bush waging the contemporary war on terror, these calls for action are made with words. So before we risk getting lost in a semantic tangle, we should define our terms. The five words or phrases explained below represent the core vocabulary used in the study of public policy, Everything that follows builds upon them.

public The people in general or all of the citizens of a political jurisdiction, such as a city or state. policy A standing decision by an authoritative source such as a govern¬ ment, a corporation, or the head of a family. Thus, for example, citizens must pay sbles taxes on purchases, employees will earn one day’s vacation for each month worked, and dinner will be served at 6:00 P.M. each evening. More generally, policies can also be goals yet to be achieved. For example, greater prosperity for all, higher corporate profits, and a good education for every child. public policy Government action or inaction. To war or not to war is arguably the most significant public policy decision a government can make. When the World Trade Center in New York was bombed in 1993, President Clinton chase not to go to war over the attack. His administration took a

—

Socrates (470-399 $.C.E.) The Greek philosopher who established the intellectual foundations of modern educational testing when he asserted that “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Continental Congress The delegates from the thirteen original colonies who first met in 1774 in Philadelphia. The Second Continental Congress instigated the American Revolution by adopting the Declaration of Independence in 1776. jurisdiction A territory, subject matter, or person over which lawful authority may be exercised.

8

PART I

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

criminal justice approach toward the perpetrators. In 2001, President Bush, faced with massive deaths, decided that war was the best policy. It is all too easy to personalize policy decisions, to make them seem dependent upon the will of a given leader. But policies, especially those in democratic states, are usually the result of broad historical and political forces. Thus a leader riding a tidal wave of support as Bush did when he declared war on terror is often credited by historians or blamed for something anyone occupying his or her office might have done at the time. public law The codification, or the listing, of ail the standing public policy decisions made by a state or municipality. The political victories (and defeats) of all legislative and judicial battles are effectively announced by the new laws that emerge from the fray. Laws passed by a legislature in the form of individ¬ ual statutes are known collectively as statutory law. Laws that evolve from court decisions, such as those of the U.S. Supreme Court, are known collec¬ tively as case law. Other public laws also emerge from regulatory agencies and executive orders. public administration What governments do; the execution of a public law. Every application of a general law is necessarily an act of administration. Administration cannot exist without the foundation of public law. In the United States, the Constitution of 1787 as amended is the law of the land. All legislation must conform to it, or at the very least not violate it in a manner obvious to the U.S. Supreme Court. The law that creates an agency or program is known as its enabling legislation the law that legally “enables” a program to exist. In theory, no government administrator can do anything if it is not provided for in the legislation or the rules and regulations that the legislation allows an agency to promulgate.

—

—

—

An Operational Definition of Public Policy Now that our core terms have been explained, we can use them all in a one-sentence definition that explains how public policy operates: A public policy is a policy made on behalf of a public by means of a public law that is put into effect by public administration. This definition reflects exactly what President Bush did after September 11, 2001. He started to wage war (the policy) on behalf of the American people (the public) by means of public law (his constitutional authority as commander in chief and his leg¬ islatively derived power to spend money for defense) that is put into effect by public administration (all of the efforts of his cabinet secretaries and other agency heads). municipality A governing unit within a state; from the Latin municipium, referring to any self-governing body within the ancient Roman Empire. executive order Any rule or regulation issued by a chief administrative authority that, because of prece¬ dent and existing legislative authorization, has the effect of law. administration The management and direction of the affairs of governments and institutions. promulgate To put a new law into effect by announcing it formally and publicly. authority The power inherent in a specific government position that allows an incumbent to perform his or her assigned tasks.

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy

9

The end result of public policymaking is usually obvious: for example, a new law is passed or an agency head announces a new decision. But what is usually far less obvious, indeed quire convoluted, is how policy ideas bubble up out of the polit¬ ical environment and are eventually accepted or rejected by the people in power. And even when we think we know what happened, we are often wrong, because policymakers may deceive us about their true motives, may not know the convo¬ luted whole truth themselves, or may manipulate the historical record to their advantage. Whereas the keynote tells an essentially true story, it is not the whole truth. It is what the president and his advisors wanted the public to know at the time. As can already be seen from the rash of books released by departed members of the Bush administration such as former terrorism czar Richard Clark’s Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror and Paul O’Neill’s The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O’Neill there will be many attempts to shed new light on old decisions. Remember that, two decades after World War II, it came out that the British were able to read almost all the secret radio codes of the Germans. All the histories of that war had to be rewritten in light of this enormous fact. The history of the begin¬ nings of the war on terror will also be rewritten. Indeed, Bob Woodward has already expanded his series of articles into a book, Bush at War. Nevertheless, the keynote story serves our purpose because it contains all of the elements to illustrate how new policies and doctrines are made. The essential purpose of this as well as any other introductory text on public policy is to explain where new public policy ideas come from, how they are championed, and how they travel through the political wilderness to either die by rejection or thrive on continuing acceptance. This explanation begins with a review of the diverse approaches to the study of public policy.

—

—

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy The examination of public policy issues goes back as far as we can trace civiliza¬ tion. Policy issues can be found in the Old Testament, Genesis 4:9 (“Am I my brother’s keeper?”); in the New Testament, Matthew 22:21 (“Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s. . . .”); in Homer’s Iliad (“It is not unseemly for a man to die fighting in defense of his country.”); in Aesop’s fable of “The Rats and the Cat” (“Who shall bell the cat?”); and in the works of count¬ less other storytellers, philosophers, and historians. Indeed, the only really new thing about public policy is the self-conscious study of it the attempt to retroac¬ tively assign methodological techniques to what was always done instinctively or as a matter of common sense. Discussed below are seven major approaches to the study of public policies today. We concede that other approaches are possible because public policy is infinite in its variety. But these seven represent the analytical ways and means that the major¬ ity of public policy issues are offered to the world. For illustrative purposes the seven

—

ways and means The methods by which something is done. In the context of government this usually refers to the methods by which a state obtains its financial resources. Thus the U.S. House of Representatives has had a Ways and Means Committee since 1795.

10

PART

]

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

approaches are presented below as if they are always separate and distinct. But real life offers little that is pure. So it is with these approaches. They are most often to be found as hybrids with several approaches being mixed together. Thus biographies may contain case studies and policy papers may be about public laws. Note how each approach has an ancient lineage.

The Ethical Approach Religious and moral teachings have always influenced public policy decisions. Indeed, many of the hottest, most contested, public policy issues today are debated in terms of their morality. Examples include the death penalty, abortion, stem cell research, and homosexual rights. But the most obvious example is war and its conduct. Just-war doctrine has evolved through the ages as a means of formalizing the debate over whether a particular war is warranted in terms of ethics. Although elements of the doctrine can be found in the Bible and other ancient writings, the point of departure for just-war discussions ever since the Middle Ages has been the work of St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica (1267-1273). In essence his just-war doctrine deals with two basic ethical questions: 1. When is it morally acceptable to go to war? 2. What forms of war are permissible if the war is just?

His answer to the first question is that “for a war to be just, three conditions are necessary public authority, just cause, right motive.”

—

“Public authority” refers to those who have legitimate political power and general responsibility for public order. In the modern world this is limited to governments. This requirement means that wars waged by private parties (such as pirates or gangs of mercenary soldiers) for opportunistic gain can never be just. The primary just cause for war is defense. Wars of aggression for territorial gain, glory, or looting can never be just. Nor can wars be just if there is any reason¬ able alternative, such as negotiations by third-party neutrals. However, if your enemy is determined solely on your destruction, war is a morally justified response. On September 11, 2001, in New York City and at the Pentagon, the United States was given clear cause for its war on terror. Indeed, President Bush has repeatedly said, being fully advised of just-war doctrine (which is still taught to all U.S. military officers), that the war on terror is about “justice, not vengeance.” Finally, “right motive.” It is the obligation of both the state and its individual cit¬ izens to protect the innocent from harm. The primary motive of the war on terror is to prevent future attacks on U.S. citizens by an enemy that wants to kill all

mercenary A professional soldier who will fight for whoever pays him without any particular regard to ideological concerns, Modern mercenaries range from hired killers, who dub themselves with the name because it makes what they do sound more legitimate, to former members of some of the world's best armies, who tend to work for the revolutionary or the counterrevolutionary movements. aggression The unprovoked, unjustified, and thus illegal attack by one state on another. This may or may not be preceded by a declaration of war. But what one state may see as unprovoked another may view as justifiable retaliation. Ultimately, each nation defines aggression in its own interest.

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy

11

Americans. Here it is love that calls for war. Thomas Aquinas teaches that if you “love thy neighbor,” you have a moral obligation to use force to help that neighbor forestall evil. On February 12, 2002, sixty leading intellectuals published an open let¬ ter in several major newspapers including the Washington Post. Entitled “What We’re Fighting for: A Letter from America,” it addressed the just-war criterion of right motive when it proclaimed: Yet reason and careful moral reflection also teach us that there are times when the first and most important reply to evil is to stop it. There are times when waging war is not only morally permitted, but morally necessary, as a response to calamitous acts of violence, hatred, and injustice. This is one of those times.

The second question now must be answered: Is it being fought in a just manner? During the spring of 2004, this question became a central concern of the nation in light of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by members of the U.S. armed forces at the Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad. The events that took place in that now infamous facility forced Americans to question if prisoners were being harmed excessively in the execution of the war. For a just war to be justly waged, two considerations are paramount. First, noncombatants, meaning innocent civilians, cannot be directly attacked. However, it is permissible to undertake military actions that may result in collateral damage. This is quite in contrast to the enemy, the terrorists, who intentionally target civilians. The last major consideration for a just war is proportionality. This means that only appropriate and necessary not excessive military force should be used. The military means should not be disproportionate to their ends. Thus collateral damage should be minimized. The high-tech precision-guided bombs of the U.S. military make living up to the criterion of proportionality easier than ever. Nevertheless, as

—

—

Who Is to Blame for Collateral Damage in the War on Terror? Is it possible at some point that a civilian was killed? Yes. We announced here at this podium that a civilian was killed and it was an accident and unfortunate, and we regret the loss of any innocent life. But that person was not killed by us; that person was killed when the al Qaeda and bin Laden attacked the United States and killed thousands of people and caused us to have to go into that country and root out those terrorists before they kill thousands more. And it's important for the people of the world to understand that. SOURCE: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Department of Defense News briefing, December 27, 2001 .

collateral damage The unintended or incidental destruction that occurs during a military attack. For example, a school or hospital that is bombed by an air raid directed against a nearby enemy air¬ field can be said to have suffered collateral damage. Such excuses are usually not much consolation to the victims and their families.

12

PART I

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

has been dearly evident during the war in Iraq, dvilians may still be harmed through mistakes and acddents and by their proximity to the enemy. In addition, many ethical traditions affecting public policy issues are culturally influenced; for example, societies differ on what they consider to be appropriate sex¬ ual mores. One need look no further than the recent policy debates surrounding same-sex marriage in the United States for confirmation of this contention. In November 2003 a Massachusetts Supreme Court’s decision granted marriage rights to same-sex couples in that state, initiating months of hectic political activity well beyond the borders of the New England commonwealth. Most notably, President Bush became an active player in the matter, arguing for a constitutional amendment preserving marriage as a union between two people of opposite sex. In defending his position, President Bush argued that “the union of a man and a woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith” and therefore “cannot be severed from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society” (Presidential Address, February 25, 2004). The president’s position on the matter reflects the long-standing hesitancy and opposition of many Americans to the full and equal acceptance of homosexual rela¬ tionships as part of the nation’s mainstream culture, essentially because they believe such relationships to be immoral and wrong. Conversely, supporters of same-sex marriage in places ranging from San Francisco to New Paltz, New York, engaged in acts of civil disobedience against restrictions on gay marriage, largely because they believe such restrictions of rights on the basis of a citizen’s sexual preference are both immoral and wrong. Both sides in the debate claim the moral high ground, with any resolution through the policymaking process likely pleasing neither side completely.

The Biographical Approach This uses the life of an individual, usually a head of state, a legislator, or an influen¬ tial administrator to illustrate how and why certain policies came to be. Whereas Plutarch’s (46-120) Lives is the classic model for this, any modern biography of a major political figure follows in his footsteps. This necessarily historical approach, though offering an excellent means to understand the how and why of a given pub¬ lic policy, is the least useful for formulating new public policies except by offering good or bad examples. Nevertheless, Plutarch’s example of comparing the lives of influential policymakers still holds great poignancy. For example, in 1988, Desmond Seward’s parallel biography of Napoleon and Hitler was a worldwide bestseller. More recently, David McCullough set out to write a dual biography of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. But after studying these two “founding Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) The primary author of the Declaration of Independence, the first secre¬ tary of state (under President George Washington), the second vice president (under President John Adams), the third president of the United States (1801-1809), and the founder of the University of Virginia (1819). John Adams (1735-1826) The first vice president (1789-1797) and the second president of the United

States (1797-1801).

Approaches to the Study of Public Policy

13

fathers,” he found that Adams so far exceeded Jefferson in overall influence, pol¬ icy effectiveness, and personal integrity that he dropped Jefferson and wrote a straight (and best-selling) biography of Adams. Biographies, whether multiple or single, are arguably the most popular means by which the mass of the nonfictionreading citizenry “study” public policy, even when they believe they are simply reading for pleasure. Biographies of public policy activists politicians, generals, publishers, agitators, and reformers are a mainstay of the best-seller lists. Six of the last seven winners of the Pulitzer Prize in biography wrote accounts of lives steeped in public policy issues: William Taubman for Khrushchev, The Leader of Russia at the Height of the Cold War, Robert Caro for Master of the Senate (the third volume is his projected fourvolume biography of President Lyndon B. Johnson); David McCullough for John Adams (discussed above); David H. Lewis for W E. B. DuBois, his biography of the African-American civil rights leader; A. Scott Berg for Lindbergh, his biography of the first person tio fly solo from New York to Paris and who became embroiled over his advocacy of anti-Semitism and isolationism; and Katherine Graham for Personal History, her autobiography of her life as publisher of the Washington Post, the news¬ paper that led the way in exposing the criminal behavior of so many members of the Nixon administration, including the president himself, who was eventually forced to resign over the exposures. Biography as a format has traditionally so dominated the examination of public policies that British historian Thomas Carlyle (1895-1881) famously wrote “The history of the world is but the biography of great men.” His American contemporary, essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), agreed when he opined that “There is properly no history; only biography.” But these nineteenth-century “truisms” must give way to twentieth-century advances in the social and behavioral sciences. Although biography retains its ability to entice readers into policy issues, a variety of supplemental approaches have evolved in its shadow.

—

—

The Case Study Approach A case study is an in-depth analysis of a single subject. It is a history that offers an understanding of dynamic, constantly moving and changing, processes over time. Most traditional news stories use the case study approach. Note that aspiring jour¬ nalists are taught that a story should contain all the essential elements of a case study: “who, what, why, when, where, and how.” The first cage studies examined battles and wars. Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War (404 B.C.E.) (discussed in Chapter 12) is the progenitor of these military case studies. Military colleges and general staffs have long used the case study rliethod to review battles and study generalship. This same tech¬ nique is now widely used in a civilian context to examine how policy proposals

—

—

Pulitzer Prize The most prestigious annual award for American authors and journalists. Created to honor New York newspaper publisher Joseph Pulitzer (1847-1911) in 1917, the prize is now administered by Columbia University.

14

PARTI

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

The Journalist's Case Study Credo I keep six honest serving-men (They taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When And How and Where and Who. SOURC E: Rudyard Kipling. 77te Elephant's Child in Ladies' Home Journal, April. 1 900.

become law, how programs are implemented, and how special interests affect pol¬ icy development. College courses in business and public administration often use a case study approach. An entire course may consist of case studies {frequently combined into a casebook) of management situations to be reviewed. The goal is to inculcate experi¬ ence artificially. Any manager rich with years of service will have had the opportu¬ nity to live through a lifetime of “cases.” By having students study many cases, each of which may have extended over many years, the case study course compresses both time and experience. Both biographies and case studies are in essence specialized histories. The main reason to study the past this way is to not screw up the future to not make the same mistakes of our organizational or literal ancestors. Philosopher George Santayana (1863-1952) put it more eloquently: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

—

The Public Law Approach A public law is a legislative act that applies to the citizenry as a whole, as opposed private law, which affects only one person or a small group. But “public law” also refers to the underlying basis of a regime and the character of its government. Plato (428-348 B.C.E.) was the first major writer to offer a regime analysis. For example, he observed in his Republic that democracy was “a charming form of gov¬ ernment, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and to a

unequals alike.” Although analyses of regimes date from Plato, the analysis of legislative public law had to await the advent of parliamentary government. After ail, you can’t have public laws without first having legislatures to enact them. Ever since the English civil

interests A group of persons who share a common cause, which puts them into political competition with other groups or interests. Thus the oil interests want better tax breaks for the oil industry and the consumer interests want new laws protecting consumer rights vis-3-vis the business interests, who want fewer laws protecting consumer rights. regime The particular government in power; the group of people who constitute the administration.

Approaches

to

the Study of Public Policy

15

war of the mid-seventeenth century, Parliament had been evolving as an institution. It was passing laws with such increasing frequency that they cried out to be evalu¬ ated. Thus William Blackstone (1723-1780), in his Commentaries on the Laws of England (four volumes, 1765-1769), saw the opportunity to make it his life’s work to analyze and distill the developing doctrines of English law. Because his work became the de facto text for teaching law in both England and North America, his approach of explaining and describing the law and its ever-increasing doctrines became the most influential of legal analyses. Although Blackstone is now justly crit¬ icized for his dogmatic and often ill-informed interpretations of the law, he created a tradition of legal commentary that still thrives today. All modern-day analyses of public law whether by justices of a supreme court or by journalists on a TV talk show are still done in his shadow. So next time you hear a reporter on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News comment on a new or proposed law, remember that they are following in the tradition of William Blackstone. Both scholars and journalists have applied the case study approach to how new laws emerge. The classic work of this type is Stephen K. Bailey’s Congress Makes a Law: The Story Behind the Employment Act of 1946. A recent journalist version of this approach is Steven Waldman’s The Bill: How Legislation Really Becomes Law: A Case Study of the National Service Bill. This behind-the-scenes account by a Newsweek columnist shows how a law started as a campaign promise of then Governor Bill Clinton and wound up creating AmeriCorps and a new student loan system.

—

—

The Systems Approach A system is any organized collection of parts united by prescribed interactions; it is designed for the accomplishment of a special goal or general purpose. A systems approach is any analytical framework that views situations as systems. Although they didn’t use the phrase, the ancient big three of Greek philosophy were fully aware of the utility of a systems approach in enhancing understanding. For example, Socrates, according to an account by Xenophon (430-355 B.C.E.), understood the universality of management systems that the same skills are needed whether you are managing a business, a government, or an army. Plato presented a complete political system in his Republic. And Aristotle, in his Politics, systematically explains all of the elements of a political community: that it is best when “formed by citizens of the middle class” and “exists for the sake of noble actions, not of mere companionship.” The systems approach, though always there, only became self-conscious after Ludwig von Bertalanffy in the mid-twentieth century sought to organize scientific

—

AmeriCorps A network of national and community service programs that organizes volunteers to serve temporarily in nbore than 2,100 nonprofit, public, and religious organizations. Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972) An Austrian-Canadian biologist considered to be the father of general systems theory. Bertalanffy's basic statement on the subject is General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications (rev. ed., 1968).

16

PART I a Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

knowledge into a unified system. This, in turn, influenced David Easton, who first applied the approach to modern political analysis. Any review of a policy that seeks to put it in the context of a larger system is using a systems approach. Chapter 3 pre¬ sents a comprehensive systems framework for understanding public policymaking

The Policy Paper Approach This is a formal argument in favor of (or opposing) a particular public policy. Political candidates typically generate a variety of policy papers on issues of impor¬ tance to their constituents. Political campaigns often become a “battle” of opposing policy papers. And the modern battleground for these opposing policies is frequently in cyberspace, on political candidate web sites. Such web sites are promoting not only the candidate but also the policies of that candidate. Consequently they usually con¬ tain white papers about where the candidate stands on a various issues and why. In theory the voters can read these thoughtful papers on a wide range of policy issues. However, there is little evidence that most voters take the time to read these thorough policy positions. Instead, they receive their information from short political commer¬ cials lacking in derailed policy material. But no matter now astute and detailed the arguments are for or against a particular policy, the media tend to distill them into a few words. Thus an exten¬ sive and thoughtful review of the utility of capital punishment often comes down to the fact that the candidate is “for” or “against” the death penalty. Voters pre¬ fer to think that their favored candidates have given great thought to all the subtle aspects of their policy positions. Consequently it is more important that such policy papers be written than that they be read. However, policy papers put out by advocacy groups and academics and not related to political campaigns tend to be both more sophisticated and better received. Policy papers, though currently written, have an ancient unwritten tradition. When, in the Bible, Moses says to Pharoah (Exodus 5:1) “Let my people go!” and when Ulysses, in Homer’s Iliad, tells the Greeks besieging Troy to build the Trojan horse, they were presenting policies even before there was paper. There is still a strong oral tradition of policy statements. But the modern version of a would-be Moses or Ulysses is most likely to be found giving a speech on the campaign trail, either running for office or as the representative of a public interest group. For example, Charlton Heston (who played Moses in the 1955 film The Ten Commandments ), as president of the National Rifle Association, frequently spoke

—

—

David Easton (1917- ) The political scientist who wrote the most influential applications of systems analysis to the political process. Easton sought, in his own words, “in some small way to win back for theory its proper and necessary place” in political science. He succeeded admirably. Most be traced back to his modern theorizing about the workings of the American political system direct or indirect influence. white paper Any formal statement of an official (or would-be) government policy, with its associated background documentation. National Rifle Association The mass organization, created in 1871 to promote marksmanship, which has become the preeminent “gun lobby.” The NRA is generally against all efforts to legislate con¬ trols on any conventional weapons, believing any controls are a first step toward total confiscation of arms in the hands of citizens and a violation of the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms.”

