Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making Chapter One Summary The Market and the Polis

The author begins with the statement A theory of policy politics must start with a model of political society, that is, a model of the simplest ersion of society that retains the essential elements of politics!" She chooses the word #reek word polis", which means city$state! This word is fitting because it describes an entity small enough to ha e ery simple forms of organi%ation yet large enough to embody the elements of politics! &n searching for the elements of politics, it is helpful to use the market model as a foil because of its predominance in contemporary policy discussions! The contrast between the models of political and market society will illuminate the ways the market model grossly distorts political life! A market can be defined as a social system in which indi iduals pursue their own welfare by e'changing things with others whene er trades are mutually beneficial! Participants in the market are in competition with each other for scarce resources( each person tries to ac)uire things at the least possible cost, and to con ert raw materials into aluable things that can be sold at the highest possible price! &n the market model, indi iduals act only to ma'imi%e their own self$interest *which might include the well$being of their friends and family+! Ma'imi%ing one,s own welfare stimulates people to be resourceful, creati e, cle er and producti e, and ultimately raises the le el of economic well$being of the society as a whole! -ith this description of the market model, an alternati e model of the polis can be constructed by contrasting more detailed features of the market model and a political community! Community .ecause politics and policy can only happen in communities, community must be the starting point of the polis! Public policy is about communities trying to achie e something as a community! This is true e en when there are conflicts o er what the goals should be and who the members of the community are! /nlike the market, which starts with indi iduals and assumes no goals, preferences, or intentions other than those held by indi iduals, a model of the polis must assume both collecti e will and collecti e effort! A community must ha e a membership and some way of defining who is a member of the community and who is not! Membership is in some sense the primary political issue, for membership definitions and rules determine who is allowed to participate in community acti ities and who is go erned by community rules and authority! The author notes a significant distinction between residence and citi%enship!

She continues with a discussion of the difference between political community and cultural community! A political community is a group of people who li e under the same political rules and structure of go ernance and share status as citi%ens! A cultural community is a group of people who share a culture and draw their identities from a common language, history, and traditions! The political community can include many di erse cultural communities, and policy politics is faced with the )uestion how to integrate se eral cultural communities into a single political community without destroying or sacrificing their identity and integrity! Membership in a community defines social and economic rights as well as political rights! The author recogni%es that there is a component of mutual aid" among community members! Mutual aid is a good in itself that people create in order to foster and protect a community! Sharing burdens brings and holds people together! And in a larger sense, sharing caring, and maintaining relationships is at least as strong a moti ator of human beha ior as competition, separation, and promotion of one,s separate self$ interests! Public &nterest The concept of public interest" may mean any of se eral things! &t could be indi idual interests held in common, indi idual goals for the community, program or policies fa ored by a ma0ority, or things that are good for the community as a community! &t,s important to note in regards to public interest that often people want things for their community that conflict with what they want for themsel es *such as lower ta'es and good schools+ and that what people want usually changes o er time! At the ery least, e ery community has a general interest in ha ing some go erning process and some means for resol ing disputes without iolence, defending itself from outsiders, and perpetual e'istence! There is irtually ne er full agreement on the public interest, yet it is necessary to make it a defining characteristic of the polis because so much of politics is people fighting o er what the public interest is and trying to reali%e their own definition of it! The concept of public interest is to the polis what self$interest is to the market! They are both abstractions whose specific contents we do not need to know in order to use them to e'plain and predict people,s beha ior! -e simply assume that people beha e as if they were trying to reali%e the public interest or ma'imi%e their self$interest! 1ssentially within a market the empty bo' of public interest is filled as an afterthought with the side effects of other acti ities! &n the polis, by contrast, people fill the bo' intentionally, with forethought, planning, and conscious effort! Common Problems Common problems are defined as situations where self$interest and public interest work against each other! There are two types of common problems2 actions with pri ate benefits entail a social cost *industrial waste into a lake+( and social benefits re)uire

pri ate sacrifices *school system re)uires ta'es+! Any situation can be described in both ways *clean lakes are a social benefit re)uiring pri ate costs of nonpolluting waste disposal and a poor school system is the social cost of high pri ate consumption+! So whether a situation is labeled as social benefits and pri ate costs" or social costs and pri ate benefits" is strictly a matter of point of iew! Common problems are also called collecti e action problems because it is hard to moti ate people to undertake pri ate costs or forgo pri ate benefits for the collecti e good! *Think global warming3+ &n market theory, common problems are thought to be the e'ception rather than the rule! &n the polis, by contrast, common problems are e erything! Most significant policy problems are common problems! The ma0or dilemma of policy in the polis is how to get people to gi e primacy to these broader conse)uences in their pri ate calculus of choices, especially in an era when the dominant culture celebrates pri ate consumption and personal gain! &nfluence 4ortunately, the ast gap between self$interest and public interest is bridged in the polis by some potent forces2 influence, cooperation, and loyalty! Actions, no less than ideas are influenced by others$through the choices others ha e made and the ones we e'pect them to make, by what they want us to do, and by what we think they e'pect us to do! More often than not, the author argues, our choices are conditional! *Striking worker, post office complaint+ &nfluence also leads to interesting collecti e beha ior, such as bandwagon effects" in elections when a candidate,s initial lead cause more people to support him because they want to back a winner or when panics happen when people fear an economic collapse, rush out to cash out their bank accounts or sell their stocks, and in so doing bring about the collapse they feared! One cannot understate that influence$in all its arieties and degrees of strength$is one of the central elements in politics! Cooperation &n the polis cooperation is as important as competition for the following reasons! 4irst, politics in ol e seeking allies and organi%ing cooperation in order to compete with opponents! 1 ery conflict unites some people as it di ides others and politics has as much to do with how alliances are made and held together as with how people are di ided! Secondly, cooperation is essential to power and is often a more effecti e form of subordination than coercion! *Prison guard and prisoners+ &n the market, cooperation is usually described negati ely *collusion, oligarchy, price$ fi'ing, insider trading+ while in the polis it is described more positi ely *coalition, alliance, union, party, support+!

5oyalty Cooperation entails alliances, and alliances are at least somewhat enduring! &n the ideal market, a buyer will switch suppliers in response to a price or )uality change! &n politics, relationships are not so fluid! They in ol e gifts, fa ors, support and most of all, future obligations! Political alliances bind people o er time! &n the market, people are buyers" and sellers"! &n politics, they are enemies" and friends"! 4riendships are forgi ing in a way that pure commercial relationships are not, or should be! &n the polis, history counts for a lot( in the market, it counts for nothing! *&t,s business not personal+ This does not mean that political alliances are perfectly stable or that people ne er abandon friends and 0oin with former enemies! .ut it does mean that in the polis there,s a presumption of loyalty! &t takes a ma0or e ent$something that triggers a deep fear or offers a ast opportunity$to get them to switch their loyalties! There is a risk to breaking old alliances and people do not do it lightly! #roups .ecause of the powerful forces of influence, cooperation and loyalty, groups and organi%ations, rather than indi iduals are the building blocks of the polis! #roups are important in three ways2 4irst, people belong to institutions and organi%ations, e en when they are not formal members and their opinions are shaped by organi%ations and they depend on organi%ations to represent their needs! Second, the author asserts, policy making is not only about sol ing public problems, but about how groups are formed, split, and re$formed to achie e public purposes! Third, groups are important because decisions of the polis are collecti e! &nformation &n the ideal market, information is perfect, meaning it is accurate, complete and a ailable to e eryone at no cost! &n the polis, by contrast, information is interpreti e, incomplete, and strategically withheld! Correct information does e'ist, but in the politics, the important thing is what people make of such reports! &nterpretations are more powerful than facts! 4or this reason, much of political acti ity is an effort to control such interpretation! *Think spin control+! &n the polis, information is ne er complete! More importantly for a model of the polis is that crucial information is deliberately kept secret for the reason that one e'pects someone else to beha e differently once the information is made public! *Think 4red Thompson 0oining the race for presidency+ Secrecy and re elation are tools of political strategy and information by its ery nature is alued and aluable! Passion One of the 5aws of Passion" is that passion feeds upon itself! 5ike passion, political resources are often enlarged or enhanced through use! Channels of influence and political connections grow by being used! Political skills and authority also grow with

use! The more one makes certain types of decisions, the easier it is to continue in the same path, in part because repeated decisions re)uire no new thought, and in part because people are less likely to resist or )uestion orders and re)uests they ha e obeyed before! This phenomenon of resource e'pansion is ignored in the market model! Another law of passion go erning the polis is the whole is greater than the sum of its parts"! A protest march means something more than a few thousand people walking down the street! Most human actions change their meaning and impact when done in concert or in )uantity! Another is things can mean *and therefore be+ more than one thing at once!" *6ealth care e'penditures+ Ambiguity and symbolic meanings ha e no home in the market model of society, where e erything has its precise alue or cost! Power Power is the primary defining characteristic of a political society and is deri ed from all the other elements! &t is a phenomenon of communities! &ts purpose is always to subordinate indi idual self$interest to other interests$sometimes to other indi idual or group interests, sometimes to the public interest! &t operates through influence, cooperation, and loyalty! &t is based also on the strategic control of information! And finally, it is a resource that obeys the laws of passion rather than the laws of matter! Any model of society must specify its source of energy, the force or forces that dri e change! &n the market model, change is dri en by e'change, which is in turn moti ated by self$interest! Through e'changes, the use and distribution of resources is changed! &n the polis, change occurs through the interaction of mutually defining ideas and alliances! &deas about politics shape political alliances, and strategic considerations of building and maintaining alliances in turn shape the ideas people espouse and seek to implement!

