CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO

 

  PPA 210:

    Political Environment of Policy Making

 

      Spring, 2003

 

 

Professor Ted Lascher                                                Meeting time and place:

3035 Tahoe                                                                 Monday, 6-8:50, Brighton 113

278-4864 (office)                                                          

(530)758-5687 (home-                                                 Class office hours: Monday, 5-5:50

no calls after 9:00 p.m.)                                                and by appointment

tedl@csus.edu                                                         

 

 

OVERVIEW

 

One of the recurring themes in American history is the desire to remove politics (that great beast!) from policy making.  Fortunately or unfortunately, we live in the real world.  In that environment, politics matters.  Decision makers commonly hold different values and interests, and attempt to advance them through a variety of means (e.g., deployment of resources, advantageous issue framing, bargaining).  Outcomes frequently reflect participants' skills, clout, etc.  Persuasive arguments are also important, though commonly underestimated.  Additionally, the role of political entrepreneurs is especially critical.

 

This course asks students to embrace the notion that politics matters, and then go beyond that.  My aim is to help you diagnose the political factors that affect outcomes.  The ultimate goal is to improve your effectiveness.  At the same time, I intend that people appreciate the subtlety and importance of ethical obligations.

 

This course focuses mainly (although not exclusively) on the development stage of the policy process, and particularly efforts to secure enactment of legislation.  I find legislative battles especially useful for illustrating key analytical points.  However, students should remain aware that politics enters other forums and stages, including policy implementation.

 

 

 SPECIFIC LEARNING GOALS

 

At the end of PPA 210 it is expected that students will:

 

1. Appreciate the variety of political factors that influence whether policy  

    proposals are likely to be adopted;

2. Understand a useful way of thinking about how and why policies are adopted:      the Kingdon Amultiple streams@ model;

 

3. Understand the critical role of Apolicy entrepreneurs@ in policy development;

 

4. Understand how policy problems are identified and policies may be attached to     them.

 

5. Appreciate the role of the policy community in developing policy options;

 

6. Understand the pervasive nature of collective action problems and their impact     on political mobilization;

 

7. Understand different ways that political conflict may be resolved;

 

8. Understand the ethical subtleties of role obligations facing political

    entrepreneurs and other policy actors;

 

9. Be able to engage in more effective policy negotiations and deliberations than      would have been the case at the beginning of the course;

 

10. Be able to move effectively between abstract political science concepts and          concrete situations facing actual political actors; 

 

10. Better be able to write effective short memos and papers; and

 

11. Appreciate that constructive policy change is possible in possible to achieve        even in a highly political environment.

 

 

CONDUCT OF THE SEMINAR

 

The term "seminar" is accurate.  Conventional lectures will be limited and classes will be discussion oriented.  While I will guide the conversation, summarize points, and draw lessons, the bulk of class time will be devoted to exchange about course topics, in-class exercises, etc. 

 

 

Student participation is therefore not a luxury; it is essential to a successful course.  I expect that students will come to class consistently, be prepared to discuss the week's readings, and be prepared to accept special in-class assignments such as leading a critique of a particular argument from the literature.

 

 

 

READINGS

 

All readings are available at the Hornet Bookstore.  Many of the required readings are in a course packet.  The packet contains articles, book chapters, and case studies.

 

The following books are also required.

 

Arthur Isak Applbaum, Ethics for Adversaries: The Morality of Roles in

Public and Professional Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press,                       1999)

 

Thomas A. Birkland, After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and   Focusing Events (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1997)

 

Maureen Hogan Casamayou, The Politics of Breast Cancer (Washington:

Georgetown University Press, 1997)

 

John W. Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd ed. (New                        York:  HarperCollins, 1995)

 

James A. Stimson, Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings, 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999)

 

 

ASSIGNMENTS AND GRADING

 

There will be two short papers, an in-class mid-term examination, and an in-class final examination.  Assignment due dates are specified in the syllabus.

 

Course grades will be determined in accordance with the following weights:

 

Paper #1 (agenda setting memo)                                    15%

Mid-term examination                                                20%

Paper #2 (ethics paper)                                                 15%

Final examination                                                            30%

Class participation                                                            20%

 

 

  MAKE-UP ASSIGNMENTS AND MISSED CLASSES

 

Late assignments will not be accepted.  At my discretion, a student who misses a deadline may be given a make-up assignment.  Whether or not a penalty will be assessed depends on the reason (e.g., a family emergency constitutes a good reason; a competing requirement for another course does not). 