Typologies

17

against further government regulation of firearms. But the place where you will find this oral tradition flourishing every hour of every day is on TV and radio talk shows. There the most pressing public policy issues of any given day will be dis¬ sected, criticized, and/or supported ad nauseum. Academic policy papers are pub¬ lished in professional journals and read by few. Talk show hosts publish little and may be relatively ignorant, but they can be immensely influential.

The Formal Research Approach This is the end product of a formal effort to test the utility of a given policy. It essen¬ tially reports the result of formal research involving techniques such as data gathering and analysis, sample surveys, benefit-cost analysis, and game theory, among others. Much of the academic world is dedicated to policy research that presents new evidence regarding factors such as the effectiveness of public policies or the causes of policy adoption. Even research in areas that seem far afield from public policy can have vast public policy implications. For example, new medical research might mean that government must take action to make new treatment widely available. New findings about crop productivity might mean that government must revise its agricultural policies. And new investigations about how a law has been administered might mean that a government must pay out vast sums to remedy past injustices. A common aspect of policy research conducted in academic or nonpartisan set¬ tings such as government agencies is a tight adherence to rigorous scientific methodol¬ ogy. To sustain the scrutiny of review by peers, the press, and the public at large, policy researchers must incorporate processes that meet the accepted standards of social sci¬ ence research. For example, in trying to ascertain levels of public support for the use of military force in Iraq, public opinion researchers must employ well-constructed ques¬ tionnaires, adequate sample selection and size, and proper interviewing procedures. Failure to follow accepted research practices casts doubt on the validity of the policy research and limits its usefulness in both the study and development of public policies.

Typologies The seven methods listed above are a typology, a systematic classification of categories so that the approaches to public policy may be more readily analyzed. Typologies are commonly used in the study of public policy and have a long historical tradition. They create neatness out of chaos, make it easier to remember the essence of complex intel¬

lectual arguments. For example, Aristotle wrote of the three forms of government (see Chapter 2 Keynote). Max Weber wrote that there were three pure types of legitimate benefit-cost analysis Any process by which organizations seek to determine the effectiveness of their spending, in relation to costs, in meeting policy objectives. game theory The study of rational decision making in scenarios where multiple participants have varied options and thfc final outcome is dependent upon the combination of choices made. Max Weber (1864-1920] The German sociologist who produced an analysis of an ideal-type bureau¬ cracy that is scjll the most influential statement the point of departure for all further analyses on the subject. Weber also pioneered the concepts of the Protestant ethic, charismatic authority, and a value-free approach to social research.

—

—

18

PART I

Chapter 1 Defining Public Policy

A Famous Typology of Military Officers I divide my officers into four classes as follows: The clever, the industrious, the lazy, and the stupid. Each officer always possesses two of these qualities. Those who are clever and industrious I appoint to the General Staff. Use can under certain cir¬ cumstances be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man who is clever and lazy qualifies for the highest leadership posts. He has the requisite nerves and the mental clarity for difficult decisions. But whoever is stupid and industrious must be got rid of, for he is too dangerous. SOURCE: German General Freiherr von Hammerstein-Equord, quoted in Arcades Ambo, "All God's Chillun Ain't Got Wings," Infantry Journal Header, ed. J. I. Greene. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1943.

authority: charismatic (in which the personal qualities of a leader command obe¬ dience), traditional (in which custom and culture yield acquiescence), and legal (in which people obey laws enacted by what they perceive to be appropriate authorities). More recently, Theodore J. Lowi classified all domestic public poli¬ cies into distribution, regulation, or redistribution. The study of public policy offers enormous scope for the creation of typologies. Textbooks and scholarly monographs sag with lists, categories, and classifications of public policies and ways to analyze them. The study of public policy is a chaotic world that cries out for organization for definitive classification and a unified approach. But this is a cry that will not be heeded. Chaos rules because there is no powei neither national president nor university president who can tell the scholars of those academic disciplines concerned with public policy (political science, public administration, economics, international relations, etc.) how to ply their trade. Textbooks in science (biology, chemistry, physics, etc.) at least agree on the subject matter they cover. Public policy texts, in contrast, are far less agreeable. True, there is considerable overlap, but it is minimal compared to the sciences. This is largely because the disciplines that study public policy have different traditions and approaches. The history, problems, and opportunities created by this academic chaos are the subject of Chapter 2. Typologies are also used to explain different approaches to the same problem. For example, Chapter 3 examines three major approaches to decision making (rational, incremental, and mixed scanning). Looking at the differing approaches to common

—

—

Theodore J. Lowi (1931- ) The leading critic of interest group pluralism. His The End of Liberalism: Ideology, Policy, and the Crisis of Public Authority (1 969; 2nd ed., 1979) was a condemnation of the paralyzing effects of interest group pluralism. Lowi asserted that public authority is parceled out to private interest groups, resulting in a weak, decentralized government incapable of longrange planning. These powerful interest groups operare to promote private goals; they do not compete to promote the public interest. Government then becomes not an institution capable of making hard choices among conflicting values but a holding company for interests.

Key Concepts

19

problems is particularly useful when comparing different cultures or organizations. A typology of how things are done in different cultural environments is often instructive. Consider this story often told in the Pentagon: Each of the military services is told to secure a building. The Navy makes sure all the doors and windows are watertight and locked. The Army posts guards at all the entrances and exits. The Marines stage an assault on the place and arrest everyone inside. The Air Force seeks out the owner of the building and negotiates a five-year lease. Each service has secured the building in its fashion.

—

Summary A public policy is a policy made on behalf of a public by means of a public law that is put into effect by public administration. The end result of public policymaking is usually obvious: for example, a new law is passed of an agency head announces a new decision. But what is usually far less obvious, indeed quite convoluted, is how policy ideas bubble up out of the polit ical environment and are eventually accepted or rejected by the people in power. And even when we think we know what happened, we are often wrong, because policymakers may deceive us about their true motives, may not know the convo¬ luted whole truth themselves, or may manipulate the historical record to their

advantage. There are seven major approaches to the study of public policies today. The ethical approach examines the morality of policies. The biographical approach uses the life of an individual to illustrate how and why certain policies came to be. The case study approach is an in-depth analysis of a single subject. The public law approach reviews legislative acts that apply to the citizenry as a whole. A systems approach is any analytical framework that views situations as systems. Any review of a policy that seeks to put it in the context of a larger system is using a systems approach. A policy paper approach uses logical argument in favor of {or opposed to) a particular public policy. Formal research is the end product of a structured effort to test the utility of a given policy. It reports the results of formal research involving techniques such as data gathering and analysis.

Key Concepts case study An in-depth analysis pf a single subject. just-war doctrine The teachings dealing with the questions of when it is morally acceptable to go to war and what forms of warlike activities are

permissible. policy A standing decision by an authoritative source. preemption A surprise attack on an enemy with¬ out a formal declaration of war. public administration What governments do; the execution of a public law.

public law The codification, or listing, of all the standing public policy decisions made by a state or municipality. public policy A policy made on behalf of a public by means of a public law that is put into effect by public administration. policy paper A formal written argument in favor of (or opposing) a particular public policy. typology A systematic classification of categories so that they may be more readily analyzed.

20

PART I

Chapter 1

Defining Public Policy

Review Questions 1. What factors led President George W. Bush to create his Bush Doctrine in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001? 2. What is the fundamental difference between public policy and public administration? 3. Why is it difficult to ascertain the factors that lead policymakers to adopt or reject public policies? 4. What are the major advantages and disadvanatges of the primary approaches to the study of public policy? 5. What are the various forms of public law in the United States?

Bibliography Aristotle (1952). Politics, trans. B. Jowett. Chicago: Great Books, Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 9. Bailey, Stephen K. (1950). Congress Makes a Law: The Story Behind the Employment Act of 1946. New York: Columbia Universiry Press. Balz, Dan, and Bob Woodward (2002). “America’s Chaotic Road to War.” Washington Post (January 27). (2002). “We Will Rally the World." Washington Post (January 28). (2002). “Afghan Campaign’s Blueprint Emerges.” Washington Post (January 29). (2002). “A Day to Speak of Anger and Grief.” Washington Post (January 30). - - (2002). “At Camp David, Advise and Dissent." Washington Post (January 31). (2002). “Combating Terrorism,” Washington Post (February 1).

-

— ——

-

-(2002). “A Presidency Defined in One

Speech.” Washington Post (February 2). Berg, A. Scott (1991). Lindbergh. New York: Putnam. Burnham, James (1941). The Managerial Revolution. New York: John Day. Carlyle, Thomas (1966). On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History. Omaha: University of Nebraska Press. Caro, Robert A. (2003). Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon ]ohnson. New York: Knopf. Confucius (1938). Analects. London: Allen and Unwin. Weber, Max (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, edited and translated by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press. Woodward, Bob (2002). Bush At War. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Recommended Books Adolino, Jessica R., and Charles H. Blake (2000). Comparing Public Policies Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly. How policies are made in six of the largest industrialized states. Barzelay, Michael (2001), The New Public Management: Improving Research and Policy Dialogue. New York: Columbia University Press. How policymakers should treat the denizens of the bureaucracy. Dye, Thomas R. (2002). Understanding Public Policy, 10th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-

Hall. A leading traditional approach to the study of public policy. Shafritz, Jay M., editor in chief (1998). International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration, 4 volumes. Boulder, CO: Westview. Nine hundred articles defining and analyzing every aspect of public policy and its administration. Stein, Harold (1952). Public Administration arid Policy Development: A Case Book. New York: Harcourt Brace. The first of its kind remains worth reading for its still telling case histories.

'

Related Web Sites

Related Web Sites American Political Science Association http://wvvw.a psanet.org/i ndex.cfm American Society for Public Administration

http://www.aspanet.org/ Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management

http://qsilver.queensu.ca/appam/ Civics and Politics http://www.civicsandpolitics.cam/index.htm Ethics and Public Policy Center http://www.eppc.org/ International City/County Management Association http://www.icma.org/go.cfm

National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration http://www.naspaa.org/ National Center for Public Policy Research http://www.nationalcenter.org/ Public Agenda Online http://www.publicagenda.org/ Public Policy Forum http://www.ppforum.con1/engli5h/inclex.html White House http://www.whitehouse.gov

21

CHAPTER 2

The Study of Public Policy Chapter Outline Keynote: Jeremy Bentham— A Founder of Public Policy Studies 23

Influence of the Progressive Movement on the Study of Public Policy 26 The Muckrakers 28 The Reform Movement 28 The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia 30 Political Science 32 Public Administration 34 International Relations 35 Political Economy 37 Policy Science and Policy Studies 39 Pluralism Versus Elitism in the Study of Public Policymaking 41

The Paranoid Style 42 Group Theory Explains the Alliances of Interests 43 ‘"A?

Chapter Objectives To show that the study of public policy has a long and illustrious history (P- 23)

To illustrate how the Progressive Movement nurtured the early develop¬ ment of formal public policy studies in the United States (p. 26) To explain the influence of academic location on how public policy is studied (p. 30) To review the approaches to understanding public policy in political science, public administration, international relations, political economy, and policy studies (p. 32) To explain how pluralism and elitism influence the public policymaking process (p. 41)

22

1

Keynote: Jeremy Benrbam—A Founder of Public Policy Studies

Keynote: Jeremy Bentham

—

23

A Founder of Public Policy Studies

Public policy studies have a long history. They can be easily traced back to the philosophers of ancient Greece. Plato (427-347 B.C.E.) is often considered to be the first political scientist. His Republic is the western world's first systematic analysis of the political process and the reasons for a state. He provided an intellectual rationale for the divine right of kings even before Christianity sanctioned the notion. To Plato, only an elite of philosopher kings or "guardians" had the political wisdom necessary to govern a wisdom that could be transmitted to others by selective breeding. Thus a just society would be one where each knew his or her place, with the guardians on top. Because Plato wrote in the form of dialogues in which Socrates directs discussion among varying groups of people, questioning them rather than asserting his own positions, there are a multitude of interpretations of the meanings Plato himself would have intended had he stated them in more systematic form. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.) is perhaps the world's best example of a student surpassing his illustrious teacher. In his Politics, Aristotle, a student of Plato, presented the first comprehensive analysis of the nature of a state and of any political community. To Aristotle, the state was a natural development because "man is by nature a political animal.” The state was even more important than family because, whereas a family exists for comfort, the state can be a vehicle for glory and the good life. Perhaps Aristotle's best-known analytical construct is his typology of the three basic forms of government. He found that every political community had to be gov¬ erned by either the one, the few, or the many. This corresponds to his three governing types: kingship, aristocracy, and polity (majority rule). Unfortunately, each of these had its perversions, the conditions to which it degenerated when the rulers ceased ruling in the interests of the whole community. Kingship often degenerated into tyranny; aristocracy (rule by a talented and virtuous elite) into oligarchy (rule by a small group in its own interest); and a polity or constitutional system (where a large middle class rules for the common interest) into democracy (mob rule in the interest of the lower classes). Overall, Aristotle favored a mixed constitution one in which all citizens "rule and are ruled by turn" where no class monopolizes power and a large middle class provides stability. The Greek philosophers and the political analysts they inspired over the next two millennia were concerned with grand theories of the state and governance, of war and peace, and of power and politics. But with the rise of cities, the advent of a merchant or

—

—

—

divine right of kings The seventeenth-century notion that monarchs rule by the will of God and are subject only to him. Thus any effort to change monarchs would not, indeed could not, be justi¬ fied. Because it was, as Alexander Pope (1688-1744) wrote in The Dunciad (1728), “the right divine of Kings to govern wrong,” the founders of the United States thoroughly rejected this doctrine in the Declaration of Independence.

24

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy middle class, and the new problems and opportunities brought about by the industrial revolution, things had to change. Governments had to get increasingly involved with the minutiae of public policy and its administration. Someone had to start thinking about the relatively small issues less about war and peace and more about how best to collect taxes, build sewers, and design prisons. This is where Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) came in. He was a one-man think tank for a great many of the petty details of governance. In consequence, he is considered one of the founders of the practice, indeed the science, of policy analysis. Bentham was often referred to as a child prodigy because he was reading English by age three, Latin by four, and French by six. At age 12 he was sent off to Queen’s College, Oxford. Having graduated in 1763, he immediately undertook the formal study of law. The family hoped he would join his father in the family legal business. But upon hearing the lectures of the leading legal scholars of the day, he became disillusioned and disappointed with English law, but not discouraged. Although he was called to bar in 1769, he decided, instead of practicing law, to devote his life to reforming it. Bentham is best known as the British philosopher who held that self-interest was the prime motivator and that a government should strive to do the greatest good for the greatest number. He wanted institutions to justify themselves on the practical grounds of the level of useful welfare achieved. He was thereby the prophet of the movement called utilitarianism, which held that an action is right if and only if its perfor¬ mance will be more productive of pleasure than pain and more productive of happiness than unhappiness as compared with available alternatives. In his best-known book, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1780), Bentham wrote that "nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do." By using the principle of utility to explain all human motivation, Bentham felt he had found the key to a science of human welfare. The overall welfare of a society would be measured by how well off were each of its members. Thus governments, through their policies, should strive to achieve the “greatest happiness for the great¬ est number." This was not an attitude that endeared him to the British aristocracy who, as a class, were determined to keep themselves happy at the direct expense of the lower classes. By holding that governments were created because of humanity's desire for happi¬ ness and not by divine intervention, Bentham antagonized both the monarch and the

—

industrial revolution A very general term that refers to a society’s change from an agrarian to an industrial economy. The industrial revolution of the western world is considered to have begun in England in the eighteenth century, think tank A colloquial term for an organization or organizational segment whose sole function is research, usually in the policy and behavioral sciences. bar The once real but now imaginary partition across a court: lawyers stood at this bar to argue their cases. Thus, to be “called to the bar” meant that you were thought to be enough of a lawyer to plead a case in court.

—

Keynote: Jeremy Bentham A Founder of Public Policy Studies

25

church, which denounced utilitarianism as "godless philosophy." His beliefs, writings, and actions made Bentham the major intellectual force behind social reform in nineteenth-century England. What actions? Bentham, a truly gentle man, was an intellectual agitator. He bought a house in Westminster near the British Houses of Parliament. He named his house "Hermitage" and there, unmarried, he devoted his life to writing and reform. On virtually every day of his life he wrote about 15 pages of proposals for and commentary on legislation. He was conveniently located to frequently entertain or rather educate members of both houses of Parliament. He was not only a one-man think tank but also a one-man lobbying organization. Ultimately, he succeeded in that his ideas, premised on their utility, contributed to all the major social and legal reforms of nineteenth-century Britain. The difference between Bentham and other would-be reformers was that Bentham sought to develop techniques to deal with policy questions techniques that others could use to apply to yet unknown problems. In effect, Bentham's patrimony is so great because he was the first methodologist in policy analysis. Bentham demanded that all laws and policies answer the question "who benefits?" And if the proposal didn't meet his test of the "greatest happiness for the greatest number," then it was not deserving of enactment. Above ail, Bentham urged practical, pragmatic solutions to the problems of crime, education, welfare, and public health, among others. He felt that he had a genius for legislation, for recommending new policies that should be enacted into law. He demanded that legislators be guided not by their party but by his principle of utility. To do otherwise would be dishonorably immoral. That is why his most influential work is called An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. After all, the whole point of legislation is to do the moral, the ethical, thing. Isn't it?

—

—

—

A Modern Illustration of Bentham's Method If a slum clearance project in an industrial city is debated in terms of fundamental issues like free enterprise and socialism, agreement is improbable. If it can be shown what the pertinent facts of the situation the cost to the community of existing slum* in terms of increased crime, ill health, fire hazards—weighed against the cost of putting up better housing with assistance from public funds the original gBp has been considerably narrowed, and agreement will be likelier on this basis than on issues of apparently irreconcilable ultimate values. The progress of social science depends on its ability to reduce questions of principle to questions of feet, and Bentham’s examination of ideas, acts, and institutions in terms of their practical consequences has been a pioneering contribution to the development of social science and social engineering.

—

—

SOURCE: William Ebenstein, Great Political Thinkers, 4th edition. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston, 1969.

26

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

Jeremy Bentham as he is today. Bentham after death was determined, in the best utilitarian tradition, to continue being useful to society. So his will provided that after his body was dissected by his friends for their edification, that an 'Auto Icon" be created of his skele¬ tal remains the bones (now encased in wax) would be clad in his clothes and seated in a chair surrounded by a box open on one side. Bentham's will stipulates: “If it should so happen that my personal friends and other disciples should be disposed to meet together on some day or days of the year for the purpose of com¬ memorating the founder of the greatest happiness sys¬ tem of morals and legislation, my executor will from

—

time to time cause to be conveyed to the room in which they meet the said box.' Since 1850 the box (left) with Bentham inside has been at University College, London (UCL). Every day students pass by on their way to and from classes.This is fitting in that UCL was founded in 1828 by Bentham's friends and disci¬ ples. UCL was the first university in England to fulfill Bentham's vision of higher education available to stu¬ dents of any race, creed, or political belief. Bentham had learned to loathe the clerical influence at Oxford and Cambridge universities where, in order to study or teach, one had to be a subscribed member of the Church of England. In life, Bentham made a will that gave UCL a significant bequest. In death, he has become its most significant tourist attraction.

For Discussion: Is utilitarianism’s core holding, that government should strive for the “greatest happiness for the greatest number,” still operative today? What is the likely attitude of the two major U.S. political parties, the Republican Party and Democratic Party, toward utilitarianism?

The Influence of the Progressive Movement on the Study of Public Policy Modern critiques of public policies, those that deal with the recognizable social problems of today, have their origins in the “progressive movement,” which emerged from the American experience with the consequences of urbanization and industrialization in the decades between 1890 and 1920. Although the term has its origins in religious concepts that argued for the infinite improvability of the human condition rather than fixed class distinctions, it had, by the end of the nineteenth century, come to mean a responsibility of classes for one another and a willingness to use all government and social institutions to give that responsibility legal effect.