Stone, Chap. 1
To show how market models distort political life and to design an alternati e model, the author contrast the political community and a market model based society! The #reek term, Polis, meaning city$state is used to embody the essence of the political society! &t describes an entity small enough to ha e simple forms of organi%ation, yet large enough to embody the elements of politics7 &n a market, the participants are competing for scarce resources and their goal is to make a profit by2 8! Ac)uire goods at the lowest cost 9! Con ert raw goods to profitable finished goods The market model is used because of the pre alence in contemporary policy discussions! &n the market model, the participants, 8! stri e to ma'imi%e their own self$interest a! Self$interest is described as one,s own welfare as percei ed by them

This ma'imi%ing of welfare stimulates people to be resourceful, creati e, cle er and producti e, and ultimately raises the le el of economic well$being of the society as a whole and this is assumed to be benefits to all of society! The author discusses the difference between political community and cultural community! A political community is a group of people who li e under the same political rules and structure of go ernance and share status as citi%ens! A cultural community is a group of people who share a culture and draw their identities from a common language, history, and traditions! The political community can include many di erse cultural communities, and policy politics is faced with the )uestion how to integrate se eral cultural communities into a single political community without destroying or sacrificing their identity and integrity! &n the construction of a new polis model the author looks at the concepts of society to contrast political community and the market model! 8! /nit of analysis, or who makes the determinations a! /nder market it is the indi idual /nlike the market, which starts with indi iduals and assumes no goals, preferences, or intentions other than those held by indi iduals, a model of the polis must assume both collecti e will and collecti e effort! b! And in the polis, the community makes the determination 9! -hat are the moti ations: a! &n market model, it is self$interest which dri es the moti ation The author said, &t,s important to note in regards to public interest that often people want things for their community that conflict with what they want for themsel es *such as lower ta'es and good schools+ b! So &n polis, it is the public interest which ser es self$interest! ;! Chief conflict a! &ndi iduals percei ed welfare ersus another,s &ndi iduals percei ed welfare b! &n the polis it is Self$interest s public interest *cost of e'ternalities, use of commons+ Common problems are defined as situations where self$interest and public interest work against each other! There are two types of common problems2 actions with pri ate benefits entail a social cost *industrial waste into a lake+( and social benefits re)uire pri ate sacrifices *school system re)uires ta'es+! 4ortunately, the ast gap between self$ interest and public interest is bridged in the polis by some potent forces2 influence, cooperation, and loyalty! Actions, no less than ideas are influenced by others$through the choices others ha e made and the ones we e'pect them to make, by what they want us to do, and by what we think they e'pect us to do! More often than not, the author argues, our choices are conditional! *Striking worker, post office complaint+

<! Peoples ideas and preferences a! 4rom the self$interest indi idual b! Strong &nfluence from the community =! >ature of collecti e acti ity a! MM competition b! PM cooperation and competition &n the polis model, cooperation is as important as competition for the following reasons! 4irst, politics in ol e seeking allies and organi%ing cooperation in order to compete with opponents! Secondly, cooperation is essential to power &n the market, cooperation is usually described negati ely *collusion, price$fi'ing, insider trading+ while in the polis it is described more positi ely *coalition, alliance, union, party, support+! ?! criteria for decision$making a! mm Ma' self interest and min cost &n the ideal market, a buyer will switch suppliers in response to a price or )uality change! b! 5oyalty, ma' self$interest, promote public interest &n the polis, history counts for a lot( in the market, it counts for nothing! *&t,s business not personal+ @! .uilding blocks of social action a! Mm indi iduals b! Pm groups .ecause of the powerful forces of influence, cooperation and loyalty, the groups and organi%ations, rather than indi iduals are the building blocks of the polis! #roups are important in three ways2 4irst, people belong to institutions and organi%ations, their opinions are shaped by organi%ations and they depend on organi%ations to represent their needs! Second, the author asserts, policy making is not only about sol ing public problems, but about how groups are formed, split, and re$formed to achie e public purposes! Third, groups are important because decisions of the polis are collecti e! A! nature of information a! accurate, complete, a ailable b! where polis, tends to be, ambiguous, interpreti e, incomplete, manipulated &n the ideal market, information is perfect, meaning it is accurate, complete and a ailable to e eryone at no cost! &n the polis, by contrast, information is interpreti e, incomplete, and strategically withheld! Correct information does e'ist, but in the politics, the important thing is what people make of such reports! &nterpretations are more powerful than facts! 4or this reason, much of political acti ity is an effort to control such interpretation! *Think spin control+! &n the polis, information is ne er complete! Secrecy

and re elation are tools of political strategy and information by its ery nature is alued and aluable! B! 6ow things work, a! 5aw of matter, resources are finite and diminish with use b! 5aw of passion, One of the 5aws of Passion" is that passion feeds upon itself! 5ike passion, political resources are often enlarged or enhanced through use! Political skills and authority also grow with use! The more one makes certain types of decisions, the easier it is to continue in the same path, in part because repeated decisions re)uire no new thought, and in part because people are less likely to resist or )uestion orders and re)uests they ha e obeyed before! This phenomenon of resource e'pansion is ignored in the market model! Another law of passion go erning the polis is the whole is greater than the sum of its parts"! A protest march means something more than a few thousand people walking down the street! Most human actions change their meaning and impact when done in concert or in )uantity! Another is things can mean *and therefore be+ more than one thing at once!" *6ealth care e'penditures+ Ambiguity and symbolic meanings ha e no home in the market model of society, where e erything has its precise alue or cost! 8C! source of change a! material e'change and )uest to ma'imi%e own welfare b! ideas, persuasion, and alliances and pursuit of power, own welfare, and public interest! Control D Power is the primary defining characteristic of a political society and is deri ed from all the other elements! 8! &ts purpose is always to subordinate indi idual self$interest to others! 9! &t operates through influence, cooperation, and loyalty! ;! &t is based also on the strategic control of information! <! &t is a resource that obeys the laws of passion rather than the laws of matter! Any model of society must specify its source of energy, the force or forces that dri e change! &n the market model, change is dri en by e'change, which is in turn moti ated by self$interest! Through e'changes, the use and distribution of resources is changed! &n the polis, change occurs through the interaction of mutually defining ideas and alliances! &deas about politics shape political alliances, and strategic considerations of building and maintaining alliances in turn shape the ideas people espouse and seek to implement!

Chapter 2 !"#ity
1 ery policy issue in ol es the distribution of something!" A distributi e conflict is any conflict where e)uity is the goal! The parado' of distributi e problems2 1)uality may in fact mean ine)uality( e)ual treatment may re)uire une)ual treatment( and the same distribution may be seen as e)ual or une)ual, depending on one,s point of iew!" *see cake in class distribution pps! <C$<8+ 1)uality E uniformity in distribution, sameness 1)uity E distributions regarded as fair, e en though they contain both e)ualities and ine)ualities" Three important dimensions to any distribution2 8+ Fecipients *i!e! -ho gets something+ 9+ &tem *i!e! -hat is being distributed+ ;+ Process *i!e! 6ow is the distribution being decided upon and carried out+ 6ori%ontal e)uity$ e)ual treatment of people of the same rank! Gertical e)uity$ une)ual treatment of people in different ranks! $rankHmerit based distribution $group based distributions *e!g! )uotas, affirmati e action, etc!+ &n some instances *e!g! lottery, athletic competition+ people accept une)ual outcomes as long as there is a fair process in place for deciding the outcome! *many things of alue are indi isible+! Two iews of e)uality$ 8+ criteria of the process2 fairness in process 9+ criteria of the recipients and items2 the end$result" People do not always agree on the rele ant characteristics of recipients and items!" That is where conflicts arise, in the descripti e and categori%ation process! 5iberty2 8+ freedom from constraints 9+ ha ing enough basic resources to choose out of desire than necessity" $fair shares" I e eryone has at least a bare minimum to sur i e Jiscussion of liberalism s! conser atism, which continues throughout the book!

Konathan Cer as PSC@9;

!"#ality $ De%orah Stone

8! Political Science defined$ who gets what, when, and how" a! Jistributions are at the heart of public policy contro ersies 9! Jistributi e conflict a! 1)uity is the goal for all sides, the conflict comes o er how the sides en ision the distribution of whate er is at issue ;! Parado' $ 1)uality may in fact mean ine)uality( e)ual treatment may re)uire une)ual treatment( and the same distribution may be seen as e)ual or une)ual, depending on one,s point of iew! !"#ality $ uniformity in distribution !"#ity $ distributions regarded as fair, e en though they contain both e)ualities and ine)ualities <! &n any distribution, there are three important dimensions a! The recipients b! The item c! The process =! Challenges to distributi e conflict a! -ho should count as a member of the class of recipients b! Fele ant internal di isions for distributing something and that these di isions ha e been ignored c! Some ma0or di isions in society are rele ant to distributi e e)uity and that membership in a group based on these di isions should sometimes outweigh indi idual characteristics in determining distribution d! 1'panding the definitional boundaries of the item is always a redistributi e strategy, because it calls for using the more narrowly defined item to compensate for ine)ualities in a larger sphere e! The switch from a standardi%ed alue of the item to a more customi%ed alue f! 4or many things in life, we are willing to accept an une)ual outcome so long as we know that the process was fair ?! The argument for 1)uality a! Criteria of Process i! Ac)uired fairly if2 8! Created newly or not formally held as property *in entions or rights to own+ 9! Ac)uired by transfer *sale, gift, or inheritance+ b! 1nd$result concept i! Assumes that a 0ust distribution is one in which both the recipients and items are correctly defined and each )ualified recipient recei es an e)ual share of each correctly defined item c! 1nd$results look only at the end result and do not need any historical

information as to how the distribution came about @! Fawls defines the rele ant class if recipients as all citi%ens, and he defines the rele ant items as social primary goods a! Social primary goods are things that are ery important to people but are created, shaped, and affected by social structure and political institutions *&!e! power, opportunity, wealth, income, ci il rights, and liberties b! >atural primary goods are things ery important to people but which, while affected by society, are less directly under its control *&!e! intelligence, strength, imagination, talent and good health A! Fawls approach looks to our innate sense of 0ustice as well as our fundamental rationality and then deri es principles of e)uity by asking us to deliberate about rules for a 0ust society without being biased by knowing our own situation * eil of ignorance+

Stone: Policy Paradox Chapter &

1fficiency2 #etting the most out of a gi en input Achie ing an ob0ecti e for the lowest cost The ratio between input and output, effort and results, e'penditure and income or cost and resulting benefit Conflicts with 1fficiency2 -ho gets the benefits and bears the burdens of a policy: 6ow should we measure the alues and costs of a policy: -hat mode of organi%ing human acti ity is likely to yield the most efficient results: Trying to measure efficiency is like trying to pull oneself out of )uicksand without a rope! There is no firm ground! Ob0ecti es for public policy are forged in political conflict and are constantly changing not handed down on a stone tablet! At the societal le el, efficiency is an ideal meant to guide how society chooses to spend its money or allocate its resources in order to get the most alue! 1fficiency is always a contestable concept! Markets and 1fficiency2

The theory of markets says that as long as e'changes are both oluntary and fully informed, they lead to the goal of allocati e efficiency2 Fesources always mo e in a direction that make people better off! o 1 ery e'change should lead to a situation in which the new holders get more alue out of the resources than the old holders!

