Unit 6 Review PowerPoint Public Policy

The Policymaking Process Every policy has a unique history, but each generally goes through five basic steps. Agenda Setting Policy Formulation Policy Adoption Policy Implementation Policy Evaluation Public Policy

Setting the Agenda “Agenda building may occur as the result of a crisis, a technological change, a mass media campaign, as well as through the efforts of a strong political personality or lobby groups.” Most important decision affecting policy-making is deciding what belongs on the political agenda 1. Shared beliefs determine what is legitimate. 2. Legitimacy affect by a. Shared political values b. Weight of custom and tradition c. Impact of events (war, depressions) d. Changes in ways political elites think about politics Public Policy

Making a Decision Nature of issue 1. Affects politicking 2. Affects intensity of political conflict Costs and benefits of proposed policy a way to understand how issue affects political power Cost: any burden, monetary or nonmonetary Benefit: any satisfaction, monetary or nonmonetary 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 Public Policy

Types of Policy Politics: Breakdown Costs Benefits Majoritarian Large group Interest Group Small Group Small group Client Entrepreneurial Public Policy

The politics of deficit spending The general landscape Deficit: government spending over and above the amount taken in by taxes National debt: combined amount of all deficits Interest on the debt: typically the third highest item in that national budget Gross domestic product (GDP): proportion in relation to debt about the same as 1964 Strategy: get rid of the annual deficit to make progress on the overall debt By raising taxes (political liberals) By cutting spending (political conservatives) Economic Policy

The Politics of Taxing and Spending Inconsistency in what people want out of majoritarian politics No tax increases No government deficit Continued (or higher) government spending Difficult to make meaningful tax cuts Politicians get reelected by spending money Strategy: raise taxes on “other people” Economic Policy

Economic Theories & Political Needs Monetarism – inflation occurs when there is too much money chasing too few goods; advocates increase in money supply about equal to economic growth Keynesianism – government should create right level of demand Planning – free market too undependable to ensure economic efficiency; therefore government should control it Supply-side tax cuts – need for less government interference and lower taxes Economic Policy

Fiscal Policy Managing the economy by the use of tax and spending laws. Where the Money Comes From Federal Income Taxes Social Insurance Taxes Borrowing Other taxes Where the Money Goes Entitlement programs National defense National debt Economic Policy

Monetary Policy Managing the economy by altering the supply of money and interest rates Monetary policy is the government’s control of the money supply Too much money in system leads to inflation (devaluation of dollar) Too little money in circulation leads to deflation Economic Policy

The Machinery of Economic Policy Making Fragmented policymaking: not under president’s full control 3 people of special importance (The Troika): Chairman of Council of Economic Advisers Forecast trends, analyze issues, submit congressional report Director of Office of Management and Budget Analyzes and estimates what departments will spend Secretary of Treasury Estimates US revenue from taxes Usually closely tied to business/finance world Economic Policy

The Machinery of Economic Policy Making The Fed (Federal Reserve Board) 7 members, Pres appointed-Senate confirmed, 14yr terms Regulates the supply of money and interest rates (=monetary policy) Independent of Pres and Congress (though sometimes questionable) Congress Most important! Creates the nation’s tax and spending laws (= fiscal policy) Economic Policy

Social Welfare in the United States 1. Who deserves to benefit? Insistence that it be only those who cannot help themselves Slow, steady change in deserving/undeserving line Alterative view: fair share of national income; government redistribute money Preference to give services, not money, to help deserving poor Social Policy

3. Influence of federalism Federal involvement “illegal” until 1930s Experiments by state governments Argues against federal involvement because state already providing welfare Lobbied for federal involvement to help states Social Policy

Majoritarian welfare programs Social Security Act of 1935 Great Depression of 1929: local relief overwhelmed Elections of 1932: Democrats & FDR swept in Legal and political roadblocks; was direct welfare unconstitutional? Cabinet Committee’s two-part plan “Insurance” for unemployed and elderly “Assistance” for dependent children, blind, aged Federally funded, state-administered program under means test Social Policy