The Influence of the Progressive Movement on the Study of Public Policy

27

The progressives got their name from the fact that they believed in the doctrine of progress that governing institutions could be improved by bringing science to bear on public problems. It was a disparate movement, with each reform group tar¬ geting a level of government, a particular policy, and so on. Common beliefs included that good government was possible and that “the cure for democracy is more democracy.” At the national level, the progressives achieved civil service reform and introduced the direct primary. At the state and local levels they fought for adoption of the initiative, the referendum, and the recall and helped spawn the commission and council-manager forms of government. It was also the progressive influence that initially forged the fledgling discipline of public administration. Politically, the movement reached its national climax in 1912, with the creation of the Progressive Party as a break between the Republican party professionals, who backed the incumbent, William Howard Taft, and the Republican opponents of political machine politics and party regularity, who nominated former Republican president, Theodore Roosevelt. The split in the Republican Party caused the Democratic candidate, Woodrow Wilson, to be elected in 1912. Wilson in fact represented many of the programs the progressives had supported (banking reforms,

—

direct primary A primary election in which political parry nominees are selected directly by the voters. initiative A procedure that allows citizens, as opposed to legislators, to propose the enacrment of state and local laws. An initiative, the proposed new law, is placed on the ballot (often as a proposition) only after the proper filing of a petition containing signatures from 5 to 15 percent of the voters. Fewer than half of the states provide for the initiative. Initiatives are not possible with federal legislation because Article I of theU.S. Constitution prevents Congress from delegating its legislative responsibilities. referendum A procedure for submitting proposed laws or state constitutional amendments to the voters for ratification. A petition signed by an appropriate percentage of the voters can force a newly passed law onto the bailor, or it can be put on the ballot by the recommendation of the legislature. Whereas only a minority of the states provide for statutory referenda, practically all stares require them for constitutional amendments. recall A procedure that allows citizens to vote officeholders out of office between regularly scheduled elections. William Howard Taft (1857-1930) The only person to be both President of the United States (1909-1913) and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (1921-1930). Taft, at 321 pounds, also holds the record as the largest of all presidents. While he was the handpicked successor of President Theodore Roqsevelt, Taft quickly lost Roosevelt’s support once in office. Roosevelt found him so unacceptably Conservative that both men competed for the Republican nomination in 1912. political machine Historically, an informal organization that controlled the formal processes of a government through corruption, patronage, intimidation, and service to its constituents. A political machine usually centered on a single politician a boss who commanded loyalty through largess, fear, or affection. The phrase is usually pejorative, because the machine works to achieve political control through those who run the machine, rather than through the popular will. The classic story of a political machine concerns Tammany Hall in New York City. John P. O’Brien (1873-1951), the newly installed mayor in 1932, was asked who his new police commissioner would be. He responded: “I haven’t had any word on that yet.” Tammany Hall soon gave him the “word.” Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) The colonel who led the Rough Riders in Cuba during the 1898 Spanish-Amerlcan War; who was the elected governor of New York on the basis of his war record; who was made vice president under William McKinley by the party bosses, who wanted him out of New York; and who became president after an assassin shot McKinley in 1901. Roosevelt, who won election in his own right in 1904, took an expansive view of the presidency and thus set the tone for most of the presidents to follow.

—

—

28

PART I

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

antitrust laws, and business regulation), but he did not support many of the pro¬ gressive interests in national social policy (meaning he was an unabashed racist and hostile to the interests of African-Americans).

The Muckrakers While the progressive movement sought to offer solutions to many vexing social problems, these problems were often first identified and dug up by the muckrakers. This was President Theodore Roosevelt’s term, taken from John Bunyan’s (1628-1688) Pilgrim’s Progress (1678), for a journalist who wrote exposes of busi¬ ness and government corruption. Some of the most famous muckrakers were Lincoln Steffens (1866-1936) who, in The Shame of the Cities (1904), found many big cities “corrupt and contented”; Ida M. Tarbell (1857-1944) who exposed the monopolistic practices of John D. Rockefeller and forced the breakup of Standard Oil; and Upton Sinclair (1878-1968) whose exposure of the poisonous practices of the meatpacking industry in The Jungle (1906) led to the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Today, anyone who writes an expose of governmental corruption or incompetence might be called a muckraker. However, today’s muckrakers avoid the term, preferring to be called investigative journalists, but continue the practice.

The Reform Movement The reform movement, which was part of the overall progressive effort, developed a tactic that would shed light on social problems. Private nonprofit organizations

President Theodore Roosevelt First Puts the Muckrake into the Hands of Journalists In Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress you may recall the description of the Man with the Muckrake, the man who could look no way but downward with the muckrake in his hand; who was offered a celestial crown for his muckrake but who could neither look up nor regard the crown he was offered but continued to rake to himself the filth of the floor. Muckraking leads to slander that may attack an honest man or even assail a bad man with untruth. An epidemic indiscriminate assault upon character does no good but very great harm. Mudslinging is as bad as whitewashing. . . . Men with the muckrake are often indispensable to the well¬ being of society, but only if they know when to stop raking the muck. SOURCE: Speech of April 14, 1906.

reform movement What an out-of-power political party often considers itself: an advocate of positive change in governing structures. A loose term for efforts to weed out corruption and/or incompe¬ tence

in public office.

The

influence of the Progressive Movement on the Study of Public Policy

29

such as Hull House in Chicago and the Institute of Public Administration in New York City would conduct forma), methodological, rigorous investigations of poor, often immigrant communities. The information gained from such a social survey would be used to make policy recommendations for ameliorating social and urban ills that were brought to light by these investigations. But no matter how accurate and telling the social surveys were, nothing could be done to change conditions until government got involved. Unfortunatfely, government, the bossism of the day, was a big part of the prob¬ lem. So the survey technique was turned on the bosses themselves in order to spur reform. According to Camilla Stivers: “The first such investigation was launched in 1906 by the newly formed New York Bureau of Municipal Research. Blocked by Tammany Hall from digging into municipal finance and accounting practices, the bureau decided to conduct an outdoor survey of city street cleaning and repair.” Their results then “documented the shocking state of the streets, marshaled evidence of the need for better administrative methods, and led to the forced resignation of the Manhattan borough president.” The success of this technique of embarrassing the bosses was quickly dupli¬ cated in other major cities: Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Kansas City, and San Francisco, among others. The effects of the private municipal research bureaus led directly to the beginning of professional education in public administration. Jane Dahiberg, in her history of the New York Bureau of Municipal Research, observes that the programs created to train people to conduct these reform-minded surveys evolved into the graduate programs in public administration that we have today. Indeed, the first such programs at the University of Michigan, Syracuse University, Columbia University, and the University of Southern California were heavily staffed by people from the survey movement. And public policy studies (though always a part of history, political science, and law) were especially well nurtured by these and many other public administration programs.

Hull House Founded in 1889, this was the best known of the “settlement houses," organizations run by the middle class for the benefit of the poor. Often quite literally a house in a distressed urban neighborhood where the poor, usually recent immigrants, could get the social services that they needed to better themselves. Institute of Public Administration A private research organization founded in 1906 as the New York Bureau of Municipal Research, it is one of the most influential forces for urban reform and techni¬ cal innovation in public administration. It provides consultation, technical services, and training in many areas of public administration. bossism An informal system of local government in which public power is concentrated in the hands of a central figure, called a political boss, who may not have a formal government position. The power is concentrated through the use of a political machine, whereby a hierarchy is created and maintained through rhe use of patronage and government largesse to assure compliance with the wishes of the boss. It was a dominant system in American city government after the Civil War and was the main target of the American urban reform effort. Few authentic bosses exist today. Tammany Hall A building in New York City used by the Tammany Society (founded in 1789 and named after a Delaware Indian chief). Because the New York County Democrats also met in the building, its name became a symbol of all that is associated with political machines.

30

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

PART I

!

V

r

t-

!

.

;v.

1

S

v

,

f

i /

!

I

N :-.;3

V

\

t \ \

;

V. i

& tfe-:-

/

Two 'street Arabs' from Jacob A. Riis's How the Other Half Lives (1890). Riis was a muckraker with a camera. He would document the conditions in the slums of New York City with heart-wrenching photographs. Homeless, unwanted children known as “street Arabs' (because they were urban nomads) would roam the streets by day, pursuing careers of petty crime, and sleep in alleys and doorways at night. The boys in this photo are brothers. ten-year-old John and eight-year-old Willie. When they were picked up by the police, they said they 'didn’t live nowhere,” had never gone to school, and couldn't read or write. Riis wrote that they had a 12-year-old sister who 'kept house for the father, who turned the boys out to beg. or steal, or starve.' Riis's documen¬ tation of this 'homeless army' of children helped foster charitable and governmental efforts to alleviate their plight. With his pho¬ tographs of the conditions of the poor, he excelled at the primary tactic of the muckrakers and political reformers putting the problem in the face of the middle class and politicians so that it could no longer be ignored.

—

\

!

7; r

.1

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia It is often said in relation to real estate that three things are critical in arriving at a sale price: location, location, location. Of course other factors also enter into consideration. But none conies even close to location in importance. It is the same with the location of public policy studies. Nothing is more important in determining the nature of a public policy study or proposal than its source or origin. This phenomenon is commonly known as Miles’s law, after a manager in the Bureau of the Budget (now the Office of Management and Budget) named Rufus E. Miles, Jr. (1910-1996). He wrote the history of his law in a 1978 Public Administration Review article after it had been folk wisdom among federal bureaucrats for many years. While admitting that his “concept was as old as Plato,” the “phraseology” evolved from a specific sequence of events that occurred when Miles was supervising a group of budget examiners. One of the examiners was offered a higher-paying new job as a budget analyst at one of the agencies he had been reviewing. Since he had been particularly critical of this

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia

31

agency in his capacity as a reviewing budget examiner, he told Miles {His boss) that he would prefer to stay in his present job if his salary could be raised. Miles, ever concerned about federal expenditure levels, refused to support a raise of his subordinate’s salary. So the subordinate resigned to accept the job with an agency he felt was not very efficient. Miles then remarked to the remaining workers under his supervision that soon the former employee would be defending the new budget policies that he had so vociferously criticized. His fellow budget examiners found this unbelievable. After all, the exiting, analyst was a man of strongly felt judgments and integrity. But Miles insisted and was proven correct by events. As his law states: “Where you stand depends upon where you sit.” Since the former employee was sitting else¬ where, his views would naturally evolve to reflect his new position. It wasn’t a matter of ethics so much as it was a matter of perspective. In effect, no employee can be separated from the perspective of the particular responsibilities of his or her current position. Revised stances on issues and policies can be and often are the opposite of those previously held. This is not so much hypocrisy as it is loyalty to one’s new employer. Miles’s law has never been repealed. Stances on policy issues still tend to reflect the different disciplines and organizations that promulgate them. It is not that these sources are necessarily corrupt or dishonest, they just approach policy issues through different lenses. They are often like the person whose only tool is a hammer; to that individual every problem looks very much like a nail. This is why to a lawyer all public policy issues look like legal problems. Economists have a well-known procliv¬ ity to apply econometrics to policy questions. Each academic discipline has its tools of the trade with which the public policy world is examined. The approaches to problems taken by the various disciplines (as well as the specializations within them) constitute their doctrines their core beliefs about how public policy problems are to be examined. They don’t see the policy world through rose-colored glasses so much as through professional, organizational, and methodological bias. However, this bias is not a negative unreasoning preju¬ dice; it is how their occupational socialization has taught .them to see public policy issues. There are also some commonly accepted principles that help the varied disciplines accept the others’ contentions. For example, there are core principles centered in the scientific method that are generally looked upon as necessary attributes of quality examinations of public policy. Let’s look a little more closely at the disciplines that examine public policy and the fundamental approaches they employ.

—

econometrics A subdiscipline of economics known by its use of mathematical techniques, such as regression analysis and modeling, to test economic theories and forecast economic activity. occupational socialization The process by which an individual absorbs and adopts the values, norms, and behavior of the occupational role models with whom he or she interacts. Occupational socialization is complete when an individual internalizes the values and norms of the occupational group. scientific method The procedure for collecting and analyzing data in a systematic and unbiased manner; its four major steps are observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and prediction.

32

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

Political Science Political science is the academic discipline that studies political phenomena. It has its origins in the contention by eighteenth-century theorists {such as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes) that the political behavior of individuals as well as states could be subjected to the same criteria of analysis as natural phenomena. While this idea can certainly be traced back to Plato and Aristotle, its development in the Enlightenment era rested on the transfer of conceptions of a mechanical celestial universe to the universe of human action. A constitution of governments could thus be defined in the form of mechanisms that limit and control the judgment and authority of individuals. The U.S. Constitution is often considered in this tradition. James Russell Lowell called it “a machine that would go of itself,” meaning that it was a political perpet¬ ual motion machine so finely crafted that, except for an amendment here and there, it needed no maintenance. The U.S. government as an entity, as a low-maintenance machine, was quite literally created in the light of the Enlightenment. As such, it was a product of the best political science of its day. Political scientists are always asking about the health of “the machine.” Is it still going “of itself”? That is why the single most important policy question that American political science can ask is “Is it constitutional?” Many policy issues the death penalty, abortion, pornography, gun control, and so on are frequently framed as matters of constitutional law. Because only after government arrangements and public policies are deemed constitutional (at least in the eyes of their proponents if not yet the U.S. Supreme Court) will they be considered on their own merits. Maintenance of the machine (the Constitution) takes precedence over efficiency, fairness, and some¬ times even justice itself. So as far as public policy is concerned, we tend not to know whether a policy is fair or just, only whether it is constitutional. Playwright George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) gave early voice to what has become the standard complaint, that “political science, the science by which

—

John Locke (1632-1704) The English physician and philosopher whose writings on the nature of

—

governance were a profound influence on the founders. It is often argued that the first part of the Declaration of Independence, which establishes the essential philosophic rationale for the break with England, is Thomas Jefferson’s restatement of John Locke’s most basic themes. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) The English political philosopher and social contract theorist who wrote Leviathan (16511, a highly influential and comprehensive theory of government. Hobbes asserted that, in a state of nature, man is in a chaotic condition “of war of everyone against everyone.” For safety’s sake men formed governments to which they surrendered their freedom but from which they got securiry and order. Enlightenment The seventeenth- and eighteenth-century European intellectual movement that advocated reason, as opposed to God, as the prime means by which the human condition could be understood and improved. James Russell Lowell (1819-1891) The American poet, editor (of the Atlantic Monthly), and diplomat who served as ambassador to Spain (1877-1880) and Great Britain (1880-1885). constitutional Consistent with and reflective of the U.S. Constitution. In the 1819 case of McCulloch v. Maryland the Supreme Court explained how to tell if something is constitutional: “Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional.”

'

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia

33

civilization must live or die, is busy explaining the past whilst we have to grapple with the present. It leaves the ground before our feet in black darkness whilst it lifts up every corner of the landscape behind us.” In the United States, political science developed as an outgrowth of history. Then, early in the twentieth century, American political scientists formed their own professional organization, the American Political Science Association, and proceeded to address the problem posed by Shaw. Although traditionally concerned with the structures and machinery of government, they soon branched out into the kind of behavioralism advocated by Arthur F. Bentley. He argued that political analysis had to shift its focus from forms of government to actions of individuals in the context of groups, because groups are the critical action mechanisms that enable numbers of individuals to achieve their political, economic, and social desires. Behavioralism emphasized the use of the scientific method for empirical investi¬ gations and the use of quantitative techniques. Eventually this led to the counterrev¬ olutionary response of postbehavioralism. This was the answer to the complaint that as political science more and more adopted the mathematical orientation of behav¬ ioralism, it became less and less relevant to the study of politics. Because of the overemphasis on being empirical and quantitative, too much attention was being devoted to easily studied (meaning easily counted) trivial matters at the expense of more important big issues. Postbehavioralism as a movement within political science mainly suggests that there is more than one way of advancing political knowledge, that methodologies should be appropriate to the issue under study, and that policy questions should be addressed even if they cannot be adequately measured.

Why President John Adams Studied Politics The science of government is my duty to study, more than all other sciences; the arts of legislation and administration and negotiation ought to take place of, indeed to exclude, in a manner all other arts. 1 must study politics and war, that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architec¬ ture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain. SOURCE: John Adams, 1780 letter to his wile, Abigail Adams.

behavioralism A philosophical disposition toward the study of the actions of people in political situations, as opposed to studying the institutional structure of politics. Thus, for example, a behavioralist Would maintain that one should not necessarily study the structure of Congress because what Is really important is the behavior of its members. Arthur F. Bentley (J870-1957) The political scientist who was one of the pioneering voices in the behavioral analysis of politics and the intellectual creator of modern interest group theory.

34

PART I

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

Public Administration

Just as political science grew out of history, so public administration developed out of

political science but never completely broke away from it. Public administration is the art and science of management applied to the public sector. But it traditionally goes far beyond the concerns of management and incorporates as its subject matter all of the political, social, cultural, and legal environments that affect the running of public institutions. As a field of study, it is inherently cross-disciplinary because ir encompasses so much of political science, sociology, business administration, psychology, law, anthropology, medicine, forestry, and so on. Indeed, it can be argued that because public administration borrows so much from other fields, what is left as its core is hardly worthy of being considered a legitimate academic field at all. American public administration as a field of study traditionally traces its origin to an 1887 Political Science Quarterly article by Woodrow Wilson, the future president. In “The Study of Administration,” Wilson attempted nothing less than to refocus the newly emerging field of political science. Rather than being concerned with the “lasting maxims of political wisdom,” he argued that political science should concentrate on the more generally neglected details of how governments are administered. This was neces¬ sary because “It is getting harder to run a constitution than to frame one.” Wilson wanted the study of public administration to focus not only on the prob¬ lems of personnel management, as many other reformers of the time had advocated, but also on organization and management in general. The reform movement of the time had a reform agenda that did not go beyond the abolition of the spoils system and the installation of a merit system. Wilson regarded civil service reform “as but a prelude to a fuller administrative reform.” He sought to push the concerns of public administration into investigations of the “organization and methods of our govern¬ ment offices” with a view toward determining “first, what government can properly and successfully do, and secondly, how it can do these proper things with the utmost possible efficiency and at the least possible cost either of money or energy.” He was concerned with overall organizational efficiency and economy that is, productivity in its most simplistic formulation. What could be more current then or now? Although Woodrow Wilson and many others of the progressive movement called for a “science of administration,” new intellectual fields evolve amorphously; it is difficult to trace the exact moment of their conception. What is certain is that the first real American public administration text, Introduction to the Study of Public Administration by Leonard D. White, was published in 1926. Whereas Woodrow Wilson provided the rationale for public administration to be an academic discipline and professional management specialty, it remained for

—

spoils system The widespread practice of awarding government jobs to political supporters as opposed to awarding them on the basis of merit. merit system A public sector concept of staffing implying that no test of party membership is involved in the selection, promotion, or retention of government employees and that a constant effort is made to select the best qualified individuals available for appointment and advancement. Leonard D. White (1891-1958) The University of Chicago professor who wrote the first public adminis¬ tration text in 1926. He is the author of the standard administrative histories of the U.S. government in the nineteenth century.

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia

35

White to most clearly articulate its preliminary objectives. In his pioneering text, he noted four critical assumptions that formed the basis for the study of public admin¬ istration both ir) the past and today: I. Administration is a unitary process that can be studied uniformly, at the federal, state, and local levels. 2. The basis for study is management, not law. 3. Administration is still art but the ideal of transformance to science is both

feasible and worthwhile. 4. Administration “has become, and will continue to be the heart of the problem of modern government.” As an independent academic field, public administration has always been controversial. First, it was the stepchild of political science, and the field is still represented by a few courses within the political science curriculum in many colleges. Later, schools of business or management began to offer it as one of a variety of administrative specialties. In recent decades, independent departments and graduate schools of public administration have been created. But as the field of public administration matured, its constituent elements began, intellectually, to fly away. The public policy analyst increasingly identified with the mathematical rigor of political science methodologists. Public finance has been claimed by the econo¬ mists. The core management elements have drifted toward the field of public management. Increasingly, the field seems to be less a discipline than a holding company for disparate intellectual components. This is hardly new. In 1975 Dwight Waldo was decrying that "public administration is suffering from an identity crisis, having enormously expanded its periphery without retaining or creating a unifying center.” More than a quarter century later, this crisis shows no signs of abating.