Challenges from the Market2 &n order for efficiency, there must be numerous buyers and sellers of any resource, so that no one person or firm can influence the market price! There must be full information about the a ailable alternati es, so that e'changes truly result in the best situation for e eryone! Jecisions and actions of parties to an e'change must not affect the welfare of people who are not part of the e'change! Fesources in ol ed in e'changes must be used indi idually and used up if they are used at all! Challenges from the Polis2 One can )uestion the possibility of purely oluntary e'changes due to the astly une)ual distribution of income and wealth! The market model re)uires accurate and complete information! .ut information is always incomplete, interpreti e and deliberately controlled! &ndi idual actions ha e side effects on others! To ignore side effects, or to pretend that e'ternalities are a defect in a miniscule area of human affairs, is to undermine the ability of public policy to achie e efficiency in any important sense! The 1)uality$1fficiency Trade$off2 1)uality eliminates the differential rewards necessary to moti ate people to be producti e! To maintain e)uality go ernment must continuously interfere with indi idual choices about how to use resources, and in doing so, it curbs useful e'perimentation and producti e inno ation! To maintain e)uality re)uires a large administrati e machinery that uses up resources but is not itself producti e! Cartoon *pg A;+ -elfare doesn,t work, because it gi es poor people an incenti e to stay poor3" &nstead, let,s gi e the wealthy a huge ta' cut! Then the poor will ha e an incenti e to become millionaires!" -here labor is well organi%ed and shares significant political power, where in other words, there is someone to articulate the self$interest of the non$rich," economic polices tend to reconcile e)uality with efficiency! The idea that the two are incompatible is a politically useful myth for the rich and powerful!

Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, De%orah Stone Chapter &: !fficiency
1fficiency is broadly defined as achie ing the goal of getting the most out of a gi en input or achie ing an ob0ecti e for the lowest cost *cost being monetary, effort, time, etc!+ 1fficiency can be measured in simplified ratios of input2 output( effort2 results( e'penditures2 incomes( or cost2 resulting benefit! There are different ideas of what is efficient for people who are in different positions! The chapter presents the e'ample of a library where different iews engage the goal of impro ing the efficiency of the library! Outside scholars iewing the daily operation of the library 0udged the wasteful staffing positions as taking money away that could be used to increase the si%e of the library,s collection! 4or these scholars, the si%e of the supply determined the le el of efficiency! Other iews from the community and from the library staff )uestioned if supply can be used to measure efficiency! Some preferred ser ice o er the si%e of the collection, as others placed their preference in the amount of time re)uired to use the library and its le el of user friendliness! As one can see, it is difficult to determine what specifically determines efficiency for different situations! Certain )uestions need to be asked2 8+ -ho determines the correct output or ob0ecti e: 9+ 6ow do we alue compare multiple ob0ecti es: ;+ 6ow do different outputs affect different people and groups: <+ 6ow are inputs counted that are outputs of something else: =+ 6ow do we decide which benefitsHoutputs to be in the e)uation: ?+ 6ow do we include unlimited opportunity costs of resources used as inputs: Markets and 1fficiency The debate o er the best mode to organi%e society to achie e the greatest social welfare has led many to the market idea, where oluntary e'changes achie e efficiency through freedom and rational choice *>ote2 the market theory does not promote absolute freedom, as go ernments are needed to enforce contracts and define the rules of ownership and not allow black markets that ha e the potential to hurt indi iduals or go against the organi%ation and stability of the society+! The market theory is as follows2 as long as e'changes are oluntary and indi iduals are fully informed of the possible outcomes and alternati es, society will meet efficiency goals! This theory is e'plained as resources will always mo e in the direction to make people better, because people will always choose what makes them better off or at least not worst off! 1'changes in the market go through transformations, where goods can be transformed into other goods and ser ices and ice$ ersa *money into raw materials( raw

materials into finished goods( money into labor( finished goods into money+! Galues of e'changes also transform, as the market price of a good *uni ersal price+ is sub0ect to the alue that an indi idual is willing to pay for it! As e'changes are done by indi iduals, efficiency must also be determined sub0ecti ely through an indi idual,s percei ed welfare! Challenges from the Market The market can face many failures which affect the welfare of the society! 6ere are some possible failures in the market2 Monopolies2 markets need numerous buyers and sellers so that no one can influence the market price! -ithout these conditions, monopolies can control the price! &n welfare economics, monopolies are iewed as natural and una oidable due to the infeasibility of certain ser ices *e!g! utility ser ices+! .est option if these situations, is to accept the monopoly and rely on go ernment regulation to control and negati e effects! 5ack of &nformation2 market e'changes re)uire fully informed indi iduals, something that is difficult to ac)uire! Some people may be unwilling to pro ide all information as it may hurt their chances of an e'change *such as possible side effects+! Some indi iduals may not be able to understand e erything on a certain issue as well! .est option for this problem is try to inform the public as much as possible *e!g! nutrition labels+! 1'ternalities2 when people outside of the e'change are affected by the e'change! There are se eral options to attempt to alle iate this problem, but best option is to consider all possible effects of any transaction! Collecti e goods2 when resources are not used indi idually or are not used up at all! This type of failure in ol es pri ate sacrifice for social benefits *e!g! national defense+! Collecti e goods are determined to be non$correctable where collecti e action is needed! Challenges from the Polis -hen looking at the market theory, one needs to ask2 can a society built around a system of oluntary e'changes produce efficiency: This )uestion brings up the issue of happiness and satisfaction for different people! -hile the theory states that oluntary e'change will bring about happiness and satisfaction, others argue that much of the acti ity that people care about does not come from the world of e'change! Se eral problems in the market, due to society,s interaction with it, )uestions the iability of the market! 4or e'ample, one needs to )uestion the idea of pure oluntarism in market! -ith the unclear line between cooperation and coercion in many situations, oluntary e'change maybe an impossible re)uirement to meet! Manipulation inside the market also occurs, as buyers and consumers are constantly influenced by sellers in a

ser ice economy! The une)ual distribution of income and wealth also hurts oluntarism, as some ha e no choice but to work where they can so they can sur i e! Other problems, such as contract manipulation with long$term relationships and unforeseeable long$term conse)uences inhibit the outcome of efficiency as well! &ndi idual welfare is influenced by others *being comparable to those around you as well as sympathy towards others+, and by the comple' acti ities and decisions of the community! -hile the market theory stresses indi iduality, not e erything is based off of the indi idual! The li elihood and security of the community in which an indi idual is a member from is ery important! 1)uality$1fficiency Trade$Off 1)uality and efficiency is thought to be a %ero$sum trade off where the more one has, the less another will ha e! 1)uality is iewed as a barrier to efficiency, as it remo es moti ation for higher production! &f e eryone will always be e)ual, then there would be no desire for anyone to mo e ahead! &f there is no desire to work harder, then the society will be less producti e *i!e! less efficient+! Also, constant go ernment interference is re)uired to keep the society e)ual and go ernment interference re)uires a large administrati e machine that wastes resources which could be used in a more producti e manner! &t is not clear if these arguments are accurate! The arguments rely on opinions and decepti e wording! -hile some policy makers argue for some redistribution of resources for better e)uality, no one is feasibly arguing for a complete redistribution for total e)uality! -hile policy makers seek some kind of trade off between e)uality and efficiency, other methods can be found to moti ate businesses at the same time attempting some method of e)uali%ing distribution!

Chapter 4: Security
Security in the broad sense as need; things that should be available because they are essential.
Difficult to define objectively

Dimensions of Need What is minimally necessary for survival.

Relates to specified amounts of food, amounts of eapons for defense, income to function o !hings that are absolute. "uantifiable #sing food as an e$ample% o &inds of food, as opposed to standard food 'liver and lard( o Societal association or status 'Dinner at Wynn )as *egas vs. +urger &ing drive thru( o ,ultural 'e$. -e s not consuming pigs( o .asting in cultures

Symbolic factors add to the absolute aspect of brea/ing do n hat is minimally necessary into easy to handle components. 0f e accept the symbolic dimension of need as important, then security means protecting people1s identities as ell as their e$istence. 2.34 !his added dimension to need ma/es it a relative idea as ell.
5llo s one people in a group to compare themselves to each other 'absolute standard( and people in other groups as ell 'relative standard(

So far, there are t o dimensions of need%

6. 5bsolute 7. Relative

5 third dimension is the direct vs. instrumental vie of need.

