The Policy-Making Process Chapter 17 AP United States Government and Politics

What is Public Policy?

Setting the Agenda Most important decision affecting policy-making is deciding what belongs on the political agenda Shared beliefs determine what is legitimate Legitimacy is affected by Shared political values Weight of custom and tradition Changes in way political elites think about politics

Setting the Agenda The legitimate scope of government action Always gets larger Changes in public attitudes Influence of events May be enlarged without public demand even when conditions improving Groups: a motivating force in adding new issues May be organized (corporations) or disorganized (urban minorities) May react to sense of relative deprivation -- people’s feeling that they are worse off than they expected to be Example: Riots in the 1960s May produce an expansion of government agenda Example: New commissions and laws May change the values and beliefs of others Example: White response to urban riots

Setting the Agenda Institutions a second force adding new issues Courts Make decisions that force action by other branches: school desegregation, abortion Change the political agenda Bureaucracy Source of political innovation: size and expertise Thinks up problems to solve Forms alliances with senators and their staffs

Setting the Agenda Senate Media Once a slow moving, status quo club Influx of liberal activist Senators in the 1960s Now -- contrary to the intent of the Framers -- a major source of change Media Help place issues on political agenda Publicize those issues raised by others, such as safety standards proposed by Senate

Setting the Agenda Action by the states Evolution of political agenda Sometimes laws are pioneered in states State attorneys general can file suits against businesses that result in settlements binding throughout the country Evolution of political agenda Changes in popular attitudes that result in gradual revision of the agenda Critical events, spurring rapid changes in attitudes Elite attitudes and government actions, occasioning volatile and interdependent change

Making a Decision Nature of issue Affects politicking Affects intensity of political conflict

Making a Decision Costs and benefits of proposed policy a way to understand how issue affects political power Cost: any burden, monetary or non-monetary Benefit: any satisfaction, monetary or non-monetary Two aspects of costs and benefits important: Perception affects politics People consider whether it is legitimate for a group to benefit Politics a process of settling disputes about who benefits and who ought to benefit People prefer programs that provide benefits at low cost Perceived distribution of costs and benefits shapes the kinds of political coalitions that form but not who wins

Majoritarian Politics: Distributed Benefits, Distributed Costs Gives benefits to large numbers Distributes costs to large numbers Initial debate in ideological or cost terms Example: Military budgets

Interest Group Politics: Concentrated Benefits, Concentrated Costs Gives benefits to relatively small group Costs imposed on another small group Debate carried on by interest groups Example: Labor unions versus business

Client Politics: Concentrated Benefits, Distributed Costs Relatively small group benefits; group has incentive to organize Costs distributed widely Most people unaware of costs pork barrel legislation logrolling

Entrepreneurial Politics: Distributed Benefits, Concentrated Costs Gives benefits to large group Costs imposed on small group Success may depend on people who work on behalf on unorganized majorities Legitimacy of client claims is important Example: the Superfund

The Case of Business Regulation The question of wealth and power One view: economic power dominates political power Another view: political power is a threat to a market economy Text cautious; weighs variables

The Case of Business Regulation: Majoritarian Politics Antitrust legislation in the 1890s Public indignation strong but unfocused Legislation vague; no specific enforcement agency Antitrust legislation in the twentieth century strengthened Presidents take initiative in encouraging enforcement Politicians, business leaders committed to firm antitrust policy Federal Trade Commission created in 1914 Enforcement determined primarily by ideology and personal convictions

The Case of Business Regulation: Interest Group Politics Labor-management conflict 1935: labor unions seek government protection for their rights: businesses oppose Unions win Wagner Act creates NLRB 1947: Taft-Hartley Act a victory for management 1959: Landrum-Griffin Act another victory for management

The Case of Business Regulation: Interest Group Politics Politics of the conflict Highly publicized struggle Winners and losers determined by partisan composition of Congress Between enactment of laws, conflict continues in NLRB Similar pattern found in Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 Reflects a labor victory Agency established

The Case of Business Regulation: Client Politics Agency capture likely Licensing of attorneys, barbers, and so on Prevents fraud, malpractice, and safety hazards Also restricts entry into occupation or profession; allows members to charge higher prices Little opposition since: People believe regulations protect them Costs are not obvious

The Case of Business Regulation: Client Politics Regulation of milk industry Regulation prevents price competition, keeping price up Public unaware of inflated prices Consumers have little incentive to organize Sugar quotas also benefit sugar producers Attempts to change regulations and cut subsidies and quotas 1996 bill replaced crop subsidies with direct cash payments Subsidies continued to increase 2002 law replaced 1996 law, and new subsidies were authorized Subsidies: the result of history and politics Client politics for “special interests” seems to be on decline Importance of appearing to be “deserving” Regulation can also serve to hurt a client (e.g., FCC and radio broadcasters/telephone companies

The Case of Business Regulation: Entrepreneurial Politics -- Relies on Entrepreneurs to Galvanize 1906: Pure Food and Drug Act protected customers 1960s and 1970s: large number of consumer and environmental protection statues passed Examples: Clean Air Act, Toxic Substance Control Act Policy entrepreneur usually associated with such measures Examples: Ralph Nader, Edmund Muskie Often assisted by crisis or scandal Debate becomes moralistic and extreme

The Case of Business Regulation: Entrepreneurial Politics -- Relies on Entrepreneurs to Galvanize Risk of such programs: agency may be “captured” by the regulated industry Newer agencies less vulnerable Standards specific, timetables strict Usually regulate many different industries; thus do not face unified opposition Their existence has strengthened public-interest lobbies Allies in the media may attack agencies with pro-business bias Public-interest groups can use courts to bring pressure on regulatory agencies

Perceptions, Beliefs, Interests, and Values Problem of definition Costs and benefits not completely defined in money terms Cost or benefit a matter of perception Political conflict largely a struggle to make one set of beliefs about costs and benefits prevail over another Types of arguments “Here-and-now”argument Cost argument Role of values Values: our conceptions of what is goof for our community or our country Emphasis on self-interest Ideas as decisive forces

Perceptions, Beliefs, Interests, and Values Deregulation Examples: airline fares, long-distance telephone rates, trucking A challenge to “iron triangles” and client politics Explanation: the power of ideas Idea: government regulation was bad Started with academic economists They were powerless but convinced politicians Politicians acted for different reasons Had support of regulatory agencies and consumers Industries being deregulated were unpopular

Perceptions, Beliefs, Interests, and Values Presidents since Ford have sought to review government regulation Many groups oppose deregulation Dispute focuses mostly on how deregulation occurs “Process regulation” can be good or bad The limit of ideas Some clients are just too powerful Examples: dairy farmers, agricultural supporters But the trend is toward weaker client politics