International Relations As an academic discipline, international relations focuses upon the relations among and other actors in the international system. International relations did not really develop as an academic discipline until the twentieth century partly because political philosophy focused on the principles and practices of governance within political units rather than on the relations between them. There were, however, important political thinkers, such as Grotius, Hobbes, Rousseau, Clausewitz

states

—

Dwight Waldo (1913-2000) The preeminent historian of the academic field of public administration. Hugo Grotius (1588-1645) This Dutch jurist considered the “founder of international law.” Jean-Jacques Rousstau (1712-1778) The Swiss-born French Enlightenment philosopher whose theories of democracy and the social contract were major influences on the American and French revolutions. His most important book, The Social Contract (1762), opens with the poignant: “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” Rousseau found that only the general will as expressed by the people could make valid law. Rousseau’s notions fell on fertile intellectual ground. His basic ideas, that ordinary people had the right to govern themselves and had the right to overthrow kings who claimed a competing divine or hereditary right, can be found in both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

36

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy (see box), and Kant, who had immense insight into various aspects of international relations. Their observations helped to establish a variety of intellectual traditions, which underpin contemporary study. The two most important are the Grotian tradition, which emphasizes that there is a society of states bound by common rules, customs, and shared norms, and Hobbesian realism, which focuses on the anarchi¬ cal nature of the international system and sees international relations as dominated by the political struggle for power. During the period between the First and Second World Wars, the Grotian tradition with its emphasis on the norms of international society was not only dominant but became closely bound up with an idealism based upon the desire to fundamentally transform international relations in ways ensuring that the horror of the First World War would never be repeated. Consequently, the studies of international relations done during this period were predominantly prescriptive (what should be) in tone and aim. Idealists believed that flawed political arrange¬ ments, especially international anarchy and secret diplomacy, led to war and had done so in 1914. The concomitant was that once the problems were correctly identified, they could then be eradicated so long as governments listened to the prescriptions. The problem with the idealist approach, according to Edward H. Carr, was that “wishing prevailed over thinking.” Although the development of realism grew out of the reaction against idealism, its roots can be traced back to Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Rousseau. Realism’s main theorist was Hans J. Morgenthau, who

—

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804} The German philosopher who, writing at the time of the French Revolution, produced works such as Toward Eternal Peace (1795) and Metaphysical Elements of Justice (1797), in which he argued against monarchy. For Kant, sovereigns acting for their own purposes treated citizens as the means to achieve territorial conquest in wars. But this was unac¬ ceptable, because citizens had a right to be treated with respect. In republics where the citizen had a say, it was more difficult to go to war than in a monarchy. Consequently, for eternal peace to be achieved, Kant believed that it was essential for all states to be republican. The contemporary argument that democracies do not fight each other is heir to the ideas of Kant.

realism An approach to international politics embodied in the realist school of thought which accepts that struggle is an endemic feature of life in the international system, either because of the innate imperfectibility of humans or because of the anarchic nature of the international system. Realism has been attacked, however, because of its obsession with power and its relative indifference to domestic sources of state behavior or considerations of morality. Edward Carr (1892-1982) The British diplomat and scholar who was one of the first modern propo¬ nents of political realism in the analysis of international relations. Carr’s The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939, was written “with the deliberate aim of counteracting the glaring and danger¬ ous defect of nearly all thinking, both academic and popular, about international politics in English-speaking countries from 1919 to 1939 the almost total neglect of the factor of power.” Hans J. Morgenthau (1904-1980) The key figure in the development of political realism as an approach to international politics an approach that he developed most fully in Politics Among Nations (1948). Morgenthau started from the premise that human nature was basically selfish and involved a struggle or quest for power. The most notable manifestation of this struggle was in rela¬ tions among nations, where the problems stemming from the inherent nature of humankind are compounded by the dynamics of a competitive environment in which there are few mechanisms of control apart from the power of others.

—

—

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia

37

ALTERNATIVE Theories Realism vs. Idealism Even today, foreign policy issues are frequently examined by placing them on a continuum that starts with the purest idealism and extends to an almost criminal realism. The United Nations was founded on idealist sentiments in 1945, after a world war was fought and won to repulse the criminal realism of Germany and Japan. Foreign policy analysts constantly measure the degree of idealism and realism in considering actions. Too much idealism and you may be taken advantage of Uncle Sam as "Uncle Sucker." Too much realism and you may be seen as a bully and engender unnecessary enmity. How much of each? That's the essential question of foreign policymaking. The realism versus idealism debate is nowhere more evident than in analysis of the war in Iraq. In early 2007 after four years of war the realists said "Enough already!" We have done all we reasonably can to help the feuding factions peacefully come together. To continue is too much of a drain on American blood and treasure. The idealists, led by President Bush, contend that it is in our and the world's interest for the U.S. to "stay the course" and see to it that Iraq evolves into a peaceful democratic state a model for others in the region. This goal is worth the cost because of the greater cost of allowing Iraq to descend into a chaotic civil war and become a haven for terrorists. What do you think is the best

—

—

approach?

assumed that international politics, like all politics, was a struggle for power and that states defined their national interest in terms of power,

Political Economy Economics is the study of how people or states use their limited resources to satisfy their unlimited wants how scarce resources are allocated among competing needs. Political economy is the conjunction of politics and economics; the field of study of relations between the economy and the state before either political science or economics became distinct disciplines. According to the “father” of modern economics, Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations (1776), it is that “branch of the science of a statesman or legislator” that provides “a plentiful revenue or subsis¬ tence for the people . . . and [provides] the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public service. It proposes to enrich both the people and the

—

Adam Smith (1723-1790) The Scottish economist who provided the first systematic analysis of economic pheaomena and the intellectual foundation for laissez-faire capitalism. In The Wealth of Nations (1776), Smith discusses an invisible hand that automatically promotes the general welfare as long as individuals are allowed to pursue their self-interest. It has become customary for organization theorists to trace the lineage of present-day theories to Smith’s concept of the division of labor. Greater specialization of labor was one of the pillars of the invisible hand market mechanism, in which the greatest rewards would go to those who were most efficient in the competitive marketplace.

38

PARTI*» Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

Karl Maria von Clausewitz (1 780-1 831), the Prussian general who wrote On War (1 832), the most famous book on western military strategy and tactics. All students of public policy should be familiar with at least these three of his concepts: 1 . That “war is the continuation of policy by other -• means”; meaning that, if diplomacy or other efforts fail to get you what you want, war is "simply" your next policy option. This is realism in action. 2. That “war is the province of uncertainty; threefourths of the things on which action in war is 1 based lie hidden in the fog." The "fog of war' is the descriptive phrase for the confusion inherent in combat. It is as if a literal fog descended upon the H battlefield, blinding the combatants to what the ' .j? ft' ' enemy and even other elements of their own forces were doing. Today, wherever far-flung or large-scale operations have to be coordinated, whether mili¬ tary or managerial, fog or uncertainty is always a possibility. The field of management information systems has grown up in recent decades to reduce the inevitable fog to manageable proportions. But the reduction mechanisms themselves computer data and memorandums in a seemingly endless stream often create more problems than the fog they were designed to dispel. 3. That no matter how well designed an operation may be, 'friction" the reality of delays and misunderstandings inevitably makes its execution less than ideal.This is why Clausewitz said: "Arrange maneuvers in peacetime to include . . . causes of friction, in order that the judgment ... of the separate leaders may be exercised ... It is of immense importance that the soldier . . . whatever be his rank, should not see for the first time in war those phenomena of war which, when seen for the first time, astonish and perplex him."

u

Ml

m

tsr

—

—

—

—

sovereign.” A contemporary whom Smith never met, Alexander Hamilton, took this science very seriously. As President George Washington’s secretary of the Treasury, he wrote his Report on Manufactures (1791), which explained why government intervention in the economy was desirable. Ever since, American politicians have been intervening in an effort to achieve Smith’s goal of enriching “both the people and the sovereign.” Political economy is a paramount public policy concern because of the pri¬ macy of economic prosperity to U.S. governments. The government not only accounts for one-third of the gross national product but also regulates society’s

Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804) George Washington’s aide and secretary during the Revolutionary War who went on to become the first secretary of the Treasury (1787-1795). Hamilton signed the U.S. Constitution and coauthored the Federalist Papers to help get it ratified in his native New York. gross national product (GNP) The monetary value of all the goods and services produced in a nation in a given year, one of the most important tools for measuring the health of a nation’s economy. The U.S. Department of Commerce is responsible for gathering GNP data. All GNP figures must be adjusted for inflation or deflation if they are to reflect the growth (or nongrowth) of the economy accurately.

The Locus and Doctrines of Public Policy Studies in Academia

39

basic economic conditions. For example, it can specify production of a product, regulate the wages of the production workers, prescribe working conditions, establish standards for the quality of the product, and inspect it when finished. The recurring policy questions have to do with whether interest rates should be higher or lower, whether government spending on public works should be increased or decreased, and whether inflation should be modestly encouraged or severely discouraged. The perpetual policy problem here is that there is seldom consensus on how to achieve any of these goals even if the goals themselves could be agreed upon, Public choice economics is that aspect of political economy which deals with public administration based on microeconomic theories that view the citizen as a consumer of government goods and services. It attempts to maximize administra¬ tive responsiveness to citizen demand by creating a market system for govern¬ ment activities in which public agencies would compete to provide citizens with goods and services. This might replace a portion of the current system, under which most administrative agencies in effect act as monopolies under the influ¬ ence of organized pressure groups, which, the public choice economists argue, are institutionally incapable of representing the demands of individual citizens. Philosophically, Republican or conservative governments are much more amenable to public choice approaches than Democratic or liberal governments. Therein lies the constant tension, the constant policy question, over how govern¬ ment services are best delivered by a government monopoly or free market competition. Chapter 7 is devoted to an explanation of why public choice approaches have become increasingly popular.

—

Policy Science and Policy Studies The term “policy science” refers to a problem-solving orientation that cuts across all disciplines to deal with the most important societal decisions. It is more than the application of social or behavioral science; it is a new science, encompassing all that is involved with policy formulation and execution. It began as a post-World War II effort to distinguish between (1) an objective conception of social science (which rejected public purposes and goals) and (2) the pragmatic approach of policy practitioners (who insisted on the priority of experience and application as the sole basis for education and research). Harold D. Lasswell, a pioneer in the concept, held that policy science studies “the process of deciding or

microeconomics The study of the parts of an economy and how they function, as opposed to the study of a total economy and its aggregate performance. Individual firms and consumers are analyzed concerning wages, prices, inputs and outputs, and supply and demand, among other things. Harold D. Lasswell (1902-1978) One of the most influential and prolific of social scientists. Although he made major contributions to the fields of communications, psychology (he pioneered the applications of Freudian theory to politics), political science, sociology, and law, his most lasting legacy is probably his pioneering work in developing the concept and methodology of the policy sciences.

40

PART I

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

choosing and evaluating the relevance of available knowledge for the solution of particular problems.” Although the policy sciences are alive and well, policy science as an indepen¬ dent integrating academic discipline has nor done well. Its subject matter has been subsumed into policy studies programs that are most often located in political science, public administration, and departments of economics. Lasswell’s call for a new discipline was simply not heeded. The great contribution of the concept of policy science was to call attention to the inherently interdisciplinary nature of public policy research. Each of these traditional academic disciplines was able to say with a relatively straight face that it could be as interdisciplinary as the next discipline. Nevertheless, location still rules here. Thus Stuart S. Nagel, a preeminent historian of policy studies as a discipline, is able to say that “the most distinguishing characteristic of various programs ... is whether they emphasize a political science approach, as in the Berkeley Graduate School of Public Policy; an economics approach, as in the Harvard Kennedy School; or a social psychology approach as in Northwestern’s Evaluation Research Program.” Overall, “policy studies” is an extremely broad term used to describe a vast vari¬ ety of interdisciplinary academic programs that focus on aspects of public policy. Furthermore, policy studies as a program emphasis or as a specific research effort can be broken down into two broad categories:

—

—

1. The normative, which critiques public policymaking and makes recommenda¬ tions on how the process may be made more efficient, more equitable, and more democratic 2. The analytic, which uses policy analysis (see Chapter 5) to develop models and explanations for policy outcomes Policy studies began a significant self-conscious expansion of programs and research in the 1960s. At this time too, public administration enjoyed explosive growth. But whereas the growth in public administration leveled off by the early 1980s, policy studies has continued to expand. "Why? Because it is so much easier to identify with a field which, unlike public administration, is so broad and amorphous that, like a gas, it will fill any space it occupies. Biologists and chemists, who once worked primarily in their laboratories, have now come out as environmental policy experts. Civil engineers and city planners are now urban policy experts. Municipal bond analysts and government accountants are now fiscal policy experts. Social psychologists with interest in how people are motivated to act in the public interest become social policy experts. And it goes on and on. Every discipline has its only policy niche.

normative Those findings or conclusions that are premised upon morally established norms of right or wrong.

I

Pluralism Versus Elitism in the Study of Public Policymaking

41

Pluralism Versus Elitism in the Study of Public Policymaking The various disciplinary approaches to the study of public policy each has inher¬ limitations and internal schisms. But another great schism— one that crosses disciplinary boundaries also exists in the world of public policymaking. This schism has engendered contentious debate over who really makes American public policy the members of a multitudinous pluralistic republic or a restricted elite of those who limit real power to themselves. Or is the reality a mix of the two extremes? American political processes, being inherently pluralistic, emphasize the role of competitive groups in society. Pluralism assumes that power will shift from group to group as elements in the mass public transfer their allegiance in response ro their per¬ ceptions of their individual interests. However, according to power-elite theory, if democracy is defined as popular participation in public affairs, then pluralist theory is inadequate as an explanation of modern U.S. government. Pluralism, according to this view, offers little direct citizen participation, since the elite structure is closed, pyramidal, consensual, and unresponsive. Society is thus divided into two classes: the few who govern and the many who are governed. That is, pluralism is covert elitism instead of a practical solution to preserve democracy in a mass society. Those who believe that elites dominate policymaking in American society often seek to prove their point by referring to the military-industrial complex a state’s armed forces and their industrial suppliers. During his January 17, 1961, farewell address, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned that “in the councils of government we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” During the Cold War, however, the military-industrial complex was widely seen as having an influence which was both pervasive and malignant pervasive in that it had an impact on so many aspects of American life and malignant in that this influence was generally seen as negative. It was believed that the complex was against mutual accommodation or arms control. While there was something to such arguments and to the belief that there were close linkages among the leaders of the military and American industry (with many officers working for companies in the defense field after retirement from the military), the idea that there was some kind of conspiracy orchestrated by a monolithic group ent

—

—

—

—

power-elite theory The belief that the United States is basically ruled by a political, military, and business elite whose decisional powers essentially preempt the democratic process. citizen participation A means of empowering individuals or groups with bargaining power to represent their own interests and to plan and implement their own programs with a view toward social, economic, and political power and control. arms control A general reference to any measures taken to reduce international military instability. Arms control can be divided into two types: control over existing weapons systems and preemptive arms con¬ trol, which tries to prevent the deployment of a new or potential weapon. Arms controls may be selfimposed or unilateral, but more often it is the result of bilateral or multilateral agreements or treaties.

42

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

of military officers and industrialists was less compelling. Besides, as President Ronald Reagan said during his 1985 State of the Union address: “We only have a military-industrial complex until a time of danger: then it becomes the arsenal of democracy. ”

The Paranoid Style Those who subscribe to elite theory often have a paranoid political orientation, the belief that there is a nationwide conspiracy against them. Examples include those homosexuals who believe that AIDS was “invented” by the government to destroy them, those African-Americans who believe that the drug epidemic is encouraged by the government to hurt them, those right-wing militia members who believe that the federal government is conspiring to confiscate all firearms in the hands of the citizens, and politicians who especially during the Cold War believed that a Communist conspiracy was on the verge of taking over the country. The concept was first identified in 1965 by historian Richard Hofstadter in The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Hofstadter coined the phrase “paranoid style” to describe this belief in a conspiracy to destroy one or another of the fundamental values of American life. He writes that only the term paranoid “adequately evokes the qualities of heated exaggeration, suspicious¬ ness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind.” Americans who kill physicians who perform abortions, bomb abortion clinics, or blow up federal buildings all believe that they must engage in violence in order to save the country from hostile, destructive, and evil forces that are destroying the fabric of American life. According to Hofstadter:

—

—

There is a vital difference between the paranoid spokesman in politics and the clinical paranoiac: although they both tend to be overheated, oversuspicious, overaggressive, grandiose, and apocalyptic in expression, the clinical paranoid sees the hostile and con¬ spiratorial world in which he feels himself to be living as directed specifically against him; whereas the spokesman of the paranoid style finds it directed against a nation, a culture, a way of life whose fate affects not himself alone but millions of others.

Pluralism also has a cultural dimension. Those who espouse this believe that a nation’s overall welfare is best served by preserving ethnic cultures rather than by encouraging the integration and blending of cultures. This is in contrast to the assimilationist belief that all immigrants should take their turn in a national melting pot ethnic A member of a minority group within a larger society. In the United States the term originally applied only to European ethnics. The term is now more likely to refer to the new ethnics, both those that have long been here and those that are more recent arrivals, for example, the blacks, the Hispanics, the Vietnamese. Technically, every American is a member of an ethnic group except for white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. And now that they are in the minority, many of them have begun to claim that they are an ethnic group, too. melting pot A sociological term that implies (1) that each succeeding wave of immigrants to the United States blends into the general sociery and (2) that this melting is ideally what should happen. The term originated in Israel ZangwiU’s (1864-1926) play, The Melting Pot (1908), in which he wrote: “America is God’s Crucible, the great Melting-Pot where all races of Europe are melting and reform¬ ing!” The phrase depicted the symbol of assimilation for several generations of American immigrants.

Pluralism Versus Elitism in the Study of Public Policymaking

43

IN THE NEWS The Paranoid Style and Weapons of Mass Destruction President Bush justified the war in Iraq that began in 2003 partly on the assertion that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons) that Iraq was on the verge of using against the U.S. or its allies. When no such weapons were found after allied forces occupied Iraq, Bush opponents started to assert with ever increasing intensity that the president purposely lied to gain public acceptance for the war. Many of them contend that the President of the United States knowingly gave false reasons to the Congress and the American public for starting a major war. Bush and his defenders maintained that the problem was just faulty intelligence. Besides, they argued, the war was justifiable on many other grounds as well. Nevertheless a significant proportion of the U.S. and world population continue to believe that Bush consciously lied about this. Is this an example of the paranoid style at work?

and come out homogenized. But studies have consistently shown that this “ain’t necessarily so.” Historian Carl N. Degler wrote: “The metaphor of the melting pot is unfortunate and misleading. A more accurate analogy would be a salad bowl, for, though the salad is an entity, the lettuce can still be distinguished from the chicory, the tomatoes from the cabbage.” In recent years the term has become less fashionable and has been replaced in political rhetoric by the image of a mosaic. Without using the term, then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich resurrected the melting pot concept in 1995 when he asserted that America is a distinct civilization and that the way for immigrants to become “civilized” is to accept the mainstream “melting pot” values.

—

Group Theory Explains the Alliances of Interests The importance of pluralism and the significance of groups in the democratic politi¬ cal process has been recognized for over two thousand years: Aristotle noted that political associations were both significant and commonplace because of the “general advantages” that members obtained. One of the first specific references to groups in the American political process was James Madison’s famous discussion of factions in The Federalist, No. 10. In Madison’s view, the group was inherent in the nature of people, and its causes were unremovable. The only choice then was to control the effects of group pressure and power. A more elaborate discussion of group theory can be traced to John C. Calhoun’s 1853 treatise, A Disquisition on Government. While essentially an argument for the protection of minority interests, the treatise suggested that ideal governance must deal with all interest groups, since they represent the legitimate interests of the citizens. If all groups participated on some level of parity within the policymaking process, then all individual interests would be recognized by the policymakers.

44

PART I

Chapter 2

The Study of Public Policy

Modern group theory has taken greater impetus from the work of Arthur F. Bentley, David B. Truman, and Earl Latham. Latham viewed the legislature as the referee of the group struggle, responsible for “ratifying the victories of the successful coalitions and recording the terms of the surrenders, compromises, and conquests in the form of statutes.” The function of bureaucrats is quite different, however. They are like “armies of occupation left in the field to police the rule won by the victorious coalition.” Although Latham’s description was aimed primarily at regulatory agencies, he saw the bureaucrat being deluged by the losing coalitions of groups for more favorable actions despite the general rules established. The result is that “agencies are constantly besought and importuned to interpret their authorities in favor of the very groups for the regulation of which they were originally granted.” Latham distinguished three types of groups, based on phases of development: incipient, conscious, and organized. An incipient group is one “where the interest exists but is not recognized” by the potential members; a conscious group is one “in which the community sense exists but which has not become organized”; and finally an organized group is “a conscious group which has established an objec¬ tive and formal apparatus to promote the common interest.” Latham’s incipient and conscious groups are essentially the same as Truman’s potential groups, which always exist but do not come together until there is a felt need for action on an issue. The concept of potential groups keeps the bureaucratic policymaking process balanced, given the possibility that new groups might surface or some issues may influence decision making. The “potential groups” concept also serves as a counterargument to the claim that group theory is undemocratic. Once the concept of potential group is married to the active role of organized groups, the claim can be made, in Truman’s words, that “all interests of society by definition are taken into account in one form or another by the institutions of government. ”

Although Truman and others have helped define the positive aspects of groups within American democracy, other scholars have focused on the nega¬ tive side of group proliferation. According to political scientist Theodore J. Lowi, too much public authority is parceled out to private interest groups, resulting in a weak, decentralized government incapable of long-range planning. Powerful interest groups operate to promote private goals but do not com¬ pete to promote the public interest. Government becomes not an institution that makes hard choices among conflicting values but a holding company for interests.