Direct% 5ctions that can ta/e place no to counter current problems 0nstrumental% 5ctions that can contribute to future gains o 5n investment for the future 8$. 8ducation 2olicies enacted to allo for more effective action against the un/no n future o 8$. 9andatory seatbelts in cars, licenses for pilots, safety re:uirements for bridges and dams, pre;natal healthcare 5 sense of belonging to something; need for non;tangible satisfaction

5 fourth dimension is protection against hat might happen

.inal dimension% Relational needs

!hese five aspects are not stepping stones to one another, but alternative vie s.
9a/es it difficult to define hat security should mean for a hole society of uni:ue individual needs

Needs in the Polis With so many different perspectives, the society ma/es decisions on hat policies to pursue by collectively validating claims for need
2ublic needs are those needs the society recogni<es as legitimate and tries to satisfy as a community o Different from public goods, hich are goods that anyone can use o 2ublic needs are needs the society believes are essential to that particular society and define that society

8$amples. 9edieval -e ish communities and practices that allo ed for the necessary practices of the religion; 5thens and their military and festivals

!he provision of public needs can create a sense of loyalty in turn, helping to strengthen the society. 0n ma/ing claims for societal needs, the Stone gives three e$amples of ho a society can understand hat is needed.
6. =eeds e$pressed as decisions related to consumption a. 5ction ill be used to pursue those needs 7. =eopluralism a. =ot all needs ill be recogni<ed e:ually and those needs accompanied ith greater clout ill be addressed >. 9ar$ist a. !he fe po erful control hat the needs of the society should be and the majority of society do not /no hat they really need

The Security-Efficiency Trade-off 5rgument% 0f people have hat they need or feel secure, they ill not or/ as hard and ill be a drain on society ,ounter;arguments%
6. Self;fulfilling prophecy a. !he argument is proven true, not because it is necessarily true, but because those ho are receiving the security are forced to consistently prove their hardship due to eligibility tests i. !his is an argument for universal coverage as it uses the policies instituted during the ?reat Depression and lifetime employment policies in -apan as better alternatives to proving ones need for aid 7. 9easurement of productivity a. 9athematical errors in measurement i. Related to greater staffing that, accounting; ise, lo ers productivity and has no use, but increases the delivery of :uality service >. #n illingness to incur losses in order to gain a. 2reservation of jobs and industries that could be lost due to more efficient sectors pushing out obsolete or inefficient processes i. 5uthor suggests countering the loss of jobs ith training and relocation 6. +ut, again, community, pride, and belonging issues arise

?iven these different dimensions of need@security in a society, any one perspective ill not be sufficient to address the needs of a society. 0nstead, it ill ta/e a multi;perspective approach to effectively tac/le these issues.

Policy Paradox: Ch. '

The challenges of defining Security are similar to those of defining 1)uity and 1fficiency! Security here generally refers to how well the go ernment is able to pro ide for our essential needs! Stone addresses three main areas in this chapter! (Di)ensions of need* To begin, the basic definition of need is things that are necessary for physical sur i al or things that are minimally necessary *e!g! the po erty line with regards to income+! 8+! >eeds are difficult to define in ob0ecti e and countable terms when you add symbolic meanings *e!g! food and its ritual significance+! Symbolic meanings weight human differences, whereas with the e'ample of food it,s easier to find e)uity in the basic, material alue *at least in terms of biochemistry+! >eed is not a biological )uestion necessarily, but a political one! 9+! Absolute need and relati e need 4i'ed or )uantifiable needs s! relati e to a social standard *e!g! defense policy $ where a country will de elop its national security measures in relation to other nations that are percei ed as threats!+ ;+! &nstrumental need enables people to mo e beyond basic sur i al needs, e!g! education e!g! steel industry in the /S *direct need2 import restrictions are necessary to preser e its product against cheaper foreign competition H instrumental need2 restrictions gi e the industry more time to de elop technologies and cut costs in the future+ <+! Protection from possible future needs Politically this is more powerful than present needs as it takes into account fear of the unknown e!g! safety measures *food H 4JA, en ironmental, homeland defense+ =+! Felational needs Fefers to needs for relationships opposed to things, e!g! connectedness of a community, bene olence to others L >ote that the needs discussed are largely intangible and that the dimensions of needs" lead to differing concepts about security! 5 Dimensions Recap: Material vs. symbolic / absolute vs. relative / direct vs. instrumental / present vs. future / physical vs. communal

(+eeds in the polis*

Political figures decide which needs are real and legitimate I difficult to do as we ha e acknowledged that there are se eral different definitions and perspecti es! Public needs come into play here I needs a particular society determines are legitimate based on cultural considerations, e!g! Public needs in the /S today2 safety research and de elopment s! immediate aid for the homeless or mental health ser ices! Public needs are always disputed. Claims$making about needs $ ; ariations2 8+! >eeds e'pressed in consumption decisions *consumer demand+ 9+! >eopluralism iew I needs are not e)ual and obtaining them depends largely on political power ;+! Mar'ist tradition I those who control the means of production decide which needs are most important( the subordinate classes may not e en know what they really need (The Sec#rity !fficiency Trade off* Are security and efficiency compatible *or incompatible+: ; points to consider2 8+! Security can undermine producti ity e!g! welfare system diminishes moti ation by creating a cycle of dependence 9+! 6ow we measure producti ity A standardi%ed unit of measurement is needed, especially when comparing different industries! 1!g! More people and ser ices are needed in some industries opposed to others I e!g! the ser ice sector s! the manufacturing sector! Producti ity can be reported low in the ser ice sector, due to how it is defined, but these comparisons are largely inaccurate! ;+! The progress argument Jisin estment leads to in estment I the auto industry in the /S might fail, but there will be growth in other areas I and if you choose to protect a failing industry it may lead to inefficiency! To a oid some of the related problems, we should consider better 0ob retraining and relocation programs!

Policy Paradox Chapter ,: -i%erty

The parado' of liberty is that the idea of America is consumed with freedom and indi idual rights and yet laws and policies of all kinds necessarily restrict human beha ior! The )uestion posed by this policy parado' is when it is acceptable to restrict liberty! 5ike all the other parado'es presented by Stone in this book she discusses attempts to simplify the )uestion of when to restrict liberty and then presents the roadblocks to these clear cut distinctions! Paradox of -i%erty Order and safety in a society re)uires rules, laws and policies! 1 en in a free society these things are necessary to maintain the greatest e'tent of freedom possible! Therefore, freedom for society re)uires the restriction of indi idual liberties! Atte)pts to Set Standardi.ed Criteria /ohn St#art Mills The restriction of li%erty is 0#stified %#t sho#ld %e #sed as little as possi%le. ' ele)ents: 8! when it pre ents harm to others 9! the restriction is based on cases where there is a distinguishable line between actions that harm others and those that don,t! ;! recogni%e that liberty is an indi idual concern and should not be restricted on the group le el <! liberty is defined as a lack of interference Problems with this classification2 $ actions that cause harm can be dealt with in many different ways that interfere with different people and ha e different le els of interference $ Mill,s presents his ideas as if there is only one way to pre ent each harm and the effects of this policy can be weighed against the le el of restriction and then e aluated $ 6arm is sub0ecti e, restrictions to pre ent harm to one group can cause harm to another Types of in0ury that can pre ented by policy *at the cost of interference or restricting liberty+ 8! Physical in0ury a! Jirect and indirect b! &ntentional and accidental LShould policy be created to pre ent accidental harm or there too much ambiguity to warrant the restriction of liberty: 9! Material damages I loss or destruction of property

;! Aesthetic damages I en ironmental harm, graffiti, pri acy in asions, creating a disturbance, etc! <! Psychological and emotional damage I curriculum re)uirements or restrictions, =! Moral or spiritual damage I hate speech, pornography 5iberty outside of the acuum &n the real world of the polis" that Stone discusses, the liberty ersus in0ury dilemma is more difficult! 8! liberty is not really all about the indi iduals because people are part of a community $ This changes the picture because it introduces new harms and new considerations o Structural harms that pre ent a community from working properly o Accumulati e harms I one action is insignificant but as more people engage in that action the harm becomes more pronounced o &ndi idual harm that causes group harm 9! Policies and laws will cause and pre ent harm indi idually and to groups in the community! -e allow different groups to cause harm and protect other groups based on their position and roles in the community! ;! 6arms are often allowed, e en when they are foreseeable and e'pected, to protect free markets and the so ereignty of the go ernment 1o2 to approach co))#nity and indi3id#al har)s thro#gh policy Two Jilemmas2 8! Jependence2 Security from harm makes people and communities dependent but it allows them to seek out needs, take risks, and make choices! $ Promote self$sufficiency so the go ernment does not ha e to curtail liberty through dependency *Stone argues that self$sufficiency is an illusion and unattainable+ $ liberty for those who can secure it for themsel es $ create policies that ensure security and maintain rights through further legislati e action *ie2 informed consent laws+ $ One problem with dependency created by legislation and policy is that some groups can be depri ed of rights based on their group status *must be 8A to ote+ 9! Paternalism2 &s it the responsibility, or e en the proper role, of the go ernment to protect people from themsel es: $ can you consent to being assaulted or ensla ed: $ paternalism may be 0ustified in certain circumstances, especially when, under normal conditions one would not engage in a gi en beha ior L paternalism is 0ustified whene er a rational indi idual would consent in ad ance to restrain himself in some way!" $ howe er, what a rational" person would do in a gi en situation is sub0ecti e -i%erty or !"#ality4 &n order to obtain perfect e)uality you would ha e to se erely restrict the liberty of those with resources to the benefit of those without resources! &ntroduces the positi e iew of liberty I that liberty is more simply the freedom choice rather than the absence of interference! $ liberty increases when indi idual control increases o there is a limited range of actions o er which you can ha e control o resources are needed to understand options power, wealth, and knowledge are the resources needed

therefore, in the positi e iew liberty is restricted when ine)uality in resources e'ists positi e iews of liberty also restricts infringement of liberty to those cases in which human control is in ol ed

&n essence Stone argues that redistribution of wealth actually increases liberty by e)uali%ing resources and creating human choice for people who may not otherwise ha e choices! She claims that liberty e'ists in degrees, so minor restrictions of some indi idual liberty could astly increase another,s liberty! 4inally, she claims that compelled cooperation to get society to address problems does not create a liberty$e)uality trade$off! Stone does not see a problem with remo ing liberty from those considered wealthy" to possibly increase the freedom of others because she places the liberty of certain groups in a higher priority than the liberty of others! Kohn Stuart Mill,s and others who take the negati e" iew of liberty would disagree with this e aluation of what, e'actly, constitutes liberty!