You should inform me prior to class if you must miss class on a specific day.  Except under very unusual circumstances, a student who misses three classes will be penalized one entire grade (e.g., a B+ for the course will become a C+), and a student who misses more than three classes will receive a failing grade.

DETAILED CLASS INFORMATION

 

 

I. THE POLITICS OF POLICY MAKING: AN OVERVIEW AND THEORETICAL

   FRAMEWORK

 

A. Introduction: The Concept of the Policy Entrepreneur

 

January 27

 

Readings

 

Casamayou, The Politics of Breast Cancer, pp. 1-61

Charlotte Lopez-Rojas and Barry Keene, AThe Road to the Motorcycle Helmet

Law in California,@ in Keene, ed., California Public Management

Casebook (Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, 1999), pp. 135-147

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What explains how breast cancer moved up on the agenda for the federal

    government through the 1980s?

2. Who were the key Abehind the scenes@ players for the breast cancer

     issue?

3. What do the breast cancer and motorcycle helmet cases suggest about

               the requisites for an effective political entrepreneur?

 

B. The Kingdon Framework

 

February 3

 

Reading

 

Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, chapters 1-6

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What is the distinction Kingdon draws between "conditions" and

    "problems?"

                Why is this distinction important?

2. What is the "policy community?"  How does that community influence

     the policy process?

3. How do entrepreneurs push forward policy ideas?

 

 

 

February 10

 

Paper #1 (agenda setting memo) due

 

Readings

 

Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, chapters 7-10

Nicolaous Zahariadis, AAmbiguity, Time, and Multiple Streams,@ in

Paul A. Sabatier, ed., Theories of the Policy Process (Boulder:

Westview Press, 1999), pp. 73-93

 

Discussion

 

Come to class prepared to discuss your assignment.

 

 

II. DEEPER INTO THE PROBLEM STREAM: FOCUSING EVENTS

 

A. Focusing Events in General

 

February 17

 

Readings                                                                

 

Birkland, After Disaster, chapters 1-5

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. Why do some focusing events have a bigger impact than others?

2. More specifically, why have responses to earthquakes and hurricanes

    differed significantly?         

 

B. The Ultimate Focusing Event: The September 11 Terrorist Attacks

 

February 24

 

Readings

 

Scott, Althuas, et al., symposium in PS: Political Science and Politics, 35

(September, 2002), pp. 517-521, 523-540

Sacramento Bee, special report on 9/11 impact, September 8, 2002

To be distributed in prior class

Birkland, After Disaster, chapter 6

 

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. How were the September 11 terrorist attacks similar and different from                   other

    major national events?

2. What are the likely long term effects of September 11 on the nation=s                       policy

    agenda?

3. What are the likely long term effects of September 11 on ordinary                            Americans= political and civic involvement?

 

 

III. DEEPER INTO THE POLITICAL STREAM: COLLECTIVE ACTION,

     MOBILIZATION, AND THE PUBLIC MOOD

 

A. The Collective Action Problem

 

March 3

 

Readings

 

Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Basic Books,                             1984

Robert H. Frank, Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of                               Excess (New York: The Free Press, 1999), pp. 146-158

 

In-Class Exercise

 

The Collective Action Game

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What is the Acollective action problem?@  How may it affect people=s

    willingness to engage in political action?

2. How can the collective action problem be overcome?

 

******

 

IV. MOVING FROM AGENDA TO DECISION: BUILDING A WINNING    

                  COALITION

 

Note change in schedule to accommodate guest speaker

 

March 10

 

Guest Speaker

 

Maureen Casamayou

 

Readings

 

Kristine Shultz, AEvaluating Lobbying Strategies,@ MPPA thesis, CSUS, 2002,

selections

Casamayou, The Politics of Breast Cancer, pp. 63-end

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What explains how Aturf battles@ are won in the legislature?

2. What resources were available to advocates of increased support for fighting breast

                cancer?  How effectively were such resources used?