David B. Truman (1913-2003) A political scientist and one of the most influential interest group theo¬ rists. Truman’s principal work, The Governmental Process (1951), views group interaction as the real determinant of public policy and as the proper focal point of study. Earl Latham (1907-1977) The group theorist whose The Group Basis of Politics (1952) was particu¬ larly significant because of his conceptualization that government itself is a group, just like the various private groups attempting to access the policy process.

Summary

45

Government Agency (administers policy)

Legislative Committee (creates policy)

Interest Group (lobbies for policy)

Figure 2.1 The Cozy or Iron Triangle

These interests are promoted by alliances of interest groups, relevant govern¬ agencies, and the appropriate legislative committees in each issue area. This is furthered by “cozy triangles,” the mutually supportive relations among government agencies, interest groups, and the legislative committee or subcom¬ mittee with jurisdiction over their areas of common concern. Such coalitions constantly exchange information, services, and money (in the form of campaign contributions from the interest groups to the members of the legislative commit¬ tee and budget approval from the committee to the agency). As a whole, they tend to dominate policymaking in their areas of concern. The triangles are considered to be as strong as iron, because the supportive relations are so strong that others elected or appointed to control administrative policy as representa¬ tives of the public’s interest are effectively prohibited from interfering on behalf of the public. ment

Summary The only really new thing about public policy is the self-conscious study of it. Modern public policy analysis in a formal sense can be said to have begun with the work of Jeremy Benthani, who demanded that all laws and policies answer the question “who benefits?” And If the proposal didn’t meet his test of the “greatest happiness for the greatest number,” it was not deserving of enactment. Policy analysis is a set of techniques that seeks to answer the question of what the probable effects of a policy will be before they actually occur. Nothing is more important in determining the nature of a public policy study or proposal than its source or origin. This phenomenon is commonly known as Miles’s law: “Where you stand depends on where you sit.” Stances on policy issues still tend to reflect their source the organizations that promulgate them far more so than any ideals of objectivity. It is not that these sources are necessarily corrupt or dishonest, they just look at policy issues through nonobjective lenses. Each academic discipline has its own biases with which it views the public policy world. American political processes, being inherently pluralistic, emphasize the role of competitive groups in society. Pluralism assumes that power will shift from group to group as elements in the mass public transfer their allegiance in response to their perceptions of tiheir individual interests.

—

—

46

PART I a Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

The problem is that too much public authority may be parceled out to private interest groups, resulting in a weak, decentralized government incapable of longrange planning. Interest groups operate to promote private goals, not to promote the public interest. Thus, government may become not an institution that makes hard choices among conflicting values but a holding company for interests.

Key Concepts cozy triangles The mutually supportive relations among government agencies, interest groups, and the legislative committee or subcommittee with jurisdiction over their areas of common concern; as a whole, these “triangles” tend to dominate policymaking in their areas of concern. pluralism A theory of government that attempts to reaffirm the democratic character of society by asserting that open, multiple, competing, and responsive groups preserve traditional democratic values in a mass industrial state. Pluralism assumes that power will shift from group to group as elements in the mass public transfer their allegiance in response to their perceptions of their individual interests. policy science A problem-solving orientation that cuts across all disciplines to deal with the most important societal decisions, policy studies An extremely broad term used to

describe a

vast variety

of interdisciplinary

academic programs that focus on aspects of public policy. political economy The conjunction of politics and economics; the field of study of relations between the economy and the state before either political science or economics became distinct disciplines. progressive movement A term that has its origins in religious concepts arguing for the infinite improvability of the human condition rather than fixed class distinctions; by the end of the nineteenth century, it had come to mean a responsibility of classes for one another and a willingness to use all govern¬ ment and social institutions to give that responsibility legal effect. social Darwinism Charles Darwin’s concept of biological evolution applied to the develop¬ ment of human social organization and economic policy.

Review Questions 1. How do Aristotle and Jeremy Bentham differ in their approach to the study of public

policy? 2. How does the behavioralist approach to the study of politics differ from earlier approaches? 3. What are the key differences between the pluralist and power elite perspectives on American democracy? 4. How does Miles’s law relate to the study of public policies? 5. What are the major assumptions of the public choice approach to public policymaking?

Bibliography Aristotle (1952). Politics, trans. B. Jowett. Chicago: Great Books, Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 9. Bowring, John, ed. (1962). The Works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols. New York: Russell and Russell.

Dahlberg, Jane (1966). The New York Bureau of Municipal Research: Pioneer in Government Administration. New York: New York University Press.

Recommended Books Degler, Carl (1970). Out of Our Past. New York: Harper fk. Row. Downs, Anthony (1967). Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown. Gill, Norman N. (1944). Municipal Research Bureaus. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Public Affairs. Gingrich, Newt (1995). To Renew America. New York: HarperCollins. Hofstadter, Richard (1965). The Paranoid Style in American Politics. New York: Knopf. Jones, Charles O. (1977). An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, 2nd ed. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press. Holden, Matthew, Jr. (1966). “Imperialism in Bureaucracy.” American Political Science Review, LX (December). Kamen, Michael (1993). A Machine That Would Go of Itself: The Constitution in American Culture.

New York: Knopf.

Kelly, Paul Joseph (1990). Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice: Jeremy Bentham and the Civil Law. New York: Oxford University Press. Lasswell, Harold D. (1936). Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. New York: Peter Smith. - and David Lerner, eds. (1950). The Policy Sciences. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. (1971). Pre-view of the Policy Sciences. New York: American Elsevier. Lowi, Theodore J. (1979). The End of Liberalism, 2nd ed. New York: Norton. Mills, C. Wright (1956). The Power Elite. New York:

—

--

-

Oxford University Press. Nagel, Stuart S. (1998). “Policy Studies,” . International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration, ed. Jay M. Shafritz. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Plato (1925). The Republic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

47

Plutarch (1955). The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans. New York: Modern Library. Posteina, Gerald J. (1986). Bentham and the Common Law Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press. Santayana, George (1998). The Life of Reason. New York: Prometheus Books. Shaw, George Bernard (1944). Everybody’s Political What’s What ? New York: Dodd, Mead. Sinclair, Upton (1906). The Jungle. New York: Bantam Classics. Steffens, Lincoln (1904). The Shame of the Cities. New York: McClure. Stivers, Camilla (1998). “Municipal Research Bureaus,” International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration, ed. Jay M. Shafritz. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. “Survey Method,” International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration, ed. Jay M. Shafritz- Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Tarbell, Ida M. (1966). The History of Standard Oil Company. New York: Norton. Taylor, Frederick W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper Brothers. Waldo, Dwight (1955). The Study of Administration. New York: Random House. -(1975). “Education for Public Administration in the Seventies” In American Public Administration: Past, Present, Future, ed, Frederick C. Mosher. University of Alabama

-

Press.

Warshaw, Shirley Anne (2000). The Keys to Power: Managing the Presidency. New York: Longman. Weber, Max (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, edited and translated by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press. Xenophon (1859). The Anabasis or Expedition of Cyrus and the Memorabilia of Socrates, trans. J. S. Watson. New York: Harper & Row.

Recommended Books Katznelson, Ira (2003). Political Science: The State of the Discipline New York: W. W. Norton. A sum¬ mary of the intellectual diversity found in political science today. Pipes, Daniel (1997). Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From. New York: Free Press. An updating of Richard Hofstadter’s 1965 The Paranoid Style

in American Politics, which deals with the latest batch of wacky theories as well as the golden

oldies. Stivers, Camilla (2000). Bureau Men, Settlement Women: Constructing Public Administration in the Progressive Era. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press. A history of the origins of modern policy studies.

48

PARTI

Chapter 2 The Study of Public Policy

Related Web Sites The James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy hrtp://bakerinstitu te.org/ Center for Strategic and International Studies (CS1S) http://www.csis.org/ Center of International Studies, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (CIS) http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cis/ Council for Excellence in Government h ttp://www.excelgov.org Council on Foreign Relations

http://www.cfr.org Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/

Johns Hopkins Foreign Policy Institute (FPI)

http://www.sais-jhu.edu/centers/fpi/index.htinl

Journal of Group Theory

http://www.degruyter.de/joumals/jgt/

National Endowment for Democracy http://www.ned.org Power Elite excerpts http://www.lhirdworldtraveler.coin/ Book Excerpts/PowerEhte.html United States Institute of Peace http://www.usip.org/

i

CHAPTER 3

The Public Policymaking System Chapter Outline Keynote: Sherlock Holmes— The World’s Most Famous Systems Analyst 50

The Policymaking System 51 Systems Theory 52 Open Systems Theory 53 Systems Analysis 55 The Public Policymaking Process 56

Agenda Setting 57

The Role of Public Policy Entrepreneurs 58 The Issue-Attention Cycle 62 Decision Making 62

Rational Decision Making 63 Incrementalism 64 Mixed Scanning 66 Implementation 68

Who Gets What 69

Evaluation 70 Efficiency and Effectiveness 70 Feedback 71

Chapter Objectives To illustrate how Sherlock Holmes’s approaches to solving crime mirror modern-day systems analysis (p. 50) To show how systems thinking is a useful lens by which to view the public policymaking process (p. 51)

49

50

PART 1

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

To explain how issues bubble up from the political environment to gain a place on the agendas of public policy decision makers (p. 56)

To review the main theories of public policy decision making from those that are rational, incremental, and in-between (p. 62) To examine the implementation of public policies and wonder why some citizens get a bigger share of the implementation pie than others (p. 68) To explain why program evaluation and feedback are the final phases of the public policymaking system (p. 70)

—

Keynote: Sherlock Holmes The World's Most Famous Systems Analyst

i

Mickey Mouse is his only rival to having the world's most instantly recognizable silhouette. Almost everyone in the literate world knows that a deerstalker cap on the head, a drooping pipe in the mouth, a short-caped overcoat on the shoulders, and a magnifying glass in the hand means that Sherlock Holmes is afoot. Holmes, the fictional detective created by Arthur Conan Doyle, was the original crime scene investigator. Today's investigators both on television and in real life arrive on the scene and proceed to follow in Holmes’s footsteps by systematically analyzing the physical evidence and drawing conclusions based on logical deductions. "System" is the key word here. Although he never used the word, Holmes always took a holistic approach to a problem. He saw some of the pieces of a puzzle at a crime scene and, by the use of scientific methods and logical analysis, was able to come up with the missing pieces to get the whole picture. Think of a problem, such as a crime to be solved, as a jigsaw puzzle. The placement of the last remaining piece becomes obvious once you have figured out the rest of the system that is, have properly arranged the rest of the pieces. Then, as Holmes initially said in The Sign of the Tour (1890), "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." It is his systemic approach to problem solving that allows Holmes to discover the truth of a crime. This jigsaw puzzle approach to solving crimes is readily illustrated by Holmes in two of his most famous short stories: "The Red-Headed League" (1891) and "The Adventure of the Six Napoleons" (1904). In each case Holmes realizes the criminal's modus operandi his method (his system) of operation and is able to catch him in the act by anticipating his next step. Then Holmes, his systemic thinking flawless, is able to simply wait in the dark with the police at his side for the criminal to show up. As Holmes advised in The Valley of Fear (1914): "Everything comes in circles. . . The old wheel turns, and the same spoke comes up. It's all been done before, and will be again." Sherlock Holmes is now so famous that describing someone as "a Sherlock Holmes" has long meant that he was a brilliant detective, just as describing someone as "a Napoleon" has long meant that he was a highly skilled military officer (or merely a short one). Holmes’s fame is important here because of what he was famous for: In his own words from A Study in Scarlet (1887); “I have a trade of my own. I suppose I am the only

—

—

—

.

The Policymaking System

51

one in the world. I’m a consulting detective." He was a singular figure in plying his trade at first; but he became the inspiration to untold thousands more who modeled themselves on him some to detect crime as well as others who would detect and solve business problems. Yes, he was "a consulting detective," but he functioned as a consulting systems analyst. After all, solving crimes and solving production bottlenecks call for the same kinds of intellectual skills. The science of deduction applies in both instances. In one case, actual criminals are sought; in the other, it is criminal waste and inefficiency that must be removed from the society of the factory or office. By doing the first. Holmes showed the way for the second. Today consultants are commonplace. Business and governments hire them for a vast variety of specialized skills; accounting, engineering, computer services, management, and even ethics. The first consultants were oracles fortune tellers in ancient Greece. This same term was adopted by legal specialists in ancient Rome and eventually applied to medical experts in England the doctors to whom general practitioners sent their patients with problems needing advanced skills. Conan Doyle was just such a general practitioner in England when the first Sherlock Holmes tale was published in 1887. Because Holmes was the kind of detective to whom other detectives, those of the police as well as private investigators, turned when they were stumped, Conan Doyle made him a self-described consultant. This is critically important, because it is Holmes who is the first modern consultant of any kind outside the field of medicine. Obviously, smart people have always consulted, always given advice. But Holmes was the first to set up shop yes, at 221 B Baker Street to sell his brainpower, his ability to theorize rapidly and think creatively to do systems analysis for a living. As he put it in A Study in Scarlet: "I depend upon them [his theories of detection] for my bread and cheese." Holmes, in effect, created the world's first self-conscious consulting firm. Systems analysis had become an occupation.

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

For Discussion: Is Sherlock Holmes the only fictional character to use system analysis or merely the first to become world famous for doing so? Why is it that all systems analysis, both imaginary and real, follows in the intellectual footsteps of Sherlock Holmes?

The Policymaking System In every country and every jurisdiction within that country, the public policymaking system is different. There are different leaders, different laws, different customs, and differing levels of corruption influencing the system. Yet while they are different,

they are also the same, in that all policymaking processes share common elements. The first of these is that they are systems. All social (really social-biological) systems start with individual cells. Once they combine and grow to be embryos and then people, they prove Aristotle’s contention that “the whole is more than the sum of its parts.” Once these “whole systems,” as individuals, combine, they create families, clans, and tribes. Now they are part of an

52

PART 1

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

organization or social system that focuses on the attainment of specific goals and contributes, in turn, to the goals of a more comprehensive system, such as a larger organization or society itself. With the immense number of systems in the world, this can get very complicated very fast. To help sort out and better understand how all these social systems interact, sociologists developed the structural-functional approach, by which societies, communities, and organizations are viewed as systems. Their particular features are then explained in terms of their contributions (their functions) in maintaining the system. Structural-functional analysis, pioneered by Talcott Parsons, emphasizes the social system at the expense of, or as opposed to, the system’s recognized politi¬ cal organizations, actors, and institutions. The newest thing about systems thinking is theorizing about it as if it were new. But ancients like Aristotle and poets like Shakespeare understood systems instinc¬ tively. Perhaps the best poetic description of the human social system is that of John Donne (1572-1631). When he wrote “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main,” he provided the preamble for modern social science. And when he concluded “Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee,” he explained why everyone had to understand the doctrines of systems theory.

Systems Theory Since World War II, the social sciences have increasingly used systems theory to examine their assertions about human behavior. Systems theory views social organizations whether they are as small as a family or as large as a star as a complex set of dynamically intertwined and interconnected elements. Every system includes inputs, processes, outputs, feedback loops, and the environment in which it operates and with which it continuously interacts (see Figure 3.1). Any change in any element of the system causes changes in other elements. The inter¬ connections tend to be complex, dynamic (constantly changing), and often unknown. For example, consider a beehive. If the drone worker bees ventured forth one day and most of them never came back (because they inadvertently flew into a mist of insecticide), the whole hive would have to change. Floney produc¬ tion would have to be curtailed so that more drones could be raised until the hive, the system, was back in a state of equilibrium. Similarly, when policymakers make decisions involving one element of the system, unanticipated impacts may occur throughout the system. Systems theorists study these interconnections in order to anticipate what was once unanticipated. Systems thinking is critically important because the whole world, in essence, is a collection of interrelated systems. Nothing happens in isolation. Your reading this

—

Talcott Parsons (1902-1979) The sociologist whose theories of social action and structural functional¬ ism advanced systems and organization theory. bell toll The sounding of a church bell to announce a death.

The Policymaking System

53

Environment

Outputs

Inputs

Process

Feedback

Figure 3.1

Norbert Weiner's Model of an Organization as an Adaptive System

page is made possible by your visual system. Your turning to the next page is a func¬ tion of your nervous system and muscular system, which is also related to your visual system. How else would you know when to turn the page? The systems of the world seems so infinite that another theory chaos theory has evolved to explain why they are often inexplicable. This theory postulates that the tiniest change in the smallest part of a system can eventually produce enormous effects. In weather forecasting, this has become known as the “butterfly effect.” According to James Gleick, this is “the notion that a butterfly stirring the air today in Peking can trans¬ form storm systems next month in New York.” All of chaos theory seeks to explain how the smallest elements of a system, whether weather or organizational, can have the biggest consequences. Yet all this was summed up by Benjamin Franklin in a 1758 issue of Poor Richard’s Almanac:

—

—

For the want of a nail the shoe was lost, For the want of a shoe the horse was lost, For the want of a horse the rider was lost, For the want of a rider the battle was lost, For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost, And all for want of a horseshoe-nail.

Open Systems Theory An open system is any organism or organization that interacts with its environment, as opposed to a closed system, which does not. A closed system is mainly a theoretical concept, since even the most isolated mechanical system will eventually be affected by its environment. So for all practical purposes all systems theory especially in the social sciences—-is open systems theory. Because all social organizations are adaptive (and open) systems that are inte¬ gral parts of their environments, they must adjust to changes in their environment if they are to survive. In turn, virtually all of their decisions and actions affect their environment. Norbert Wiener’s model of an organization as an adaptive system, from his 1948 book Cybernetics, epitomizes the basic theoretical perspectives of

—

54

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

the systems perspective. “Cybernetics,” from a Greek word meaning “steersman,” was used by Wiener to mean the multidisciplinary study of the structures and functions of control and information processing systems in both animals and

machines. The basic concept behind cybernetics is self-regulation biological, social, or technological systems that can identify problems, do something about them, and then receive feedback to adjust themselves automatically. For example, humans must maintain a relatively stable body temperature. When the environment gets too hot, our bodies adjust by sweating to expel excess heat. When it gets too cold, our skin contracts to retain heat. These are automatic cybernetic body adjustments because they are done spontaneously, without thinking. A thermo¬ stat that regulates heating and/or air conditioning performs this same function for a house. Variations on this simple model of a system have been used extensively by systems theorists for many years, particularly around the development and use of management information systems. Karl Deutsch in The Nerves of Government uses the term “cybernetics” to refer to the systematic study of communication and con¬ trol in organizations of all kinds. His emphasis is on information, its transmission through the organization, and the responses that are made to it. The organization will try to stop breakdowns and adapt to its environment through the feedback of information, which leads to adjustments in performance. This basic cybernetic model was used by John Steinbruner to develop a theory of foreign policy decision making in The Cybernetic Theory of Decision (1974). Steinbruner suggests that governments monitor a few critical variables and modify their behavior accordingly to maintain an equilibrium. The search for order among complex variables has led to an extensive reliance on quantitative analytical methods and models. The systems approach is strongly oriented toward cause and effect (logical-positivist) in its philosophy and methods. In these respects, systems theories have close ties to Frederick W. Taylor’s scientific management approach. Whereas Taylor used quantitative methods (such as time study) to find “the one best way” to undertake a production task, the systems theorist uses quantitative methods to identify cause-effect relationships and find optimal solutions. In this sense, the conceptual approaches and purposes between the two perspectives are strikingly similar. Thus, systems approaches are often called management science or operations research. But be careful never to make the unpar¬ donable error of calling them scientific management!

—

—

—

Karl Wolfgang Deutsch (1912-1992) The political scientist who pioneered the application of the social sciences in general and quantitative techniques in particular to the study of international relations. logical-positivist An approach to scientific explanation that emphasizes empirical methods and uses quantitative analysis wherever appropriate to create logical, formal explanations for the phenomena under study. Frederick W. Taylor (1856-1915) The industrial engineer and management consultant widely considered to be the “father” of scientific management. lime study A variety of measurement techniques for determining the time it should take a worker to perform a specified task.