Chapter , $ -i%erty
The Parado' of 5iberty I 4lag burning e'ample! L4reedom is ambiguous and comple', 0ust as other goals and alues that moti ate politics! &! 5iberty A! Jilemma of liberty arises in public policy and the )uestion of when the go ernment can legitimately interfere with choices and acti ities of citi%ens! .! Kohn Stuart Mill2 The only time a go ernment can e'ercise power o er a citi%ens liberty, against his will, is to pre ent harm to others! L&n Kohn Stuart Mill,s e'ample, the indi idual reigns supreme! 8! 1lements of Tradition in Mill,s way of thinking2 $8st2 There is a single criterion by which we can 0udge whether interference with indi idual action is 0ustified I harm to others! $9nd2 Predicated on the possibility of clear distinction between beha ior that affects other people and beha ior that does not! $;rd2 Sees liberty as an attribute of indi iduals, not social roles or groups or organi%ations! $<th2 Jefines liberty in a negati e way *5ack of interference with indi idual actions+! &&! .reaking down Mill,s definition2
A. Harm to others (policy issues are then cast as a choice between protecting the liberty of individuals and preventing harms to others). a. What types of harms should government prevent? i. Physical harm seems obvious . What about to!ic doses of chemicals in the wor"place?

#. $irth control pills can be harmful if used by a smo"er. %hould smo"ers be prohibited from ta"ing birth control pills?

L1 en when an action is known to produce harms in others, there are many possible ways of pre enting harm, each of which interferes with different types of liberties for different sets of people! 1'! Some chemicals used in manufacturing are known to cause in0ury to fetuses! Should employers e'clude fertile women of childbearing years from 0obs in ol ing e'posure to chemicals:
ii. &aterial Harms . An activity may cause loss of income (e!. %lander) #. Actions may cause loss of resources (e!. 'ec"less driving can damage another(s property) a. How far do we want to go? )s there a difference between actions that cause physical damage to property and those that destroy mar"et value of property? b. *ven material losses have different degrees of urgency and reality that might be considered relevant for decisions about liberty. iii. Amenity *ffects . An activity that causes aesthetic harms (e!. %atellite dishes on rooftops) #. *nvironmental harms might be considered amenity harms rather than material (actions that change the character of landscape or destroy wildlife habitats). +. ,isturbances of -uiet (blaring radios) ..All are e!amples of policy areas where government limits certain activities in order to mitigate amenity harms. iv. *motional and Psychological harms . Place in public sphere government as"ed to restrict behavior of one set of people to prevent psychological damages to another (e!. /hree &ile )sland)

#. %piritual and &oral Harms0 a. &ill was adamant about the idea that religious belief should never be a permissible ground for government regulation of behavior. b. Harms to others are not ob1ective phenomena2 but are political claims which are granted more or less legitimacy by the government. c. 3laims based on physical harm are easier to assert successfully than claims based on material harms etc. (it(s a hierarchy) i. ...%ignificant aspect of political strategy is thus to move claims from one category to another in order to gain legitimacy.

&&&! 5iberty in the Polis

. /he polis is a community with some collective vision of public interest2 thus the liberty of individuals is also limited by obligations to the community. a. )n the polis2 the sphere of compulsion based on the interests of society (not individuals) is large. b. Above all else2 societies re-uire their members to obey the law2 regardless of whether violations cause harm to someone else. i. *!. A driver will be punished for running a red light even if no one is harmed. ii. &eant to protect social order2 not individuals. #. %tructural Harms effects on the ability of a community to function as a community. +. Accumulative Harm some actions are not harmful when one person does it2 but when a number of people do it2 it can be devastating (e!. Wal"ing on grass2 dumping sewage2 ta"ing money out of the ban"). 4. Harm to a group of that results from harm to individuals a. Applicant is denied a 1ob based on race2 it affects his family2 his community2 others may not try to get a 1ob of that caliber2 children denied emotional and financial security2 etc. 5. Public officials and $usiness *!ecutives

a. 6overnments are far less restrictive of these roles because they need more freedom to do their 1obs. b. %overeign )mmunity0 government agencies2 officials2 employees cannot be held liable for certain "inds of damages they causes (e!. Police car damage during a chase). c. Whether the liberties of officials are greater or smaller than those of ordinary citi7ens2 the "ey point is that liberty in the polis is to a significant e!tent an attribute of roles rather than individuals. 8. 3orporate Actors a. /o thin" of liberty only as it applies to individuals misses the significant political -uestion of the freedom accorded to corporate actors2 which affect individuals 1ust as much. b. 6overnment Agencies can perpetrate both harms to the community and harms to the individual. i. *!. )ncreased monitoring and record sharing may create a sense of distrust in the community. ii. $ecause corporate actors can have far greater impact on individuals and community than the actions of other individuals2 a theory of liberty must consider corporate actors as well. iii. ,istinct legal culture in America regarding role of government in restricting individual liberties to promote social cohesion2 security2 and solidarity (law and morality are separate spheres9 e!. $aby drowning).

&G! The 5iberty$Security Trade$Off2 Can a society pro ide its members both liberty and security:
. /he dilemma of ,ependence0 a. Without the security of having one(s basic needs met2 a person cannot ma"e free choices. :n the other hand2 security creates dependence (old city machine bosses2 for e!ample). i. %ecurity is necessary for liberty and yet undermines it. b. )f public policy promoted self;sufficiency instead of dependence2 then people would not become dependent and suffer the inevitable constraints on liberty that accompany dependence.

c. &odern democracies attempt to reconcile security and liberty by creating formal political rights for the dependent. #. /he dilemma of Paternalism0 a. %hould the government prevent people from acting voluntarily in ways that harm themselves? b. &ill0 never2 unless it is referring to slavery. i. $y entering into slavery a person gives up his liberty and protecting individual liberty is the very purpose of prohibiting paternalism in the first place. . Are there other situations in which a person(s freedom to choose should be denied in order to enable him to have other choices in the future? (e!. Assisted suicide). #. Problem0 how do we decide what is <as bad as= slavery? c. >oophole0 e!clusion of whole categories of people from rights and liberties i. 3hildren and mentally incompetent are usually thought proper ob1ects of paternalism2 as well as <bac"wards= societies. ii. *!. Women and blac"s in the ?%. iii. *!. 'ight to die and the 1udge(s interpretation of the will of women vs. men. d. ?lysses 3ontract0 i. ,wor"in suggests that paternalism is 1ustified whenever a rational individual would consent in advance to restrain himself in some way.

G! The 5iberty$1)uality Trade$Off 8! People ha e different talents, skills, and abilities to secure the alued resources and opportunities in society! To maintain e)uality, go ernment would ha e to take away resources and positions from some people *the ad antaged+ and gi e them to others *the disad antaged+! This taking away of resources and positions interferes with the freedom of action of the ad antaged! LLOnly applies to a negati e concept of liberty, one that defines it as the absence of restraint!
+. Positive @iew of >iberty0 *!panded whenever a person(s control over hisAher own life is increased.

a. 'ange of issues or problems over which one can e!ercise control. b. /he resources2 both material and non material2 that enable one to envision alternatives and carry out one(s will. c. ?nder the positive definition2 power2 wealth and "nowledge are prere-uisites to liberty because they are sources of capacity to e!ercise control. i. )n this sense2 liberty is defined by degree (those with more power2 wealth and "nowledge have more liberty). d. >in"s social and individual freedom. e. )ssue with the positive definition is not what "inds of harms should be prevented2 but what constraints on individual freedom are within the realm of human agency.

L.ecomes e ident as we mo e from physical harms to abstract harms that harms are political claims asserted by one set of interests against another!

Policy Paradox $ Chapter 5 (Sy)%ols* Symbolic representation is the essence of problem definition in politics! According to the author, a symbol is anything that stands for something else7The meaning of a symbol is not intrinsic to it, but is in ested in it by the people who use it!" Symbols which shapes our perceptions and suspendMsN skepticism" are what make symbols political de ices! This makes symbols a means of influence and control, e en though it is often hard to tell with symbols e'actly who is influencing whom! There are four aspects of symbolic representation that are especially important in the definition of policy problems2 narrati e stories, synecdoches, metaphors, and ambiguity!

Stories Jefinitions of policy problems usually ha e narrati e structure *a beginning, middle, and end+ in ol ing change or transformation! .rief Outline2 >arrati es with heroes and illains, problems and solutions, tensions and resolutions! The most common are2 Stories of decline, including the story of stymied progress and the story of progress$ is$only$an$illusion! Stories of control, including the conspiracy story and the blame$the$ ictim story!