Majoritarian welfare programs Medicare Act of 1965 Medical benefits omitted in 1935: controversial but done to ensure passage Opponents: AMA House Ways and Means Committee under Wilbur Mills 1964 elections: Democrats’ big majority altered Ways and Means Objections anticipated in plan Application only to aged, not everybody Only hospital, not doctors’, bills covered Broadened by Ways and Means to include Medicaid for poor; pay doctors’ bills for elderly Social Policy

Reforming majoritarian welfare programs Social Security Not enough people paying into Social Security Three solutions: Raise the retirement age to seventy, freeze the size of retirement benefits, raise Social Security taxes Privatize Social Security Combine first two methods and allow individual investment in mutual funds Social Policy

Reforming majoritarian welfare programs Medicare Problems: huge costs and inefficient Possible solutions Get rid of Medicare and have doctors and hospitals work for government Elderly take Medicare money and buy health insurance Delaying the inevitable Clinton and surplus, new benefits Bush and attempts at new health care measures – Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 Social Policy

Pros and Cons: Majoritarian politics Programs with widely distributed benefits & costs Beneficiaries must believe they will come out ahead Political elites must believe in legitimacy of program Social Security & Medicare looked like “free lunch” Debate over legitimacy: Social Security (1935) a. Constitution did not authorize federal welfare (conservatives) But benefits were not really a federal expenditure (liberals) Good politics unless cost to voters exceeds benefits Social Policy

Pros and Cons: Client politics Programs pass if cost to public not perceived as great and client considered deserving Americans believe today that able-bodied people should work for welfare benefits Americans prefer service strategy to income strategy Charles Murray: high welfare benefits made some young people go on welfare rather than seek jobs No direct evidence supports Murray Social Policy

Client welfare programs: AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) Scarcely noticed part of Social Security Act Federal government permitted state to Define need Set benefit levels Administer program Federal government increased rules of operation New programs (e.g., Food Stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, free school meals) Abolished and replaced by TANF. Social Policy

Kinds of Foreign Policy Majoritarian Politics- widespread benefits and costs (Pres has most power, public opinion supports but doesn’t guide) Ex. Wars, military alliances, nuclear test ban, Interest Group Politics-groups pitted against one another for benefits/costs (larger Congressional role) Ex. Tariffs: Japan vs. the Steel industry Client Politics- benefits to identifiable group w/o costs to any distinct group (Congress is central) Ex. Israel policy (may be changing!) Foreign and Military Policy

Constitutional/Legal Context Constitution creates “invitation to struggle” between President and Congress Pres Commander-in-Chief, Congress appropriates $ Pres appoints, Senate confirms Pres negotiates treaties, Senate ratifies Americans perceive President as being in charge, which history confirms Foreign and Military Policy

Checks on President’s Power Political rather than constitutional Congress controls the $$$ War Powers Act of 1973- restricts pres If Pres commits troops he must report it to Congress within 48 hours Only 60 day commitment w/o declaring war Previously, Congress could use legislative veto to bring troops home Has had very little influence, politically impossible (Congress will of course support successful military action) Foreign and Military Policy

Effects of War Powers Act Congress rarely invokes it Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton all sent troops w/o authorization Politically impossible Congress wouldn’t challenge successful military action (even Vietnam) Constitutionality is questionable (so they don’t push it) Foreign and Military Policy

Machinery of Foreign Policy Post-WWII major power status consequences: President more involved in foreign affairs (top of agenda) More agencies shape foreign policy Too many and too big to really be coordinated (Sec. of State is only 1 person, agencies owe no loyalty to him) National Security Council created to coordinate Foreign and Military Policy

Backing the President Public tends to support the president during crisis (approval ratings go up!) Support does not decrease with casualties Body bag fallacy: soldiers come home in coffins Support for escalation and victory Most wars do have public opposition Highest among Democrats, African Americans, and those with post-grad degrees *In sum: People are leery of wars until they start, then they support them and want to win. Foreign and Military Policy

4 Worldviews Isolationism: opposes involvement in world affairs Adopted after WWI after little accomplished Ended with Pearl Harbor Containment: (anti-appeasement) US should resist the expansion of aggressive nations Successful in that it didn’t harm US interests, proved welcome to allies, prevented military conquest Foreign and Military Policy