•

The Policymaking System

Systems Analysis

55

—

Systems analysis is a set of techniques the methodologically rigorous collection, manipulation, and evaluation of data on social units (as small as an organization or as large as a polity) used to determine the best way to improve the functioning of a social unit and aid a decision maker in selecting a preferred choice among alternatives. Systems analysis is also used to describe the development and use of mathemati¬ cal models as an aid in decision making. But this can be dangerous if nonquantifiable factors are not also taken into account. The classic example of this is the American experience in Vietnam. The systems analysis techniques introduced by Secretary of Defense Roberts. McNamara in the early 1960s were based on mathematical models that treated warfare as a cumulative exchange of firepower. Firepower is easily measurable; the morale and motivation of an enemy are not. The story is often told that a frustrated general in the Pentagon of 1968 fed into a computer all of the known data about the Vietnam War and then asked when the United States would win. The computer answered: “You won in 1964.” But neither war nor the real world always responds rationally to superior resources or good intentions. Military strategist Edward N. Luttwak examined this problem and found that “mathematical models continue to be devastatingly influen¬ tial because they capture ail that is conveniently measurable about warfare. Thus bookkeepers mfiy fancy themselves strategists.”

—

Systems Analysis in Action The story is told about the high defense official, confident in the methods of systems analysis, and faced with a personal decision. He owned two self-winding watches . . . that had both become defective. The first lost four seconds every day; the second had stopped completely. So he called in his Chief Systems Analyst, and ask him to evaluate these two chronological "systems" and recommend what to do. After study, the recommendation was clear: throw away the first watch and keep the second. Calculation showed that the first watch was correct only once every fifty-nine years, and the second was correct twice a day. This is something more than a bad joke. It illustrates the fact that systems analysis, while it is a superb decision making tool, operates in a broader setting that requires human judgment. SOURCE: Wesley W. Posvar, "The Easy Magic of Systems Analysis," American Defense Policy. 2nd ed., ed. M. E. Smith II and C. J. Johns, Jr. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1968.

polity An organized political community such as a state. Robert S. McNamara (1916- ) The secretary of defense under President John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, from 1961 to 1968. His greatest historical importance was his strong advocacy of the Vietnam War. He deserves much of the blame for the ultimately ineffective strategy and tactics used by American forces.

56

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

The situation in Iraq is a good example of this “bookkeeping” mentality. It is rational to think that the people of Iraq would have been thrilled to have the allied forces depose their vicious dictator and install a modern regime based on the princi¬ ples of democratic governance. But this attitude does not take into account all of the intellectual, religious, and emotional factors at hand. And it is these factors that have led to the insurgency and a war that continues on. The first question that must be asked in systems analysis is “what level?” After all, looking at things cosmically, the whole world is a single system. So what subsystem do you examine? Do you want your level of analysis to be the individual citizen, a small group, or the state itself? But regardless of your level of analysis, you will be looking at a system in action, because systems by definition are dynamic and constantly changing. What you must look at, therefore, is not a frozen, static snapshot of a system but a system in constant motion.

The Public Policymaking Process The public policymaking system involves so many aspects, so many players, and so many issues that it is difficult to grasp as one single thing. Of course it is not a tangible thing; it is a never-ending intangible process. It is a process because it is constantly changing. Social systems need maintenance even more than mechanical ones. The wind blows in from the north and the people in a group feel cold. Suddenly the goal of the group changes from whatever their task was to getting warm by finding clothing or shelter. Good managers or officers of such small systems anticipate and plan for such contingencies. The systemic nature of the public policymaking process can be illustrated by the public policymaking cycle (see Figure 3.2), a conceptual model that views the public

Agenda setting

Policy decision

or nondecision

Implementation

of a new program or change in an old public program

Criticism from citizens and formal program evaluations

Figure 3.2 The Public Policymaking Cycle

Feedback

Agenda Setting

57

policy process as moving through a succession of stages: (1) agenda setting (or the identification of a policy issue), (2) policy decision or nondecision, (3) implementa¬ tion, (4) program evaluation or impact analysis, and finally (5) feedback, which leads to revision or termination. Thus the process comes full circle which is why it is called a cycle. The rest of this chapter examines, in turn, each aspect of this cycle.

—

Agenda Setting Agenda setting is the process by which ideas or issues bubble up through the various political channels to wind up for consideration by a political institution such as a legislature or court. The two greatest sources of new agenda items are elective exec¬ utives and legislators. Each of their constituencies expects that they will seek the enactment into law of the policies they advocated in their campaigns for elective office. Additionally, the administrative agencies of a government often generate legislative proposals. Sometimes, these are incorporated into the executive’s legisla¬ tive recommendations. The agenda-setting process often makes extensive use of the mass media to take a relatively unknown or unsupported issue and, through publicity, expand the numbers of people who care about the issue so that an institution, whether it be city hall or the Congress, is forced to take some action. A famous example is that of Rosa Parks, an African-American woman, who was arrested in 1955 for refusing to take a seat in the back of a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. This con¬ frontation sparked the modern civil rights movement. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., would later use the tactics of nonviolent confrontation against southern segregational policies to arouse sympathy and support in the rest of the nation; this later led to the passage of landmark civil rights legislation in Congress. When these nonviolent demonstrators were met with violence from supporters of segre¬ gation, it was all the better in terms of shifting public opinion, because it made better TV and thus ensured a bigger audience for the message of the cause. Images of peaceful protesters being attacked by angry mobs helped to bring many Americans, previously indifferent to cruelties of segregation, to the realization that change was necessary. Although the contrast of peaceful demonstrators and violent mobs proved beneficial in pushing the issue of civil rights onto the national agenda, violence itself can also be quite powerful in drawing the attention of the media. Starting in the 1980s, pro-life (meaning antiabortion) groups used demonstrations in front of medical offices that were providing abortion services in order to arouse the national consciousness about this issue. These protests often became sponta¬ neously violent and thus made for better TV. The lesson is clear. “Nonviolent” demonstrators that turn violent or at least contentious once the TV news cameras arrive are more likely to get on the six o’clock news. These approaches to placing issues on the public policy agenda are called pseudoevents by historian Daniel Boorstin, because they are “nonspontaneous, planted, or manufactured ‘news,’ whose main purpose is to gain publicity for the person or cause which arranged the ‘event.’”

58

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

Issue is identified by citizen groups or a public policy entrepreneur.

Through publicity (press releases, demonstrations, violence, etc.), the issue is exposed to a larger

audience.

Because of all the “noise" created by its supporters, formal decision makers are “forced" to consider the issue.

Fig u re 3.3 The Agenda-Setting Process

'

r;

Agenda setting, which is usually confined to professional politicians, is a game that anybody can play. A federal judge could rule that a state prison is unconstitu¬ tionally overcrowded and thus force the state’s legislature to deal with the issue by appropriating funds for new prisons. A citizens’ group could grow so excited about an issue that they organize to gather enough signatures of registered voters to put the issue as a proposition on the ballot of the next election. A public interest law firm could challenge the legality of an agency’s action and force the courts to ascer¬ tain its constitutionality. Or an interest group could get thousands of its members to write (or e-mail) letters to their legislative representatives demanding action on a controversy. Although there are only a few places such as a legislature, court, or regulatory commission where agendas can be formally enacted, there are infinite numbers of sources from which agenda items spring. And like hope, they spring eternal.

—

—

The Role of Public Policy Entrepreneurs There are basically two kinds of public policy leaders. First, those outside of government who use whatever tools they can muster publicity via demonstrations, campaign contributions or bribes, public interest lawsuits, and that traditional

—

public interest law That portion of a legal practice devoted to broad societal interests rather than to the problems of individual clients. A public interest law firm provides services to advance or protect important public interests (e.g., the environment or freedom-of-information issues) in cases that are not economically feasible or desirable for private law firms.

Agenda Serting

59

i-

:v;

ffl

m

tm* Mm ns mm E.;

mm

*k mM

'

"i

»

J

mtH

iragfe

[>ÿ*

JB

Si!

[

j

y

*

:P.-i

~

v* '.> «

.-*

Agenda building on the march. This photograph, taken on August 29, 1963, shows Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (seventh from right), leading demonstrators through the streets of Washington, D.C., on their way to the Lincoln Memorial. There, King would give his famous "I Have a Dream" speech. Demonstrations like this in dozens of major cities during the early 1960s expanded the national consciousness on civil rights issues and led directly to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. At the far right front is A. Philip Randolph (1889-1979), the march director. By threatening just such a march in 1941, he (with the help of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, the First Lady) effectively "blackmailed" President Franklin D. Roosevelt into issuing Executive Order 8802, which required defense contractors not to discriminate against workers on the basis of race, creed, or national origin. The president was fearful that a mass march of " Negroes" into what was then very much a southern city would lead to extensive rioting and only create difficulties for him in dealing with powerful southerners in Congress. When Randolph finally led his march in 1963, it was both peaceful and integrated.

—

favorite, violence to get their issues on the agendas of policymakers. They can come from seemingly nowhere, such as the women who founded Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), to reform state laws regarding driving under the influence (DUI). Or they can use an established celebrity to lobby for a cause. Examples include actor Charlton Heston, who became president of the National Rifle Association to further Second Amendment rights, and a large number of fellow actors who lend their names to issues. These have included Harrison Ford (environ¬ mental policies), Danny Glover (workers’ rights), Christopher Reeve (medical research), and Martin Sheen (the homeless). And was there ever an actor who got more mileage out of her celebrity than Jane Fonda? At the height of the Vietnam

60

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

War, she traveled to the enemy capitol of Hanoi to advocate an end to the war. This made her a heroine to some in the antiwar movement and, to many others, a traitor who gave “aid and comfort” to the enemy. The second kind of public policy leaders are those inside the government. They can be in any branch (legislative, executive, or judicial) and at any level (federal, state, or local). Because of the risks they take with their careers, they are known as public policy entrepreneurs. In the ideal capitalistic system of free enterprise, an entrepreneur is the person who organizes the traditional factors of production (land, labor, and capital) to produce goods and services to sell at a profit. Ever optimistic, entrepreneurs hope for riches by using their organizational and managerial skills. In a parallel sense, public policy entrepreneurs hope to enrich society by using their organizational, managerial, and political skills to effect a change in public policy sometimes for the good of all; but alas, often for just a special interest group. A public policy entrepreneur is a political actor who takes an issue and runs with it. Thus a senator might make a particular issue his or her own by sheer force of expertise which, if respected, “forces” colleagues into cue taking on the matter. Or a legislative staff member might become such an expert on an issue that he or she can heavily influence legislation dealing with it. Thus a public policy entrepreneur can be anyone in the political environment whose expertise and actions can affect an issue. Three “fathers” will serve as examples of public policy entrepreneurs who, as unelected government executives, created, radically altered, and expanded a public organization in order to lead it on to significant accomplishment. Admiral Hyman Rickover (1900-1986), is considered the father of nuclear power. Building on the scientific discoveries of the Manhattan Project, he was the guiding force in creating both the first nuclear-powered navy ships and the first civilian nuclear power plants for generating electricity. He led the team that launched the Nautilus, the first nuclear-powered submarine, in 1955. He then dominated the nuclear navy until he was forced to retire in 1982 after having served for 63 years, longer than any other officer in the history of the U.S. Navy. Robert Moses (1881-1981) was the New York State and New York City official who had great influence on the physical development of modern New York City and its environs. As the father of the modern public authority, Moses is often used as an example of the archetypal bureaucratic entrepreneur because he was able to obtain so much power while serving in such relatively “small” offices. Finally, there is J. Edgar Hoover (1895-1972), the creator of the modern Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). After the FBI was originally set up in 1908, its operations became politicized and corrupted. Therefore Hoover was appointed

—

—

cue taking What a member of Congress does when he or she bases a vote on the perceived or actual opinion of an influential colleague or group. Manhattan Project The federally financed U.S. research project during World War II that resulted in the development of the atomic bomb the first major federal government involvement with science. public authority A government corporation with powers so similar to those of a business corporation that it is able to complete major government projects such as bridges and tunnels with minimal

—

political interference.

Agenda Setting

61

IN THE NEWS Cindy Sheehan as Public Policy Entrepreneur Cindy Sheehan is the mother of Casey Sheehan, a U.S. Army soldier who was killed in action in Baghdad during 2004. Her grief motivated her to oppose the policies of the Bush Administration in Iraq. Her success in bringing attention to her opposition and thereby expanding that opposition makes her a public policy entrepreneur. Sheehan, along with a group of families who had also lost sons in Iraq, met with President Bush a few months after her son's death. The president has often had such private meetings to help the bereaved cope with their loss and to thank them for their sacrifice. In early 2005 Sheehan became a founding member of Gold Star Families for Peace, an organization created to help the families of fallen soldiers and to advocate an end to the war. Sheehan first gained national attention in 2005 when she travelled to President Bush's ranch outside of Crawford, Texas, and demanded that he see her, again, to discuss the war. Denied an audience, she then camped out on the road outside the entrance to the ranch. This soon became a month-long media circus and catapulted Sheehan into the leadership of the anti-war movement. She has since used her newfound notoriety to make her case against the war in a wide variety of other public forums. While she became a policy entrepreneur about the war, she never did get to meet President Bush again.

director in 1924 with a mandate to dean house. He installed a merit system, radi¬ cally altered the organizational culture, and widely publicized his national crusade against crime. The FBI agent became a national symbol of incorruptible law enforce¬ ment. But toward the end of his reign, Hoover’s reputation and that of the FBI were hurt when a variety of scandals came to light about illegal wiretapping, burglaries, and gross violations of the civil rights of citizens. What all three of these men have in common is that their leadership their entrepreneurship— made an enormous difference. Sure, there would have eventually been nuclear power for ships and electric power, but years later. New York City would still have thrived, but with fewer or a different set of bridges, highways, and mass transit facilities. And the FBI would, while lacking Hoover’s flaws, also have gone on without Hoover’s genius for transformational leadership and publicity. Whereas these three have lasting reputations, there are thousands more who have done similar things on a smaller scale. And no doubt many of them would have been as effective as our “big three” if they had had the same opportunity. Entrepreneurial ability is like heroism in that it is widely distributed in any given population but shows itself only when circumstances warrant. Remember that prior

—

organizational culture The patterns of fundamental beliefs and attitudes that determine members’ behaviors in and around the organization, persists over extended periods of time, and pervades all elements of the organization (albeit to different extents and with varying intensity). transformational leadership The ability to change an imbedded organizational culture by creating a new vision for the organization and marshaling the appropriate support to make that vision the new reality.

62

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System to World War II, Dwight D. Eisenhower had resigned himself to retiring as a lieu¬ tenant colonel. History would have never heard of him. It was the war that called

forth his leadership abilities and that of thousands of others. But the ability was always there, waiting for the call.

The Issue-Attention Cycle The issue-attention cycle, a model developed by Anthony Downs, attempts to explain how many policy problems evolve on the political agenda. The cycle is premised on the notion that the public’s attention rarely remains focused on any one issue regardless of the objective nature of the problem. The cycle consists of five steps: 1. The preproblem stage (An undesirable social condition exists, but it has not captured public attention.) 2. Alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm (A dramatic event catalyzes the public attention, accompanied by an enthusiasm to solve the problem.) 3. Recognition of the cost of change (The public gradually realizes the difficulty of implementing meaningful change.) 4. Decline of public interest (People become discouraged or bored or a new issue claims attention.) 5. The postproblem stage (Although the issue has not been solved, it has been dropped from the nation’s agenda.) ; .

According to John Kingdon: “If Anthony Downs is right, problems often fade from public view because a short period of awareness and optimism gives way to a realization of the financial and social costs of action. As people become impressed with the sacrifices, dislocations, and costs to be borne, they lose their enthusiasm for addressing the problem.” For example, during the first Clinton administration, there was initially great enthusiasm and support for a major reform in the nation’s systems of medical insurance. But as increasing attention was brought to the financial costs and difficulties of implementation, the issue faded from view both political leaders and the public lost enthusiasm for dealing with what remains a major problem, at least for those without medical insurance.

—

Decision Making Public policymaking is the totality of the decisional processes by which a govern¬ ment decides to deal or not to deal with a particular problem or concern. It is a never-ending process. Nineteenth-century British statesman Lord Salisbury Anthony Downs (1930- ) The economist and policy analyst who is generally credited with establishing the intellectual framework for public choice economics in his An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957). His classic book on bureaucracy, Inside Bureaucracy (1967), sought to justify bureaucratic government on economic grounds and to develop laws and propositions that would aid in predict¬ ing the behavior of bureaus and bureaucrats.

Decision Making

63

(1830-1903) is usually credited with first remarking that “There is no such thing as a fixed policy, because policy like all organic entities is always in the making.” It is a truism in decision making that it is better to make a wrong decision once in a while than to be constantly indecisive. Many of Shakespeare’s characters grapple with indecisiveness to their detriment. It is Prince Hamlet who in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet (Act III, scene i) makes what has become literature’s definitive statement on indecisiveness:

To be, or not to be: that is the question; Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them?

Although poor Hamlet is the most famous indecisive character in fiction, he has had much company in real life generals who could not decide to attack the enemy, politicians who could not decide whether to run for a higher office, and managers who agonize over whom to promote or what new product to initiate. While they may not, as Hamlet did, die in the fifth act, their organizations are often fatally flawed.

—

Rational Decision Making There are two distinct and opposite theories seeking to explain the mechanisms that produce policy decisions or nondecisions. The first might be called the rational decision-making approach and is derived from microeconomic approaches to the study of human behavior. In this tradition Mary M. Timney offers the five signifi¬ cant phases for making a scientific decision: 1. Define the problem to be solved. Limit it to its essential parts and describe the

relationships of these parts to each other. 2. Gather all the facts. Facts should be obtained in an objective (scientific) manner. Values should be excluded from the decision framework as they cannot be quantified or measured scientifically. 3. Construct alternative solutions. Using the facts, alternative methods for solving the problem are designed. 4. Scientifically analyze alternatives. Using a scientific process, usually incorporating a mathematical tool, analyze the alternatives to measure their worth for solving the problem. 5. Select the best alternative. The analysis provides a ranking of alternatives according to scientific measures and permits the decision maker to make the best rational choice.

microeconomics The study of the behavior of individuals and firms within an economic system as opposed to the study of a total economy and its aggregate performance.

64

PARTI

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

Presidential Decision Making There has been a lot of talk lately about the burdens of the Presidency. Decisions that the President has to make often affect the lives of tens of millions of people around the world, but that does not mean that they should take longer to make. Some men can make decisions and some cannot. Some men fret and delay under criticism. I used to have a saying that applies here, and I note that some people have picked it up, “If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen." SOURCE: Harry S Truman, Mr. Citizen. New York: Random House. 1960.

Of course there is an immediate problem with this and every other such list. It is impossible to do. No matter how rational we would hope to be, there is no way anyone can gather all the facts and take into account every consideration. Therefore, decision makers exercise what Herbert Simon called “bounded rationality.” The “bounds” are what people put on their decisions. Simon asserts that “It is impossible for the behavior of a single, isolated individual to reach any high degree of rationality. The number of alternatives he must explore is so great, the information he would need to evaluate them so vast, that even an approximation to objective rationality is hard to conceive.” Consequently, humans make decisions on satisfactory as opposed to optimal informa¬ tion. Inventing a new word, Simon said that decision makers “satisfice” when they accept a satisfactory and sufficient amount of information upon which to base a decision. Thus in the real world we are forced to reject the “rational comprehensive” approach and “satisfice” rather than “maximize.”

Incrementalism A rejection of the rational approach was urged by Charles E. Lindblom, the leading proponent of the second major theory of policy decision making the incremental approach. In his most famous article, “The Science of Muddling Through,” Lindblom took a hard look at the rational models of the decisional processes of government. Like Simon, he rejected the notion that most decisions are made by rational (total information) processes. He saw policy decisions indeed, the whole policymaking process as dependent upon small incremental decisions that tend to be made in response to short-term political conditions. Lindblom’s thesis essentially held that decision making was controlled infinitely more by events and circumstances than by the will of those in policymaking positions. Disjointed incrementalism as a policy course was in reality the only truly feasible route, since incrementalism “concentrated the policymaker’s analysis on familiar, better-known experiences, sharply reduced the number of different alternative policies to be explored, and sharply reduced the number and complexity of factors to be analyzed.”

—

—

—

Herbert Simon (1916-2001) The organization theorist who was awarded the 1978 Nobel Prize for economics for his pioneering work in management decision making.