A6 Story of Decline a! &n the beginning, things were pretty good! .ut they got worse! &n fact, right now, they are nearly intolerable! Something must be done!" /sually ends with a prediction of crisis2 /nless such$and$such is done, disaster will follow!" i! Feal -orld 1'amples2 po erty rates are rising, crime rates are higher, import penetration in /!S! markets is greater, en ironmental )uality is worse! ariations on a !tory of Decline A+ !tymied Progress a! &n the beginning things were terrible! Then things got better, thanks to a certain someone! .ut now somebody or something is interfering with our hero, so things are going to get terrible again!" i! Feal -orld 1'amples2 Automakers tell a story of how minimum wage legislation, mandatory health benefits, and occupational safety regulation threaten to destroy America,s once$preeminent position in the world economy! The Pentagon tells how budget constraints ha e undermined our once$dominant military position! .+ "hange#is#only#an#illusion a! Oou always thought things were getting worse *or better+! .ut you were wrong! 5et me show you some e idence that things are in fact going in the opposite direction! Jecline *or impro ement+ was an illusion!" i! Feal -orld 1'amples2 Cancer patients are not really li ing longer( these statistics" are only because we can now diagnose cancer at earlier stages! Child abuse is not really on the rise, it only appears to ha e increased because we ha e more public awareness, more legislation, and more reporting! C6 Story of Helplessness and Control a! The situation is bad! -e ha e always belie ed that the situation was out of our control, something we had to accept but could not influence! >ow, howe er, let me show you that in fact we can control things!" i! Feal -orld 1'ample2 Cancer, pre iously thought to strike ictims unpredictably, now turns out to be related to diet, smoking, and chemicals I all things humans can control! ariations on !tory of $elplessness and "ontrol

%& "onspiracy a! &ts plot mo es us from the realm of fate to the realm of control, but it claims to show that all along control has been in the hands of a few who ha e used it to their benefit and concealed it form the rest of us! i! Feal -orld 1'ample2 Falph >ader,s famous crusade against automobile manufacturers was a story that con erted car accidents into e ents controllable through the design of cars, and e en willingly accepted by automakers! '& 'lame#the#victim a! &t mo es us from the realm of fate to the realm of control, but locates control in the ery people who suffer the problem! i! Feal -orld 1'amples2 the poor are poor because they seek instant pleasures instead of in esting, Third -orld countries are poor because they borrow too eagerly and allow their citi%ens to li e too e'tra agantly, women are raped because they ask for it"! -hat all these stories of control ha e in common is their assertion that there is choice! They choice may belong to society as a whole, to certain elites, or to ictims, but the drama in the story is always achie ed by the con ersion of a fact of nature into a deliberate human decision! Synecdoche .rief Outline2 A small part of a policy problem is used to represent the wholePfor e'ample, the horror story! Synecdoche is a figure of speech in which a whole is represented by one of its parts2 Ten thousand feet mo ed down Pennsyl ania A enue toward the -hite 6ouse!" This form of symbolism is ery common in politics, where e'amples are offered up as typical instances" of a larger problem! These typical cases then define the entire problem and frame the policy response! Feal -orld 1'ample2 The welfare )ueen" has become the dominant representation of the welfare problem! She is a mother of many children who has been on the rolls for ten or twenty years, and has adopted welfare as a way of life! &n fact, only about a fifth of current welfare recipients ha e been on the rolls for ten years or more! So, a reform that is targeted to the long$ term welfare recipient, then, will only affect a small part of the welfare population, and a small part of the welfare problem! (he $orror !tory2 Politicians or interest groups deliberately choose one outlandish incident to represent the uni erse of cases, and then use that e'ample to build support for changing an entire rule or policy that is addressed to the larger uni erse! Feal -orld 1'amples2 The early 8BB=, the 8C<th Congress rush to dismantle much of the safety and en ironmental regulation of the @Cs and ACs, so antiregulation crusaders claimed the Occupational Safety and 6ealth Administration had abolished the tooth fairy *by re)uiring dentists to discard any baby teeth the pulled+, and had re)uired all buckets to be built with a hole in the bottom of them! These absurdities could be counted on to create hostility to regulation, but they grossly distorted the actions of the agency! -hat OS6A did re)uire was that dentists protect themsel es and their assistants from blood$borne pathogens when handling teeth *not the disposal

of baby teeth+, and =C babies drown yearly by falling into buckets, so OS6A suggested that the buckets be redesigned to tip o er if a child fell in, but left it up to the industry to make a oluntary effort! Synecdoche can suspend our critical thinking with its powerful poetry! The strategy of focusing on part of a problem, particularly one that can be dramati%ed as a horror story, thus is likely to lead to skewed policy! Oet it is often a politically useful strategy because it takes a larger issue and presents a single, manageable chunk for the public to identify with! Metaphors A metaphor is an implied comparison! &t works by using a word that denotes one kind of ob0ect to describe another! .rief Outline2 A likeness is asserted between one kind of policy problem and another! Common metaphors in politics include organisms, natural laws, machines, tools, containers, disease, and war! )iving *rganisms2 Communities or groups are said to ha e a life of their own" and organi%ations ha e goals"! To see something as an organism is to assert that it is natural", which in turn implies that howe er it is, that is the way it is supposed to be"! &t,s often argued that tampering with any part of an organism *community, neighborhood, family+ will upset a delicate balance, destroy the whole, or interfere with nature! +atural )aws: Many famous social scientists ha e claimed to disco er laws that go ern the social world and that set limits, and e en total barriers, to the changes humans can bring about through deliberate policy! The most influential law" of social beha ior is Charles Murray,s law of unintended rewards"! This law states that Qany social transfer increases the net ale of being in the condition that prompted the transfer,! &n simple 1nglish, this law states that helping people who ha e problems *po erty, illness, homelessness, or drug addiction+ especially gi ing them money or ser ices, actually rewards them for ha ing the problem and creates an incentive for them to stay poor, sick, homeless, etc! -hile no one in -ashington or state capitals is going to )uote Murray,s 5aw, the e)uation helping hand e)uals incenti e to be needy" is the dri ing force in today,s social policy debates! Machines and mechanical devices: Our Constitution is deri ed from a notion that a political system is a machine with working parts that had to be kept in order" and in balance"! Thus, checks and balances" are central to our way of thinking about how political power should be allocated! The metaphor of balance implies a story about the decline from balance to imbalance and prescribes addition of something to one side or subtraction from the other! ,edges and inclines: #o ernment regulation is often portrayed as a wedge2 once they get their foot in the door, the regulators will be pushing through with more and more! The image of the wedge suggests that a seemingly small beginning can ha e enormous le erage! The Qslippery slope, argument is a part of this metaphor! "ontainers2 The idea of a fi'ed space! The problem might be that a space is o erfilled, thus Me'ican workers spill o er" the borders into the /nited States! The solutions to the problems are aried, but appropriate to the metaphor! One can drain off" some of the contents of the container, by appointing disgruntled employees to a low$le el management position where their

loyalties will be split! Or you can allow a gradual release of pressure by letting angry citi%ens blow off steam" at town hall meetings! Disease: Cults, communism, crime *or any other condemned beha ior+ is said to spread"! Members and ad ocates infect" others with their ideas *the #ay Agenda"+! Teenage pregnancy and high school dropout rates are iewed as an epidemic"! Jisease metaphors imply a story about deterioration and decline and about struggle for control between humans and nonhuman germs"! The disease label discredits opponents and implies a moral rightness of treating them as less than human! The most per asi e disease metaphor is social policy us the image of the poor and disad antaged I who ha e their problems because of personal issues and deficiencies! ,ar: This is ingrained in policy language! -e declare war on po erty", in asion of pri acy", and go on campaigns" against drunk dri ing! -hen something is portrayed as an in asion, the in ader is foreign, and therefore not a citi%en whose rights ha e to be respected or whose life is to be alued! >ames and labels are used to create associations that lend legitimacy and attract support to a course of action! Symbolic de ices are especially persuasi e and emotionally compelling because their story line is hidden and their sheer poetry is often stunning! 4or these reasons, it is worth culti ating some skill in recogni%ing symbols and )uestioning their assumptions by asking2 -hat is the underlying narrati e: Joes it make sense: Joes the metaphor tell a different story from the one the author purports to tell: Joes the metaphor seem to ob iate the need for e idence, or does it bias the kind of information opponents might bring to bear on a conflict: Joes a symbol offer a pig in a poke", and might we want to in)uire into substance before lending support to the symbol: Ambiguity The most important feature of all symbols is their ambiguity! A symbol can mean two *or more+ things simultaneously2 religious freedom" means organi%ed ocal prayer in public schools to some people and absolutely no prayer in public schools to others! .rief Outline2 The ability of statements, e ents, and e'periences to ha e more than one meaning! Ambiguity is the glue" of politics! &t allows people to agree on laws and policies because they can read different meanings into the words! Ambiguity enables the transformation of indi idual intentions and actions into collecti e results and purposes! -ithout it, cooperation and compromise would be far more difficult! &t allows leaders to aggregate support from different )uarters for a single policy! &t allows policy makers to placate both sides in a conflict by gi ing the rhetoric to one side and the decision to the other"! Feal -orld 1'ample2 a president might succeed in unifying ad ocates and opponents of foreign military inter ention by asking for a congressional mandate allowing him to send troops only if American interests are threatened"! Concl#sion

Policy stories are tools of strategy! Policy makers often create problems as a conte't for the actions they want to take! This is not to say that they actually cause harm and destruction so they will ha e something to do, but that they represent the world in such a way as to make themsel es, their skills, and their fa orite course of action necessary!

7#tline for Policy Paradox C1.5: Sy)%ols Symbolic representation is the essence of problem definition in politics! A symbol is anything that stands for something else," and that meaning is collecti ely created! Symbols shape our perceptions and are thus a means of influence and control, as well as political de ices! There are four types of symbolic representation that are especially important in the definition of policy problems2 8. +arrati3e Stories Tell how the world works and pro ide a promise of resolution for scary problems! o Policy problems are similar to stories in that they2 ha e a beginning, middle, and end, ha e heroes, illains, and innocent ictims, and often pose e il s! good! o &n policy making, what appears as conflict o er details, is really disagreement abut the fundamental story! o The most common types of stories used in policy are2 1. Stories of Decline .asis2 &n the beginning, things were pretty good! .ut then they got worse! &n fact, right now, they are nearly intolerable! Something must be done!" 1'emplifies a crisis situation and warns unless this is done7disaster will follow! &t is a prediction of doom *Gery Common+! A. Stories of 1indered Progress .asis2 &n the beginning things were terrible! Then things got better, thanks to a certain someone! .ut now somebody or something is interfering with our hero, so things are going to get terrible again!" This is often told by e ery group that wants to resist regulation! 1'! -hen the AMA was fighting go ernment cost$containment efforts, they reminded people about the days of plagues, T., high infant mortality, etc! and warned that new go ernment restrictions would undo all the progress that had been made! 9. Stories of (Change is only an 8ll#sion* .asis2 Oou always thought things were getting worse *or better+! .ut you were wrong! 5et me show you some e idence that things are in fact going in the opposite direction! Jecline *or impro ement+ was simply all an illusion!"