3. How important is grassroots lobbying to group success?  Why?

. 

*****

 

B. The Public Mood

 

March 17

 

Reading

 

R. Kent Weaver, Robert Y. Shapiro, and Lawrence R. Jacobs, APoll Trends:

Welfare,@ Public Opinion Quarterly 59 (1995): 606-627

     Stimson, Public Opinion in America, chapters 1-4

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What have been the consistent features of the public=s view of welfare?                  To what extent did opinion about welfare change over time?  Why?

2. What exactly is a Apolicy mood?@

3. Why do policy moods change over time?

4. How do changes in the public mood create opportunities and dangers                     for policy entrepreneurs?

 

March 24

 

Mid-Term Exam During the First Half of Class

 

Reading

 

Stimson, Public Opinion in America, chapters 5-6

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What can we learn about public opinion from election results?  What                      mistakes can we make in drawing inferences from elections?

2. What were key features of the policy mood in the 1990s?

 

 

 

V. MOVING FROM AGENDA TO DECISION, PART TWO: NEGOTIATIONS

 

April 7 (no Class March 31; Cesar Chavez Day)

 

Readings

 

David Lax and James Sebenius, The Manager as Negotiator (New York: The

Free Press, 1986), pp. 29-45

"MAPO-Administration Negotiation, General Information" (to be distributed              prior to class)

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. What does it take to be successful in a multi-party, non-zero sum                             negotiation?

2. What lessons from the "Salty Dog" exercise are applicable to "MAPO?"                  What lessons are not applicable?

 

In-Class Exercise

 

"MAPO-Administration Negotiation"

 

 

VI. THE ETHICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

 

April 21 (no class April 14; spring break)

 

Readings

 

Applbaum, Ethics for Adversaries, chapters 1, 2, 4

Michael Quinlan, AEthics in the Public Service,@ Governance: An                                          International Journal of Policy and Administration, 6 (October, 1993),                       pp. 538-544                    

Discussion Questions

 

1. What should we think about Charles-Heri Sanson, the Aexecutioner of


    Paris?@  And if we condemn him, what does this imply for others who

    use their professional status to justify behavior that harms others?

2. Consider the debate between Arthur Applbaum and Michael Quinlan.                      Who do you find more convincing?  Why?

 

April 28

 

Paper #2 (ethics paper) due

 

 

 

Readings

 

Fred G. Leebron, AEllsberg and the Pentagon Papers,@ in Amy Gutman

and Dennis Thompson, eds., Ethics and Politics: Cases and Comments,

(Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1984), pp. 100-113

David Nacht, AThe Iran-Contra Affair,@ in Gutman and Thompson, Ethics and

Politics, 3rd ed. (1997), pp. 57-66

Applbaum, Ethics for Adversaries, chapters 9-10

 

Discussion

 

Come to class prepared to discuss your assignment

 

 

VII. MOVING FROM AGENDA TO DECISION, PART THREE: DELIBERATION ON

      THE MERITS OF POLICY CHOICES

 

A. What Do We Want from Deliberation?

 

May 5

 

Written assignment #2 due

 

Film

 

"Twelve Angry Men" (to be viewed prior to class)

 

Readings

 

Edward L. Lascher, Jr., "Assessing Legislative Deliberation:  A Preface to

Empirical Analysis," Legislative Studies Quarterly (Winter, 1996), pp.                       501- 519

"California Welfare Reform" (Kennedy School of Government case)

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. If the jurors in "Twelve Angry Men" made a "good decision," why did this

    happen?

2. What exactly is "deliberation," and how would we know it  when we saw                it? 

3. Why should we care if policy makers deliberate?

4. To the extent Swoap and Agnos made progress in their discussions, why                did this occur?  What were the consequences of their efforts?

 

B. Evaluating Real World Deliberation

 

May 12

 

Reading                                                           

 

"Against All Odds: The Campaign in Congress for Japanese-American                                 Redress (Kennedy School of Government case)

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. Why were the advocates of redress for Japanese-Americans able to

    overcome the odds and win a legislative victory?

2. To the extent there was something compelling about the arguments used                by redress advocates, what was it?

3. Did participants in the redress debate engage in high quality                                    deliberation?  Why/why not?