HY 357 Lecture Notes - Lecture 56: Cato Institute, Brookings Institution, American Enterprise Institute
6 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Politics and Policymaking
It is impossible to separate policymaking from politics. Many groups with different interests and
their own agendas are involved in all stages of policymaking. A good example is the 1996
welfare reform legislation. Passed by the Republican-controlled Congress, the reform law
contains provisions for cuts in direct federal aid and new work requirements that troubled many
Democrats and organizations representing the poor. President Bill Clinton signed the bill after
some hesitation and then indicated that he would seek changes in the law during the next session
of Congress.
Fragmented policies
A strong case can be made that the very nature of the U.S. system of government
encourages fragmented policies. The separation of powers, checks and balances, and
federalism mean there is no one institution responsible for making policy. To illustrate,
the federal government has a perspective on immigration reform much different from
that of the governors of states mandated to provide services to a growing number of
illegal immigrants. Interest groups with opposing points of view on an issue also come
into the mix.
The lack of coordination among agencies responsible for implementing policy also
contributes to fragmentation. For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and
the Coast Guard, as well as the local and state police, have responsibilities in
preventing illegal drugs from entering the country. Not only do their jurisdictions overlap,
but each is determined to protect its turf. Anyone who has seen how local law
enforcement officers and the "feds" are portrayed on television police shows has an
inkling of the problem. The 9/11 Commission concluded that the lack of coordination
and information sharing among intelligence and other federal agencies was a factor in
the success of the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Politics in Congress
The formulations and adoption of public policy can be either hampered or advanced by
the way things are done in Congress. Bills for the construction of major public works
that benefit a particular district or state, such as bridges, dams, and highways or the
establishment of military bases, are known as pork-barrel legislation. While such
programs do create jobs, they may run counter to a broader policy direction, such as the
need to cut the federal budget deficit.
Often, representatives from different states and even different parties may agree to
support each other's legislative agendas. A New York congressman may support a
water project in Arizona in return for his Arizona colleague's vote on a mass transit
appropriation for the Northeast. This practice is known as logrolling, and it is a way of
building coalitions that may back a new policy direction.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
It is impossible to separate policymaking from politics. Many groups with different interests and their own agendas are involved in all stages of policymaking. A good example is the 1996 welfare reform legislation. Passed by the republican-controlled congress, the reform law contains provisions for cuts in direct federal aid and new work requirements that troubled many. President bill clinton signed the bill after some hesitation and then indicated that he would seek changes in the law during the next session of congress. A strong case can be made that the very nature of the u. s. system of government encourages fragmented policies. The separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism mean there is no one institution responsible for making policy. To illustrate, the federal government has a perspective on immigration reform much different from that of the governors of states mandated to provide services to a growing number of illegal immigrants.