1'! Giolence and corruption throughout the world are not really on the rise! They only appear to ha e increased because we ha e more public awareness, more legislation, and more reporting in the media of these topics! 2. Stories of 1elplessness and Control .asis2 The situation is bad! -e ha e always belie ed that the situation was out of our control, something we had to accept but could not influence! >ow, howe er, let me show you that in fact we can control things!" Stories about control ser e to speak to the fundamental problem of liberty in this country, mainly, they force us to ask )uestions regarding to what e'tent do we actually control our own life conditions and destinies: Politicians use this because what had formerly been iewed as random, accidental, natural, or a twist of fate, is now alleged to be amenable to change due to human agents of inter ention! These stories often pro ide heroes! A. Stories of Conspiracy .asis2 &ts plot mo es us from the realm of fate to the realm of control, but it claims to show that control thus far has been in the hands of a few who ha e used it to their benefit! These stories always re eal that harm has been deliberately caused or knowingly tolerated, and they end with a call to wrest control from the few who benefit at the e'pense of many! 1'! Oil companies! 9. Stories that 9la)e the :icti) .asis2 &t also mo es us from the realm of fate to the realm of control, but locates control in the ery people who suffer the problem! This story often ends with ictims ha ing to reform their own faulty beha ior! 1'! The poor are poor because they seek instant pleasures instead of using their time to work hard and in est their money efficiently! O erall, policy stories use many literary de ices to lead the audience to a course of action and people must be aware of these tactics in order to be able to make somewhat thoughtful choices and decisions! 88. Synecdoches These are figures of speech in which a part is used to represent the whole! &n politics, such symbolism is ery common, where certain e'amples are offered up as typical instances of a larger problem! -e often make policies based on e'amples belie ed to be representati e of a larger uni erse! Politicians or interest groups often use 6orror Stories," where they deliberately choose one outlandish incident to represent the uni erse of cases, and then use that e'ample to build support for changing an entire rule or policy!

o 1'! -hy do women get half of all assets in a di orce oid of a prenuptial agreement: This rule was fashioned on the assumption that the woman in a household spends her married years as a housewife and mother, and as such, had no economic assets of her own to claim in a di orce! The strategy of focusing on part of a problem is likely to lead to skewed policy, but it is often politically useful because it takes a larger issue and presents a single, more manageable chunk for the public to identify with! o 1'! A plea all o er the news to find one missing, abused, or star ing child within a region, makes the public aware and sympathetic to other children in a similar situation!

1.

2.

&.

'.

888. Metaphors Are sometimes held to be the essential core of human thought and creati ity! &n policy, they are a likeness asserted between one kind of policy problem and another! The author describes these specific types of policy metaphors2 -i3ing 7rganis)s A! -ith this metaphor, communities or groups are said to ha e a life of their own" and organi%ations ha e goals"! .! 1'! &ndustry is being strangled," ser es to personify industry! C! -hen anything in politics is described as fragmented," the perception is that it is broken! Policy metaphors often 0ump from description to prescription!" J! A natural life cycle is also used to e'plain why political issues seem to e'perience periods of rapid growth and then decline! 1! &n a culture where the common understanding is treating likes alike, to claim a likeness through a political metaphor is also to posit an interpretation of e)uity, and demand e)ual treatment of certain agencies, etc! +at#ral -a2s A! &n policy, this contributes to the belief that pro iding monetary assistance to those who ha e problems like, po erty, homelessness, drug addiction, etc!, actually rewards them for ha ing the problem and creates an incenti e for them to remain in their current condition! Machines and Mechanical De3ices A! Our Constitution is deri ed from 8Ath century political thoughts that rest on a notion that the political system is a machine with working parts that ha e to be kept in order" and in balance"! .! Thus, checks and balances" are central to our way of thinking about how political power should be allocated! C! Policy prescriptions become the addition of something to one side or subtraction from the other! J! 1'! -ith nuclear weapons, strategists talk of a balance of terror," where mutual fear pre ents either side from acting! ;edges and 8nclines A! #o ernment regulation is often portrayed as a wedge2 once they get their foot in the door!!!

.! The image of the wedge suggests that a seemingly small beginning can ha e enormous le erage! C! As for inclines, the metaphor is of one ascending a ladder, compelled rung by rung, e en though it gets scarier step by step, and despite the fact that perhaps escalating further goes against one,s better 0udgment! J! Slippery slope arguments meanwhile begin by acknowledging that a law for e'ample is not in itself bad, but permitting the phenomenon would e entually lead to badness! 1! 1'! Allowing physicians to pursue pleas for assisted suicide in certain cases7 ,. Containers A! This is the idea of a fi'ed space! .! The problem might be that a space is o erfilled, thus Me'ican workers spill o er" the borders into the /nited States! C! Or, one can drain off" some of the contents of the container, and allow a gradual release of pressure by letting angry citi%ens blow off steam!" 5. Disease A! &n the policy realm, cults, crime, or any other condemned beha ior is often said to spread," with such people iewed as contagious! Members and ad ocates are basically said to infect" others with their ideas! .! 1'! Teenage pregnancy and high school dropout rates are iewed as an epidemic"! C! The disease label discredits opponents and implies a moral rightness of treating them as less than human! J! The psychiatry profession has further facilitated such treatment in the political realm, by con erting many social problems into mental disorders! As such, consistent unemployment and repeated absences from work are classified as anti$social personality disorder," meaning that those people are in fact sick, not simply unhappy! <. ;ar A! -e declare war on many issues *such as drugs+ because when something is portrayed as an in asion, the in ader is foreign, and therefore not something whose rights ha e to be respected! .! -hen people are at war, sur i al is at stake, so costs are often ignored and one is iewed as a traitor if he or she does not support the effort! This is one ob ious reason why this tactic is so often used by leaders to carry out policies! O erall, names and labels are used to create associations that lend legitimacy and attract support to a course of action! -hat is a gas ta'" to one person is a user fee" to another! Symbolic de ices are especially persuasi e and emotionally compelling because their story line is often hidden! 8:. A)%ig#ity The capacity to ha e multiple meanings! A symbol can mean two *or more+ things simultaneously2 religious freedom" means organi%ed ocal prayer in public schools to some people and absolutely no prayer in public schools to others! Ambiguity is the glue" of politics! &t allows people to agree on laws and policies because they can read different meanings into the words! -ithout it, cooperation and compromise would be far more difficult!

o 1'! Ambiguity can unite people who would benefit from the same policy but for different reasons! Some groups do not want to see the construction of more homes because they want to preser e nature, while others simply do not want to see the alue of their own homes reduced! &t allows leaders to aggregate support from different )uarters for a single policy! &t allows policy makers to placate both sides in a conflict by gi ing the rhetoric to one side and the decision to the other"! 5egislators can satisfy demands to do something about a problem by passing a ague statue with ambiguous meaning and then letting administrati e agencies hash out the more conflicting details! .y portraying a decision one way in the press yet e'ecuting it another, political leaders can perform the magic trick of making two decisions at once and keeping the peace so that two sides can technically claim ictory!

O erall, problems are not out there in the world waiting for smart analysts to come and define them, they are created in the mind of citi%ens by other citi%ens, leaders, organi%ations, and go ernment agencies as an essential part of political maneu ering! Policy stories are tools of strategy with symbols, metaphors, ambiguities, etc!, all as weapons in the arsenal of manipulation!

Policy Paradox Chapter <

+#)%ers

One common way to define a policy problem is to measure it!" *Stone, 9CC9+ One common way to begin a discussion about a policy is to define the problem and need according to trends! &f a problem is big enough by the numbers, policy efforts gain instant credibility! One e'ample of this can be seen with the problem of obesity! &n the State of >e ada and almost e ery other state, legislators ha e begun to take a look at obesity trends and are formulating state policies and programs to help reduce the pre alence of obesity! One of the first steps in our state was the formation of a task force to e'amine the Cost of Obesity! The task force produced a report to demonstrate how costly obesity has become to all people in our state regardless of health status! /sing the report from the task force, legislators had enough momentum to pass >e ada State Senate .ill 8B@! The outcome of this bill was the formation of the Ad isory Council for the State Program on 4itness and -ellness which is comprised of professionals from a ariety of backgrounds! The Council is to make recommendations on how our State

Program for 4itness and -ellness should operate! &ne itably the Ad isory Council will go right back to the numbers to accomplish this goal! The challenge for policy )akers is to deter)ine the %est 2ay to represent the pro%le) 2ith n#)%ers. This is challenging %eca#se there are an infinite n#)%er of 2ays to descri%e so)ething 2ith n#)%ers. The )anner for #sing n#)%ers to descri%e the pro%le) 2ill depend on the p#rpose of the policy analysis. 8ncl#sion 3ers#s excl#sion One critical issue in using numbers to describe a problem is inclusion ersus e'clusion! This is the process by which we determine that something counts and another does not! -hen numbers are used to describe a problem something will be left out! The manner by which the problem is reported becomes ery political! 6ow doe we determine who to lea e out: Someone will always be unhappy: +#)%ers as Metaphors Counting numbers as metaphors is to focus on what counts and lea e out e erything else! &n obesity, we ha e a baseline measure called body mass inde' *.M&+! According to the CJC, .M& is used because for most people, it correlates with their amount of body fat! So, an adult with a .M& between 9= and 9B!B is considered o erweight and an adult who has a .M& of ;C or higher is considered obese!" There are inherent problems when numbers are used as metaphors! -hat is obese and what is not obese will be challenged! &t is possible to ha e a .M& less than the critical cut$off and be too fat! &t is also possible to ha e a .M& greater than the critical cut$off and be completely healthy! So, one issue is where the boundary lies for what is and what is not!