4 Worldviews Disengagement: (“Vietnam”) belief that US was harmed by its war with Vietnam(defeat and political disaster) so it should avoid similar events Crisis interpreted 3 ways: Correct worldview, but failed to try hard enough Correct worldview but applied in the wrong place Worldview itself was wrong Critics believed world view wrong (#3) and new one should be based on isolationism Foreign and Military Policy

4 Worldviews Human Rights: we should try to improve the lives of people in other countries (Kosovo viewed as similar to Nazi genocide) But what about Rwanda, China, USSR?? New Question post 9/11: should the US “go it alone” or build a coalition? Foreign and Military Policy

The Defense Budget Total Spending Very low spending in peacetime until 1950 Driven up by Containment policy for USSR Changes in spending tend to reflect changes in public opinion Debate once USSR fell: Liberals: cut defense, we aren’t world’s “police officer” Conservatives: some cuts ok, but world is still dangerous and we must be ready Saddam Hussein soon proved them right Involvement in war in Bosnia proved military had been cut too much…Clinton increased spending Foreign and Military Policy

Structure of Defense Decision Making National Security Act of 1947- created Dept of Defense Headed by Sec. of Defense (must be civilian)- command authority over defense on behalf of pres Sec. of Army, Air Force, Navy, (also civilians) manage daily functions Joint Chiefs of Staff (military) Branches of military kept separate- Why? Fear if unified they would become too powerful Desire of services to preserve autonomy Inter-service rivalries intended by Congress to increase info Foreign and Military Policy

Structure of Defense Decision Making Joint Chiefs of Staff- committee of heads of 4 military branches, chairman, vice chair, and military officers appointed by the pres./confirmed by Senate No command authority over troops Key to national defense planning Since 1986 reorganization, Chairman of JCS has been president’s principal military advisor Chain of Command: Pres Sec. Defense various specified commands (these can go through JCS, but they have no command power) Civilians head the military to protect from concentration of power Foreign and Military Policy

Environmental Policy Why Controversial?? Creates winners and losers Interest groups or average citizens Losers must pay the costs but receive no benefit Scientific uncertainty Takes the form of entrepreneurial politics Emotional appeals lead to distorted priorities Decisions affect federal and international relations States can pass own laws US rarely signs international environ. treaties Environmental Policy

All four points of public policy found in Environmental Politics Costs Benefits Majoritarian Large group Interest Group Small Group Small group Client Entrepreneurial Entrepreneurial role is in most environmental issues. Problems can be portrayed in life threatening terms. Goals can be related to the “good life.” Costs can be minimized, deferred, or placed on a small group. Entrepreneurial hard to adopt! (society benefits, small group pays!) However, examples of past policy link to all four areas. Environmental Policy

Majoritarian Politics Clean Air Act 1970- tough restrictions on pollutants from automobiles Started as entrepreneurial- public w/ media support demanded changes Small provision of law said states would have to restrict use of cars if pollution problem persisted Huge popular opposition, efforts failed (Congress and EPA backed down) Consumers, auto industry, unions objected Loss of horsepower, competitiveness, jobs Clean Air Act revived in 1990 w/tougher restrictions, but a 20 year deadline Most current laws target particular industries Environmental Policy

Environmental Uncertainties What is the problem? –often hard to see Support goes to most current/popular problem, Congress and public, not the EPA, often decide What goals do we want to achieve? Must be realistic Weigh costs and benefits How do we achieve the goals? Command-and-control strategy: set rules, enforce them in court But often don’t know how to get the most environmental gain for the least cost Environmental Policy

Environmental Policy Incentives replace command-and-control rules Offsets: if you increase pollution in one way you must decrease it in another Bubble Standard: total amount of air pollution allowed from a given factory. Company can decide how to meet it Pollution allowances (or banks): if company comes in under the standard they can bank the leftover Results Less air pollution, probably less water pollution (harder to judge) Hazardous waste (Superfund sites) still a problem Environmental Policy

Good to Know Understand the current implications of policy initiatives…especially social. (will they be successful, last, etc) Understand the how and why economic policy is shaped by the president, Congress and the Fed. Understand the four different policy types and examples of how each policy arena uses the four types. (ex: Clean Air Act = Majoritarian)