Decision Making

65

Incrementalism has been extraordinarily influential in thinking about budget policy. As a method of budget review, incrementalism focuses on the amount of increase or decrease in the budgets of existing programs. Incremental budgeting, which is often called traditional budgeting, is an opposing school of thought to more rational, systems-oriented approaches, such as zero-based budgeting. But this old approach nicely takes into account the inherently political nature of the budget process and so

Seven Reasons for Incrementalism Why is emphasis on alternatives closely related to existing reality an aid to rational calculation? First, the consequences of alternatives that bear a remote relation to existing reality are generally more difficult to predict. Second, . . . people cannot accurately foresee their own wants .... To be sure, they can exclude many unwanted alternatives without actually testing But it is much more difficult to know which of the remaining them alternatives is preferable .... Third, because an individual has many goals, some of which conflict with one another ... a marginal adjustment will bring about a gain in goal attainment. This is incrementalism in individual action, and the logic applies equally to social action. Fourth, incrementalism is an aid to verifying the results of one's choices. This is in keeping with the principle of isolating a single variable. Results after one has acted can be compared with conditions before the change, and the relation of the particular choice to the particular changes is more easily

....

determined. Fifth, incrementalism helps to insure control. Incremental change gives prescribed superiors an opportunity to issue rather detailed instructions or to check in detail the actions of their subordinates. As a general matter, the larger the increments of change, the more difficult it is for prescribed superiors to check on their subordinates or even to give instructions that any more than a

blank check. Sixth, incrementalism is reversible. When mistakes are made, they can more easily be repaired. Seventh, incrementalism permits both the survival and the continual alteration of the operating organization. The attempt to secure abrupt change by prescription usually fails because the operating organization, with its own codes and norms, resists sudden, large-scale change. SOURCE: Robert A. Dahl and Charles E. Lindblom, Politics, Economics and Welfare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1953.

zero-based budgeting A budgeting process that is, first and foremost, a rejection of the incremental decision-making mode! of budgeting. It demands a rejustification of the entire budget submission (from ground zero, hence its name), whereas incremental budgeting essentially respects the out¬ comes of previous budgetary decisions (collectively referred to as the budget base) and focuses examination on this margin of change from year to year.

66

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

will continue to be favored by legislative appropriations committees if not by budget theorists. As Aaron Wildavsky wrote in The Politics of the Budgetary Process (1964): “The largest determining factor of the size and content of this year’s budget is last year’s budget.” But Wildavsky’s work on incremental budgeting only confirms Lindblom’s influence. Wildavsky was one of Lindblom’s doctoral students at Yale.

Mixed Scanning The rational and incremental models, often viewed as two ends of a continuum, are useful intellectual tools for conceptualizing the decision-making process. There is even a “split the difference” compromise model that combines the two. Mixed scanning is the decision making model put forth by Amitai Etzioni that calls for seeking short-term solutions to problems by using both incrementalism and rational-comprehensive approaches to problem solving. For example, a foreign policy analyst responsible for reviewing political developments in Europe might superficially scan all recent develop¬ ments (the comprehensive approach) but focus only on those political problems that had changed since the last scanning (the incremental approach). In this way the analyst saves time by dealing in detail only with those situations that truly demand attention.

ALTERNATIVE Theories Rational Decision Making Versus Incremental Decision Making Rationalism All options and means are considered Decisions are the product of structured evaluations Major changes can be made on a regular basis Decisions tend to be made proactively Decisions should be removed from political pressures

Incrementalism Only a few options and means are considered Decisions are the product of negotiated settlements Changes are made gradually over time Decisions tend to be made reactively Political considerations are important in determining outcomes

The table above provides a number of the key characteristics associated with the rational and incremental approaches to decision making. While each approach certainly has its advantages and disadvantages, it is interesting to think about the circumstances in which each approach may be more beneficial. In particular, can you identify scenarios where either rationalism or incremental¬ ism would hold a clear advantage as a means of making a public policy decision?

Amitai Etzioni (1929- ) The sociologist whose early work on organization theory steered him toward analyses of international political integration and communitarianism.

Implementation

67

But in reality all these models are not much more than mind games for policy wonks. The real world of political executives and harried legislators is not an intellectual arena so much as it is a bare knuckles political arena. Decisions in the political arena are influenced far more by the perception of a situation, the psychological environment, than by any rational concept of objective reality, the operational environment. It is far more than the difference between a pessimist seeing a glass half empty while the optimist sees the same glass as half full. One actor in the decisional drama may view a program as absolutely essential for the national interest, while another is equally certain that it is nothing more than an example of petty bureaucrats wasting the taxpayers’ money. Policymakers bring two kinds of intelligence to bear on their thinking. First is their mental ability to cope with complicated problems. Second is the information they have with the issue at hand and the experience they have had with it. Both kinds of intelligence are then filtered through their ideological predispositions and personal biases before an attitude toward any given problem is set. Thus political decisions are seldom made on the objective merits of a case, because a case only has merit in the eyes of a political decision maker if he or she is ideologically and politically predis¬ posed to support it. At the end of the day the policy processes of government are not only about equity or justice but also fundamentally about power. Once power is exerted, once a law is enacted, once a program is created, however; these power brokers whether democrats or autocrats turn to their public administrators to make their wishes and their power a reality. Without the public administrators the policy implementors of the state to do their bidding, the power brokers are quite literally broke.

—

—

—

—

Implementation Implementation is the process of putting a government program into effect; it is the total process of translating a legal mandate, whether an executive order or an enacted statute, into appropriate program directives and structures that provide services or create goods. Implementation, the “doing” part of public administration, is an inherently political process. Architects often say that “God is in the details.” So is implementation. Its essence is in the details. A law is passed but the process of putting it into effect requires countless small decisions that necessarily alter it. Although implementation is obviously at the heart of public policy and its administration, it has only recently been self-consciously studied. The first major analysis of implementation as a new focus for public administration was Jeffrey Pressman and Aaron Wildavsky’s 1973 study of federal programs in the city of Oakland, California. The unabridged title of their work tells part of the story in itself: Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It’s Amazing That Federal Programs Work at All; This Being a policy wonk Someone who is a compulsive student of public policy analysis. “Wonk” is slang for a student who is a grind or a nerd. “Policy wonk” came to the fore of American politics during the 1992 presidential election when it was used to describe Governor William J. Clinton of Arkansas. power broker A person who controls a bloc of votes that can be delivered in exchange for a price.

68

PARTI

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

The Polis Model Policy analysts have long been critical of the "either/or" nature of the rational versus the incremental approaches to decision making. A model advocated by

Deborah Stone holds that the political community, the polis, is better able to deal with the ambiguity of less than perfect information— information often "spun" by "spin doctors"— than with the “look at hard facts" approach of the rational model. While rational analysis does not lend itself to the inconsisten cies of real life, the polis model assumes it. Stone's comparison of the two models is below. Note how the polis model is so much more congenial and digestible to the public.

Rational-Analytic Model

Polis Model

State goals/objectives explicitly and precisely.

State goals ambiguously and possibly keep some goals secret or hidden.

Adhere to the same goal throughout the analysis and decision-making process. Try to imagine and consider as many alternatives as possible. Define each alternative clearly as a distinct course of action. Evaluate the costs and benefits of each course of action as accurately and completely as possible. Choose the course of action that will maximize total welfare as defined by your objective

Be prepared to shift goals and redefine goals as the political situation dictates.

Keep undesirable alternatives off the agenda by not mentioning them,

Make your preferred alternative appear to be the only feasible or possible one, Focus on one part of the causal chain and ignore others that would require politically difficult or costly policy actions. Use rhetorical devices to blend alternatives; don't appear to make a clear decision that could trigger strong opposition. Select from the infinite range of consequences only those whose costs and benefits will make your preferred course of action look "best." Choose the course of action that hurts powerful constituents the least but portray your decision as creating maxi¬ mum social good for a broad public.

SOURCE: Table adapted from Deborah Stone, Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1997.

Implementation

69

of the Economic Development Administration as Told by Two Sympathetic Observers Who Seek to Build Morals on a Foundation of Ruined Hopes. What Pressman and Wildavsky related in their landmark book seems almost simplistii that policy planning and analysis were not taking into account the difficulties of execution or “implementation.” The goal of their book was to consider how a closer nexus between policy and implementation could be achieved. A direct result of this book was a spate of works explaining how policy analysis can accomplish this objective an objective, it is fair to say, that has yet to be comprehensively implemented.

Saga

—

Who Gets What Pressman and Wildavsky define implementation as “a process of interaction between the setting of goals and actions geared to achieving them” as well as “an ability to forge subsequent links in the causal chain so as to obtain the desired results.” This definition usefully calls attention to the interaction between setting goals and carrying them out. This helps clarify that implementation is political in a very fundamental sense in that the activities that go on under its banner of who gets what, when, and how from government. Like lawmakers, administrators and those with whom they interact during the implementation process exert power over program objectives and influence program inputs and outcomes. Implementation involves administrators, interest groups, and other actors with diverse values, mobilizing power resources, forming coalitions, consciously plotting strategies, and generally engaging in strategic behavior designed to ensure that their point of view prevails. The terrain may be different from that found in Congress or other legisla¬ tures, but the basic staples of the political process are very much present. Never forget that the goal of program implementation is necessarily the creation of the myriad details of everyday administrative life. Policy analyst Charles O. Jones maintains that implementation consists of “those activities directed toward putting a program into effect.” This involves the “translation of program language into acceptable and feasible directives” as well as creating appropriate organizational structures and routines. A major virtue of Jones’s definition is that it explicitly points to the role of routine and other aspects of organizational structure in imple¬ mentation. In order to conserve time and energy as well as to promote the equal treatment of clients, organizations develop standard operating procedures. These procedures plus other informal decision rules greatly simplify choices for adminis¬ trators. Decisions can be made almost without thinking. Any effort to comprehend how implementation processes affect program outcomes cannot, then, ignore the

who gets what This is the very definition of politics provided by the title of Harold Lasswell’s classic 1936 book, Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. standard operating procedure Instructions about how things are to be done under normal circumstances; orders that are continuously valid unless and until countermanded. decision rule Any directive established to make decisions in the face of uncertainty. For example, a payroll office might be given a decision rule to deduct one hour’s pay from an employee’s wages for each lateness that exceeds ten minutes but is less than one hour.

70

PARTI

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

collective impact of countless procedures and simple decision rules. Implementation is always a mix of the consciously strategic with the daily routine.

Evaluation Any evaluation is an assessment. A program evaluation is the systematic examination of activities undertaken by government to make a determination about their effects, both for the short term and the long range. Program evaluation is distinguished from management evaluation (also called organization evaluation) because the latter is limited to a program’s internal administrative procedures. While program evalua¬ tions use management and organizational data, the main thrust is necessarily on overall program objectives and impact. Thus a program evaluation is less concerned with the management of a police department than with that department’s overall effect on crime less concerned with a welfare agency’s internal administration than with its effectiveness in dealing with clients.

—

Efficiency and Effectiveness The concepts of efficiency and effectiveness are the standard criteria against which programs are pitted by evaluation. In addition, these concepts helped to forge a workable distinction between audits and evaluations. Audits, primarily financial accounting audits, were traditionally geared to control to ensure that every dime of public funds was accounted for and that every regulation complied with. This law-enforcement style of management is being increasingly displaced by program evaluation a far more comprehensive management tool. We still expect programs to be administered efficiently, just as we expect complete fiscal accountability for funds and receipts. But efficiency is not enough. A work unit could be terribly efficient while working toward the wrong goals. Because of this, evaluations, if they are themselves to be effective, must also deal with the questions of effectiveness and relevance. It is not unreasonable to demand that programs have an effect on problems, and the right problems at that. Simply put, the most basic objective of a program evaluation is to assay the impact of a program on its target problem. Program evaluations, while usually undertaken by the executive and legislative branches of government, are sometimes even done by the courts in response to petitions by client groups. While the three regular branches of government are heavily involved in evaluation, so too is the “fourth branch of government” the press. It conducts evaluations with every expose of a mismanaged agency. Many a

—

—

—

efficiency Competence as well as speed in performance. Americans have historically been suspicious of a too efficient government, feeling that a truly efficient administration of public affairs could eventually eat into political liberties. effectiveness The extent to which an organization accomplishes some predetermined goal or objective; more recently, the overall performance of an organization from the viewpoint of some strategic constituency. audit The final phase of the government budgetary process, which reviews the operations of an agency, especially its financial transactions, to determine whether the agency has spent its money in accordance with the law in the most efficient manner and with desired results.

Feedback

71

IN THE NEWS Scandal at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center All too often program evaluations come about not as part of the normal process of public administration, but as public scandals exposed by enterprising reporters. This was the case in February 2007 when the Washington Post published a series of articles that revealed that some wounded soldiers returning from Iraq for medical treatment were housed in facilities infested with mice and covered in mildew. It seemed all the worse because these facilities on the grounds of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center were only a few minute's drive from the White House. The Congress and the public were outraged. In short order both the general in charge of Walter Reed and the civilian secretary of the Army were removed from office. For the first time in a war lasting longer than American participation in World War II, a general lost his command for poor performance. While battlefield strategies and tactics are debatable, everybody instantly understood that there was no excuse for housing those honorably wounded in Iraq, many with missing arms and legs, in military slums in suburban Washington, D.C.

journalistic career has been made by breaking the “big story” of government ineptness and corruption. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the Washington Post reporters who exposed the Watergate scandal, are now the classic examples of intrepid journalists hot on the trail of public malfeasance. Not only did they get rich with a best-selling book ( All the President's Men) but leading movie stars (Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman) played them in the film of the same name. While different from the types of evaluations conducted by the government itself, journalistic examinations of public policies may serve as a key source of feedback for officials as they consider their next policy decisions.

Feedback The public policy cycle comes full circle when evaluative information creates new agenda items for subsequent decisions. This is called “feedback” because the new information feeds back into its original source. Note how everything about this cycle is affected by politics. This is because the whole process takes place in a polit¬ ical environment. Feedback is effective to the extent that it is noisy. The people who set the goals and make the decisions must hear it. Sometimes feedback is heard as a complaint about slow service or the poor quality of products. Sometimes it is the silent noise of the citizens voting to “throw the rascals out.” And sometimes it is an all too visible tragedy, as in the 1986 and 2003 space shuttle catastrophes. In both cases the earlier quiet voices of NASA underlings were not loud enough for top management to hear.

malfeasance The performance of a consciously unlawful act on the part of a public official.

72

PART I

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

But NASA managers at all levels were soon pushed out of their complacency by the public disasters that befell the shuttles Challenger and Columbia.

Summary The public policymaking system is different in every jurisdiction. Yet at the same time all policymaking systems share common elements that make up the never-ending public policymaking process. Agenda setting is that part of the process by which ideas or issues bubble up through the various political channels to wind up for consideration by a political institution such as a legislature or court. These institutional decisional processes then decide whether a government will or will not deal with a particular problem or concern. There are two main theories

Kr

•

seeking to explain the mechanisms that produce policy decisions or nondecisions. The first is the rational decision-making approach, which seeks virtually total information before a decision is made; the second, incrementalism, sees the policy¬ making process as dependent upon small incremental decisions made in response to short-term political considerations. Implementation is that part of the policymaking process that puts a government program into effect; it is the total process of translating a legal mandate, whether an executive order or an enacted statute, into appropriate program directives and structures that provide services or create goods. Program evaluation is the systematic examination of activities undertaken by government to make a determination about their effects, both for the short term and the long range. Feedback then completes the public policy cycle when evaluative information creates new agenda items for subsequent decisions.

Key Concepts agenda setting The process by which ideas or issues bubble up through the various political channels to wind up for consideration by a political institution such as a legislature or court. bounded rationality Herbert Simon’s term for the “bounds” that people put on their deci¬ sions. Because truly rational research on any problem can never be complete, humans make decisions on satisfactory as opposed to optimal information. dosed system Any system that does not interact with its environment. cybernetic Self-regulating biological, social, or technological systems that can identify problems, do something about them, and then receive feedback to adjust themselves automatically.

implementation The “doing” part of public administration; an inherently political process. incrementalism The view, associated with Charles E. Lindblom, that most public policy decisions are not made by rational (total information) processes but are dependent upon small incremental decisions that tend to be made in response to short-term political conditions. issue-attention cycle A model developed by Anthony Downs that attempts to explain how many policy problems evolve on the political agenda. mixed scanning A decision-making model that uses both incrementalism and rationalcomprehensive approaches to problem solving.

!

Bibliography Any organism or organization that interacts with its environment, as opposed to a

open system

closed system, which does not. satisfice To accept a satisfactory and sufficient amount of information upon which to base a decision; a word invented by Herbert Simon to help explain his theory of bounded rationality.

A sociological approach by which societies, communities, and organiza¬ tions are viewed as systems. Their particular features are then explained in terms of their contributions (their functions) in maintaining the system.

structural-functionalism

73

The methodologically rigorous collection, manipulation, and evaluation of data on social units (as small as an organization or as large as a polity) to determine the best way to improve their functioning and to aid a decision maker in selecting a preferred choice among alternatives. systems theory The view of social organizations whether they are as small as a family or as large as a state as a complex set of dynamically intertwined and interconnected elements, including inputs, processes, outputs, feedback loops, and the environment in which it operates and with which it continuously interacts.

systems analysis

—

—

Review Questions 1. How do the theories of incrementalism and rationalism differ in their explanations of

decision making in government? 2. What are the key factors that help propel an issue onto the governmental agenda? 3. What are some of the major factors that affect the implementation of public policies in the United States? 4. How do efficiency and effectiveness differ as criteria for the evaluation of public policies? 5. How does the polis model bridge the difference between the rational and incremental theories of decision making?

Bibliography Boorstin, Daniel J. (1961). The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America. New York: Scribner. Cobb, Roger W., and Charles D. Elder (1972). Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building. Boston: Aliyn &c Bacon. Deutsch, Karl Wolfgang (1953). Nationalism and Social Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (1966). The Nerves of Government. New York: Free Press. Donne, John (1624). Devotions upon Emergent

-

Occasions, Meditation 17. Downs, Anthony (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper &: Row. (1967). Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown. -(1972). “Up and Down with Ecology The Issue-Attention Cycle.” Public Interest 28

-

—

(Summer).

Easton, David (1963). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Atherton.

Etzioni, Amitai (1967). “Mixed Scanning: A ‘Third’ Approach to Decision Making,” Public Administration Review (December). Galbraith, John Kenneth (1956). American Capitalism. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Gleick, James (1987). Chaos: The Making of a New Science. New York: Viking. Hyde, Albert C., and Jay M. Shafritz, eds. (1979). Program Evaluation in the Public Sector. New York: Praeger. Iyengar, Shanto, and Donald A. Kinder (1987). News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Jones, Charles O. (1977). An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, 2nd ed. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press. Kingdon, John W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, 2nd ed. New York: Longman. Lasswell, Harold. (1963). The Future of Political Science. New York: Atherton.

74

PARTI

Chapter 3 The Public Policymaking System

-(1936). Politics: Who Gets What When,

How. New York: Smith. Lindblom, Charles E. (1959). “The Science of Muddling Through.” Public Administration Review (Spring). (1980). “Still Muddling, Not Yet Through.” Public Administration Review (January-February). Luttwak, Edward N. (1979). “The American Style of Warfare.” Survival (March/April). Parsons, Talcott (1951). The Social System. New York: Free Press. Pressman, Jeffrey, and Aaron Wildavsky (1973). Implementation. Berkeley, CA: University of

-

California Press. Rivlin, Alice. (1971). Systematic Thinking for Social Action. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. Simon, Herbert A. (1947). Administrative Behavior. New York: Free Press. (1960). The New Science of Management Decision. New York: Harper & Row.

-

Steinbruner, John (1974). The Cybernetic Theory of Decision. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Suchman, Edward. (1967). Evaluative Research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Sun Tzu (1963). The Art of War, trans. Samuel B. Griffith. London: Oxford University Press. Timney, Mary (1998), “Decision Theory” International Encyclopedia of Public Policy and Administration, Jay M. Shafritz, ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Wiener, Norbert (1948). Cybernetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wildavsky, Aaron (1964). The Politics of the Budgetary Process Boston: Little, Brown. -(1972). “The Self-Evaluating Organization." Public Administration Review, 32 (SeptemberOctober).

Woodward, Bob, and Carl Bernstein (1974). All the President's Men. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Recommended Books Dye, Thomas R. (2001). Top-Down Policymaking New York: Chatham House. An elitist approach to public policymaking. Kaufman, Herbert. (1973). Administrative Feedback: Monitoring Subordinates’ Behavior. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. How leaders of public organizations monitor the performance of their subordinates. Kingdon, John W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

How issues surface in the political environment and get on the agenda of policymakers. Stone, Deborah (1988). Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: Norton. Argument for the polis model as an alternative to both the rational and incremental models of public policymaking.

Related Web Sites Aaron Wildavsky http://www. greenleaves.com/bookcat/ by.wildavskynaron_b.html > Amitai Etzioni

—

http://amitaietzioni.org/ Charles E. Lindblom http://www. cso.edu/ancien_site/lindblom_bio.htm

Harold D. Lasswell http://www-math.cc.utexas.edu/coc/joumalism/ SOURCE/j363/lasswell.htmJ

Herbert A. Simon http://www.psy.cmu.edu/psy/faculty/hsimon/ hsimon.html

Herman Kahn

http://www.alteich.com/links/kahn.htm Norbert Wiener http://www.isss.org/lumwiener.htm Talcott Parsons http://www,hritannica.coin/cb/article?eu=600396c tocid=0 William Shakespeare http://www-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/works.html

CHAPTER 4

Formal Policy Development ‘ÿ'A?

Chapter Outline Keynote: Why Did General MacArthur Take His Staff When He Ran Away to Australia? 76 The Nature of Staff

79

Help for the Line 80 Origin of the Modern Staff System 81 The Staff Concept 81 The Influence of the German General Staff 82

Presidential Staff 84 The Brownlow Committee 84 The White House Staff Structure 86 The Chief of Staff 88 Policy Advisors 89

Formal and Informal Advisors 90 Presidential and National Commissions 91 Cabinet Advisors 94

Think Tanks 95

Nonacademic Think Tanks 96 The RAND Corporation as an Exemplar 97 RAND Expands 99 Governmental Think Tanks 99 Think Tanks for Profit and Not 100 site National Organization for Women http://www.now.org/ Martin Luther King Jr., Research and Education Institute

—

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/ U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission http://www.eeoc.gov U.S. Supreme Court decisions since 1990 http://supct.law.comeli.edu/supct/index.html

CHAPTER 12

Foreign and Defense Policy A? Chapter Outline

Keynote: Thucydides —Pioneer of Political Realism 302

Defining Power 305

Elements of National Power 306 Balance-of-Power Doctrine 307 The Power to Persuade 308 The Two-Presidencies Thesis 309 The Unsettled and Unsettling Constitutional Doctrine on War Powers 310 The Decline of the Declaration of War 312 The War Powers Resolution 313

Defense Doctrines 316 How the Doctrine of Containment Won the Cold War 316

Leading Through the Hierarchy of Doctrine 320

Grand Strategic Level 320 Strategic Level 321 Operational Level 322 Tactical Level 324

Chapter Objectives To explain why Thucydides in ancient Greece is the originator of modern political realism and the balance-of-power doctrine (p. 302)

To define the underlying concepts of personal and national power (p. 305) To review the constitutional doctrine on war powers (p. 310) To show how nations often lead with doctrine especially for foreign policy and defense (p. 316) To review how a hierarchy of doctrine allows for leadership at the grand strategic, strategic, operational, and tactical levels (p. 320) 301

302

PART II

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy

—

Keynote: Thucydides Pioneer of Political Realism The History of the Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides, provides a full account of the war between the ancient Greek cities of Athens and Sparta. Here, Thucydides made one of the most famous observations on the cause of war. "What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta." It is possible to discern in this one sentence what has subsequently been termed the "security dilemma," a situation in which one state takes action to enhance its security only to have this action seen as threatening by other states. The result is that the other states engage in countermeasures, which intensify the first state's insecurity. The dilemma arises from the fact that because of this process, actions taken to enhance security can actually end up diminishing it. There is also a dilemma for the second state in that if it regards the action as defensive and takes no counters, it leaves itself vulnerable, whereas if it responds vigorously, it will exacerbate the first state's insecurity. Included in Thucydides' account of the war is a famous dialogue on power. The Melian dialogue, or debate, comprises the discussions between the Athenians and the Melians about whether the island of Melos should surrender to the obviously superior Athenian forces. Melos was a colony of Sparta and, because of this, had refused to join the Athenian empire. Before attacking Melos, the Athenians decided to offer the Melians the choice between war and surrender. Their arguments and the rejoinders provide a very rich debate for students of raw politics. It is full of ideas about the interactions of great and small powers and the role of power in political relations. During this debate, the Athenians made no pretense that their arguments were couched in terms of justice, contending instead that "when these matters are discussed by practical people, the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel, and in fact the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept." The reason the Athenians put forward for the conquest of Melos was one of self-interest and credibility. The argument was that if Athens were seen to be on friendly terms with Melos and failed to attack, this would be viewed by the other subject peoples of Athens as a sign of weakness. Against this line of reasoning, the Melians contended that military action against them would be counterproductive for Athens. An attack on Melos would frighten other neutral states, which would fear for their own safety in the future and would consequently combine against an apparent threat to themselves. In this argu¬ ment, it is possible to discern a sophisticated and subtle kind of balance-of-power Thucydides (455-400 B.C.) An Athenian historian and political analyst whose The Peloponnesian War remains one of the greatest studies of war and politics ever written. As a young man, Thucydides probably took part in the war between Athens and Sparta that began in 431 B.C. In 424, he was appointed general but failed to save the Athenian colony of Amphipolis from the Spartans. As a result of this failure, he was exiled for 20 years. It was during this period that he wrote the work for which he is still remembered. balance of power A principle of intemarional relations asserting that when any nation seeks to increase its military potential, neighboring or rival nations will take similar actions to maintain the military equilibrium.

— Pioneer of Political Realism

303

Keynote: Thucydides

thinking. The seme kind of thinking was also evident in the Melian argument that although Melos had little power, its inferiority would be offset by its alliance with Sparta. Against Athenian arguments that this alliance meant very little and that the Melians were "most completely deluded" in counting on the Spartans, the Melians claimed that it was not in Sparta's interest to betray them. This would only result in Sparta losing the confidence of its friends and would thus be beneficial to its enemies. The Athenians were not convinced, however, and faced the Melians with a choice. "You will see that there is nothing disgraceful in giving way to the greatest city in Hellas [Greeceji when she is offering you such reasonable terms alliance on a tribute¬ paying basis and liberty to enjoy your own property. And, when you are allowed to choose between war and safety, you will not be so insensitively arrogant as to make the wrong choice.” The Athenian delegation essentially argued that the safe rule was to "stand up to one's equals, to behave with deference toward one’s superiors, and to treat one's inferiors with moderation." Although this can be understood as an attempt to use coercion rather than resort to brute military force, it failed. The final outcome was that the Melians decided to fight. When reinforcements came from Athens, however, the Melians were forced to surrender unconditionally. The Athenians then killed all the men and sold the women and children into slavery. So much for depending on one's Spartan allies! Although the hope for balance of power didn't work for the Melians because the Spartans never showed up to tip the scales, the notion has, through the centuries, grown in acceptance and sophistication. Formally, a balance of power is the foreign policy adopted by rival states to prevent any one state or alliance from gaining a pre¬ ponderance of power in relation to rivals. Thus, a military balance (and therefore peace) is maintained. While Thucydides’ History contains the intellectual origins of balance-of-power doctrine, it is also the seminal work of political realism (see Chapter 2) or realpolitik the school of thought that examines political relations on the basis of might rather than right. Thucydides' concepts are, often applied to politics whether of the organizational or societal variety premised on material or practical factors rather than on theoretical or ethical considerations. This is the power politics of realism; an injunction not to allow wishful thinking or sentimentality to cloud one's judgment. It has also taken on more sinister overtones, particularly in modern usage. At its most moderate, "realpolitik" is used to describe an overly cynical approach one that allows little room for human altruism or self-restraint and that always seeks an ulterior motive behind another actor's statements or justifications. This is illustrated by the story of a diplomat who suddenly died during delicate negotiations. His rivals immediately asked themselves: "I wonder what he meant by that?" At its strongest, "realpolitik" suggests that no moral values should be allowed to affect the single-minded pursuit of one's own or one's country's self-interest. There is an absolute assumption that any opponent will certainly behave in the same way.

—

—

—

—

—

power politics A translation of the German word Machtpolitik, referring to an aggressive foreign policy that substitutes threats and the actual use of military power for international law; in shore, the notion that might makes right.

304

PART II

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy r.

-f , ; :

Y:"- -

The balance of power shifting. On a February 24, 1972, visit to the Great Wall of China, President Richard M. Nixon points out the many advantages of better relations between the United States and China. To Nixon's left is Mao Zedong (1893-1976), the Chinese leader who created the bad relations in the first place by installing Communist rule in 1949 and then sending a million Chinese “volunteers* to fight the Americans - during the Korean War. Nevertheless, Nixon, a vehement anticommunist, thought that a friendlier China would be a counterweight to a still nasty Soviet Union during the Cold War. So he sent National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger (1923- ) on several secret missions to discuss with the Chinese the desirability of a dramatic Nixon visit. Since the Chinese were also estranged from the Soviet Union, they were agreeable to Nixon's desire for a new diplomatic beginning especially because it would upset the Soviets. The man on Nixon's right is Secretary of State William P. Rogers (1 913-2001 ). He's wondering if this trip, skillfully arranged by Kissinger, will cost him his job. It does. Within a year, Rogers is forced out and Kissinger becomes the new secretary of state.

—

Through the centuries Thucydides has set the terms of debate for political power. His assertion that "the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept" has never gone out of date. Because his realist approach is value-neutral, he would have approved what playwright George Bernard Shaw said in his play Major Barbara (1905): "You cannot have power for good without having power for evil, too. Even mother's milk nourishes murderers as well as heroes."

For Discussion: Why is Thucydides still considered essential reading for all military officers and foreign policy analysts? How can concepts from Thucydides (such as realism and balance of power) be applied to the recent situation in Iraq?

Defining Power

305

Realpolitik in Action At a black-tie "roast" of New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley held in 1987, his colleague Albert Gore of Tennessee told the following tale: Invited to make a speech at a large banquet [Bradley] sat at the head table . . . waiting to make his address. When the waiter came around and put a pat of butter on his plate, Bradley stopped him. "Excuse me. Can I have two pats of butter?" "Sorry," the waiter said, "one pat to a person." "I think you don't know who I am," Bradley said. “I'm BILL BRADLEY, the Rhodes Scholar, professional basketball player, world champion. United States Senator." The waiter said, "Well, maybe you don't know who t am." "We|l, as a matter of fact I don't," Bradley said. "Who are you?" "I'm the guy," the waiter said, "who's in charge of the butter." In the world of power, there's always someone you have to deal with. SOURCE: Christopher Matthews (1988). Hardball, New York: Simon & Schuster.

Defining Power One sure thing about power is that we ail understand it. We learn about the some¬ times brutal power of the real as opposed to home world as soon as we go to school. Balance-of-power doctrine is subliminally absorbed as we watch some social cliques prevail over others and teenage boys combine into gangs to deter violence from other gangs. Arms races are even visible in some neighborhoods, as gangs first carry knives, then revolvers, and finally, assault rifles. So the newest thing about power is not our understanding of it but rather our intellectualizing about it. Power is the ability or the right to exercise authority over others. Traditionally, according to Chairman Mao (see Keynote photo), “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” More recently, power has been residing in the checkbooks of large corporations and powerful lobbyists. Those with traditional power or the power to make large campaign contributions get to make or heavily influence public policy. Whether they do it with a gun or a check is dependent upon local conditions. The world is organized into an immense hierarchy of power: political leaders have power over their followers, managers over their workers, and parents over their children. We are all subject to the powers that be, which force us to go to work or school and constrain us from straying too far from what is expected. Power is clearly visible in this hierarchy of control of stronger over weaker. John R. P. French and Bertram Raven suggest that there are five major bases of power:

—

—

1. Expert power, which is based on the perception that the leader possesses some special knowledge or expertise 2. Referent power, which is based on the follower’s liking, admiring, or identify¬ ing with the leader

306

PART II

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy

3. Reward power, which is based on the leader’s ability to mediate rewards for the follower 4. Legitimate power, which is based on the follower’s perception that the leader has the legitimate right or authority to exercise influence over him or her 5. Coercive power, which is based on the follower’s fear that noncompliance with the leader’s wishes will lead to punishment

Subsequent research on these power bases has indicated that the first two (expert and referent power) are more positively related to subordinate performance and satisfaction than the last three (reward, legitimate, and coercive power). The word “power” causes confusion partly because it refers to both capabilities and what is, in effect, influence. In the former sense, it refers to physical capabilities; in the latter, it is about the ability to use those capabilities to make another person or another state take action that would otherwise not be taken. In this second sense, it is relational. In French, there are two terms for power: pouvoir (power) and puissance (influence). Part of the key in conducting successful foreign policy is to turn one’s physical power into political influence.

Elements of National Power There is a loosely parallel hierarchy of power among nation states. Just like people, some states are more powerful than others, and it is this power that allows them to make policies for the international system. The elements of national power consist of all the means (military, economic, political, etc.) that are available for employ¬ ment in the pursuit of national objectives. Analysts distinguish between the tangible elements of national power, such as economic and military capabilities, and the intangibles, such as national morale and the level of education of the population. Over time, the importance of particular elements such as military capabilities or economic resources may change (very) considerably. With the end of the Cold War and the rise of Asia and western Europe as economic power blocs, it seemed that the world had entered an era in which the economic elements of national power were more important than the traditional military elements, at least until the war on terror began in earnest in 2001. An area of national power in which the United States enjoys a unique advantage is “soft power,” a term popularized by Joseph Nye in Bound to Lead (1990), which refers to relatively intangible forms of power such as an attractive ideology or culture that can provide a state with considerable influence and help to co-opt others. America’s soft power is highly visible all over the world. It exists wherever theaters show Hollywood movies, wherever people eat at overseas outlets of McDonald’s, and, of course, as often as people drink a Coke or Pepsi. Increasingly, it is evident when Germans and Mexicans, for example, shop at their local Wal-Mart. It can be bloc A combination of states that supports or opposes a given issue or interest. By their very nature all alliances are blocs. But the word is also used to describe voting coalitions in international organi¬ zations such as the United Nations and as a shorthand way of referring to segments of the world, such as the African bioc.

Defining Power

307

seen in the streets when children wear hats and t-shirts with the logos of American sports teams. But most importantly, it is reflected in the political attitudes of free

peoples everywhere.

Balance-of-Power Doctrine While the balance-of-power doctrine discussed in the Keynote is usually associated with international affairs, it is equally applicable domestically. When used in a domes¬ tic as opposed to an international context, balance-of-power thinking is often called countervailing theory the notion that when one group becomes too powerful in a pluralist society, another group or coalition springs up to counter or oppose its power. Domestically, the balance-of-power principle can be found in the checks and bal¬ ances of the U.S. Constitution. Constitutional devices prevent any power executive, legislative, or judicial within the nation from becoming absolute by being balanced against or checked by another source of power. First put forth by French philosopher Charles de Montesquieu (1689-1755) in his The Spirit of the Laws, this notion was further developed by Thomas Jefferson. In his Notes on the State of Virginia (1784), he asserted that “the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that none could transcend their legal limits, without being effectively checked and restrained by the others.” The U.S. Constitution is often described as a system of checks and balances. For example, it allows the president to check Congress by vetoing a bill; Congress to check the president by overriding a veto or refusing to ratify treaties or confirm nominees to federal office; and the Supreme Court to check either by declaring laws passed by Congress or actions taken by the president to be unconstitutional. During his fireside chat radio address of March 9, 1937, President Franklin D. Roosevelt described the American system of government as “a three horse team provided by the Constitution to the American people so that their field might be plowed. . . . Those who have

—

—

—

Philosophy

Doctrine

Policy

Maintain peace and stability

Balance of power

Adjust alliances

so that no state (or branch of government) becomes too powerful

Figure 12.1 Applying the Doctrinal Template to Balance-of- Power Doctrine

Fireside chats President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s radio talks to the nation. Part of the effectiveness of FDR’s fireside chats was their novelty; for the first time, the president could visit every home (via the radio) and in a very real sense “chat” with each citizen.

308

PART II

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy

James Madison on Angels and the Separation of Powers Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary, if angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A depen¬ dence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. SOURCE: James Madison, The Federalist, No. SI.

intimated that the President of the United States is trying to drive the team, overlook the simple fact that the President of the United States, as Chief Executive, is himself one of the horses.” As Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia told the Senate Judiciary Committee on August 5, 1986, during his confirmation hearings: What makes it [the U.S. Constitution] work, what assures that those words are not just hollow promises, is the structure of government that the original Constitution established, the checks and balances among the three branches of government so no one of them is able to run roughshod over the liberties of the people.

The Power

to

Persuade

Because of the balance of power, the presidency is a constitutionally weak office. Harvard political scientist Richard Neustadt (1919-2003) wrote the classic book, Presidential Power, published in 1960, on the fragility and elusiveness of presidential power. On the eve of John F. Kennedy’s taking office, it was greeted as a pioneering addition to our understanding of presidential power, as if a modern -day Machiavelli had written a new version of The Prince just for the American presidency. The exer¬ cise of power, Neustadt argued, is more than officeholding, role enactment, or hat wearing; it is the “power to persuade.” A president as mere officeholder is so weak that he or she must persuade significant numbers of other political actors, especially members of Congress, that what the White House wants of them matches their appraisal of what their own responsibilities require them to do in their own interest and on their own authority. Neustadt concludes that a president’s capacity to persuade will rest mightily on his bargaining skills, his professional reputation, and his popular prestige. The higher a president’s ratings are in the public opinion polls, the greater his reputation and concomitant ability to influence others—and vice versa. As a president’s ratings sink, so does his bargaining strength. This is why the last two years of the presidencies of

Defining Power

309

Richard

Nixon and Bill Clinton were effectively crippled. In each case a deprived of the traditionally high prestige of the office by president, scandal-racked to fully function as the persuader in chief. Can the unable was misdeeds, his own W. Bush in 2007? George President be same thing said of goes in public esteem, he can still issue orders president low a But no matter how and directives. However, it is often the case that a presidential order indicates a failure to persuade, a failure to adroitly exercise the primary presidential power. Neustadt offered three major examples of this: (1) when Truman had to fire General Douglas MacArthur for publicly contradicting the president on military policy during the Korean War, (2) when Trunlan had the government take over the steel mills to forestall a strike that would have interfered with Korean War armaments production, and (3) when Eisenhower had to send federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to racially integrate Central High School. In each case the president failed (1) to get MacArthur to shut up, (2) to have labor and management reach agreement, and (3) to get the governor of Arkansas to use local police to have integration proceed as a federal court had ordered. Their subsequent formal orders only highlighted their initial failure to persuade.

Presidents

The Two-Presidencies Thesis The Constitution, precedents, Supreme Court decisions, and legislative enactments all have led the president to assume a dominant role in foreign policy matters. This led Aaron Wildavsky to conclude that there are two presidencies a foreign policy

—

The Frustrations of Presidential Power In the early summer of 1952, before the heat of the campaign. President Truman used to contemplate the problems of the general-become President should Eisenhower win the forthcoming election. “He'll sit here," Truman would remark (tapping his desk for emphasis), "and he'll say, 'Do this! Do that!' And nothing will happen. Poor Ike it won’t be a bit like the Army. He'll find it very frustrating." Eisenhower evidently found it so. "In the face of the continuing dissidence and disunity, the President sometimes simply exploded with exasperation," wrote Robert Donovan in commenting on the early months of Eisenhower’s first term. “What was the use, he demanded to know, of his trying to lead the Republican Party. . . " And this reaction was not limited to early months alone or to his party only. "The President still feels," an Eisenhower aide remarked to me in 1958, "that when he's decided something, that ought to be the end of it . . . and when it bounces back undone or done wrong, he tends to react with shocked surprise."

—

SOURCE: Richard E. Neustadt (1990), Presidential Power and the Modern President. New York: The Free Press.

Aaron B. Wildavsky (1930-1993) The author of The Politics of the Budgetary Process (1964; 4th ed., 1984), which reveals the tactics public managers use to get their budgets passed and explains why rational attempts to reform the budgetary process have always failed.

310

PART II

Chapter 12 Foreign and Defense Policy

—

presidency and a domestic policy presidency and that since World War II, presi¬ dents have been more successful in foreign than in domestic policy. The logic behind Wildavsky’s hypothesis was his assumption that a number of events and conditions emanating from the development of the modem presidency which rested in considerable part on the rise of internationalism over isolationism since 1941 paved the way for increasing presidential leader¬ ship in foreign policy. To test his hypothesis, Wildavsky examined congressional action on presidential proposals from 1948 to 1964. For this period, Congress approved 58.5 percent of foreign policy bills, including 73.3 percent of defense policy bills and 70.8 percent of the treaties, general foreign relations, State Department, and foreign aid bills. During this same period, Congress approved only 40.2 percent of the president’s domestic policy proposals. Thus the twopresidencies thesis was confirmed. Wildavsky’s work has spawned a bevy of research articles, none of which has materially diminished his original thesis. Some of this research does not reflect Wildavsky’s neatly differentiated two presidencies because of an insurgent Congress’s challenges to the president for control of foreign policy in the after7 math of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal. Nevertheless, the president remains preeminent in foreign policy matters and this is nowhere more so than with war powers.

—

—

—

—

The Unsettled and Unsettling Constitutional Doctrine on War Powers On the surface it seems that there is a neat division of labor concerning the war powers of the United States: Congress declares it while the president wages it. But the reality is far more subtle. The U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8) unambiguously gives to Congress the authority “to declare war.” However, the president, as commander in chief, has implied powers to commit the military forces to action. Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution says that “the president shall be commander in chief of the army and the navy of the United States and of the militia of the several states when called into the actual service of the United States.” The last president to exercise his authority as commander in chief to literally command troops in the field was James Madison during the War of 1812. At Bladensburg, Maryland, the American forces, under the direct command of their president, met the British and were soundly defeated. The British then marched on Washington, D.C., to burn the White House, the Capitol, and most other public buildings. No subsequent president while in office has sought to lead men person¬ ally in battle.

isolationism The policy of curtailing as much as possible a nation’s international relations so one’s country can exist in peace and harmony by itself in the world.

311

The Unsettled and Unsettling Constitutional Doctrine on War Powers

J;

V.

:ÿ

*1

¥

tv.

7

A

>•/

t

JH-.-