+#)%ers as nor)s and sy)%ols Measures imply a need for action! Typically, the first step in promoting change is to measure the problem! Feporting the numbers creates pressure to change! The numbers become a norm! >orms help establish helplessness or lack of control of the issue! There are often problems in using numbers as norms and symbols! Often the numbers are ambiguous! Measures often ha e double meaning! #ood in one arena bad in another! So, how the measure is interpreted is ery important! Cost is an e'ample of a double edged sword! 4ew would argue that health care in America is costly! The numbers speak for themsel es! 4or many the high cost may be a sign of high )uality! 6owe er, for others it is better to pay less for more! One great e'ample of this is seen in the prescription drug industry! &n many states there is little regulation to pre ent pharmacies from raising prices on the prescription drugs they fill! The problem is that prices are inconsistent! -hat may cost R<C at one pharmacy may cost o er R9CC at another! 5egislation is increasing to help stop the mark$up to the buyer and curb the income of the

seller! 1fficiency and producti ity can also be Qdouble edged swords!, This is e ident in health care when increasing efficiency and producti ity may be seen as positi e to insurance companies, but negati e to the consumer who re)uires )uality care! -hen it comes to numbers, politicians tend to like the middle or at the a erage and prefer to a oid e'tremes! The ambiguity of the middle ground is a safe place compared to the e'treme ends where otes may be easily won and easily lost! 1idden Stories in +#)%ers >umbers tell a story, of decline and decay or bigger and worse! The goal is to create a sense of helplessness and control! Typically, the numbers are used to tell the story and the deception lies in the fact that they don,t lie, or do they: Characteristically, numbers can be e'plicit! More importantly, numbers can be ery implicit too! &f something counts, it must be important right: People tend to use counting and measure of something to erify the problem is worth looking at! -hen something counts" the assertion is made that it" is identifiable with clear boundaries! One e'ample of this is seen in education where there is great debate o er accountability! Test scores ha e become the outcome measure for schools to demonstrate they are accountable for student progress, impro ement, and achie ement! There is great argument related to this stemming from the alidity and reliability of the measures of aptitude and achie ement! ;hen 2e %egin to co#nt a trait 2e %egin to create a co))#nity of (like.* The pro%le) 2ith this lies in the distinction of 2hat co#nts and 2hat does not. The %o#ndary %et2een 2hat is and 2hat is not )ay %e 3ery f#..y. 8n policy co#nting )o%ili.es efforts. ;e pro)ise conflict resol#tion 3ia arith)etic and can )anip#late 2hat 2e )eas#re %y adding, s#%tracting, )#ltiplying, and di3iding. This is contradictory to the nat#re of exactness appreciated in science 2here n#)%ers are seen as sy)%ols of o%0ecti3ity, precision, and acc#racy. Co#nting is political 8! 9! ;! <! =! ?! @! A! include ersus e'clude implies norms of how much is too little too much ambiguity tell stories illusion that comple' is simple create communities aid negotiation and compromise bolster authority of those that count

+#)erical strategies 8! people react to being counted 9! counting makes people notice ;! stimulate public demands for change

<! =! ?! @!

e'plicit measure to e aluate and people will try to manipulate scores power of measure is power of control creates alliances between measured and measures numbers don,t speak for themsel es and people try to control how others will interpret

=eferences Centers for Jisease Control! O erweight and Obesity! Fetrie ed April 8<, 9CC@ from www!cdc!go ! Stone, J! *9CC9+! Policy Parado-: (he %rt of Political Decision Ma.ing! *9nd ed!+! >ew Oork2 -! -! >orton D Co!

Policy Paradox Chapter <

+#)%ers

Jefine a Policy Problem by measuring it but there are infinite ways to do so with numbers 1'2 5iterature describes with words 1'2 Painting with pigments Most determine the purpose for the measuring 4undamental issues of any policy conflict are always contained in the )uestion of how to count the problem 1'2 /nemployment rate E designed as the measure of people wanting work or the need for 0obs! The official method of counting unemployment is the official definition of the problem lea es out people who fit somebody,s notion of unemployed but not the official notion Official Jefinition Older than 8? 6a e pre iously held a 0ob Are a ailable for work 6a e looked for work within the pre ious four weeks Also /nemployed /nwilling to take a ail! 0obs dangerous unpleasant demeaning Can only find part$time when -ant full$time Suit a 0ob to look for Something better Can,t work due to child care -orker,s strike

Co#nting al2ays in3ol3es deli%erate decisions a%o#t counting as Must begin with categori%ation -hat include and e'clude &mportant characteristics and asking whether the ob0ect to be classified is substantially like the others in the category 1stablishment of boundaries in the form of rules or criteria Only after characteri%ing does mere tallying come into play Feally political terms &nclusionHe'clusion I suggest community, boundaries, allies, enemies Selection I pri ilege and discrimination &mportant characteristics I alue 0udgment and hierarchy #oals of public policy need the language of counting >umber as Metaphors >umbers work e'actly like metaphors To categori%e in counting or analogi%e in metaphors is to select one feature of something, assert a likeness on the basis of that feature and ignore all the other features To count is to form a category by emphasi%ing some feature instead of the others and e'cluding things that might be similar in important ways but do not share the same feature! 1'2 acti ely looked for work in the past < weeks E unemployment but desperately wanting work but not pa ement pounding" does not e)ual unemployment Two Challenges due to the 0udgment of inclusion and e'clusion 8+ The assertion of a real likeness where the measure finds a difference, and insists on inclusion of something the measure e'cludes! 1'2 unemployment rate included discouraged workers" and underemployed workers" or how to count the homeless I 0ust those who sleep on the streets or shelters, s! prison, deto' centers, mental institutions, who would ha e no home if released &mportant definitions because they determine who will get benefits, loans, contracts, budget increases, 0obs, fines, and penalties Sometime arbitrary by setting a cutoff point or threshold or threshold on a numerical scale e'2 5SAT for law school admissions, income le el for welfare, drinking and oting rights 9+

Assertion of a real difference where a measure finds a likeness and insists on e'clusion of something the measure includes 1'2 6ealth care facility need was defined by primarily by the ratio of hospital beds to population of the community howe er it the definition of bed" was not consistent, it did not account for the number of staff, nor pro'imity to general population Though debate about final counts seems to be about the tally, it can be argued they are really about the categori%ation! >umbers are in oked to gi e an air of finality to each side,s opinions 1 ery number is an assertion about similarities and differences! Oou can,t count without making 0udgments about categori%ation and similarities and differences are the ultimate basis for decisions in public policy >umbers as >orms and Symbols >umbers make normati e leaps! Measures imply a need for action because we do not measure things e'cept when we want to change them or change our beha ior in response to them! Call for a measurement E first step in promoting change 1'2 /nemployment figures as force in politics I to use the numbers to put pressure on the administration to create new 0obs >ot only for pressure, but some le el of the measure will become the nor) +or)s I part of the story of helplessness and control H Control and failure2 unemployment rate, prime interest rate, inflation rate, si%e of the budget, the #>P, and the deficit Do#%le edged s2ords I it is good to be high on the measure but low is also good Symbols I sa ings symboli%es both thrift and past waste so it matters more is how the measure is interpreted Cost I ideology of efficiency is that it is better to pay less for something than more! 6owe er, high cost is sometime a symbol of high )uality or prestige! Cost becomes a pro'y measure for prestige Feformers see the waste side of cost and People in the system see the )uality side and symbolic benefits of high cost Cost to buyers is income to sellers Costs are always income to somebody else, so there is always a constituency for high costs to battle the low costs!

1fficiency $ getting the most output for a gi en input Producti ity I output per hour of labor #enerally think the more efficiency and producti ity the better I howe er high output can symboli%e both perfunctory work and a 0ob well done! 1fficiency is not always a irtue where the output is personal attention or custom designs! Middles and A erages e'! Middle class $ most people think of themsel es as middleclass e en when they fall substantially abo e or below the median 6owe er is the option of working class is added about <=T will choose this and feel alienated by ta' breaks aimed at middle$class The Political middle class not the same as economic middle class so hard to write a ta' plan to please both 6idden Stories in >umbers To Count something at all is to assert that phenomenon is at least fre)uent enough to bother counting &nitial demands to count something formally grow from recognition that the thing is common enough to worry about I Co))on, reg#lar, and expected e en to show how rare the phenomenon is! Mo es an e ent from the singular to the plural To count is to assert that it is an identifiable entity with clear boundaries! Oou can,t count something you can,t distinguish &s the phenomenon measurable at all: &f yes, is it too inclusi e or e'clusi e: To count is to create a community! Any number is implicitly an assertion that things counted in it share a common feature that should be treated as a group! >atural communities I or primary groups I people who actually interact regardless of whether they are counted e'2 population of a illage, si%e of a family, or si%e of a school Artificial communities I or statistical groups I lump together people who ha e no relationship other than the shared characteristic that determined the count! 1'( age groups, income classes

Sometimes the distinction between artificial and natural communities is fu%%y .ecause these groups are created, counting is an essential instrument of political mobili%ation To count is the promise of Conflict Fesolution through arithmetic! The common wisdom among negotiators is that irreconcilable demands can be handled by breaking them up into smaller components and trading the parts off against each other! 1'2 like pregnancy in the abortion debate Once a phenomenon has been con erted into )uantifiable units, it can be added, multiplied, di ided, or subtracted, e en though operations ha e little meaning in reality >umbers force a common denominator where there is none! -hy Counting is Political 8! 9! ;! <! =! ?! @! A! Counting re)uires decisions about categori%ing, about what *or whom+ to include and e'clude Measuring any phenomenon implicitly creates norms about how much is too little, too much, or 0ust right >umbers can be ambiguous, and so lea e room for political struggles to control their interpretation >umbers are used to tell stories such as stories of decline >umbers can create the illusion that a ery comple' and ambiguous phenomenon is simple, countable and precisely defined >umbers can create political communities out of people who share some trait that can be counted Counting can aid negotiation and compromise, by making intangible )ualities seem di isible >umbers, by seeming to be so precise, help bolster the authority of those who count

Making >umbers in the Polis >umbers in politics are measures of human acti ities, by human beings, and intended to influence human beha ior! They are sub0ect to conscious and unconscious manipulation by the people being measured, the people making the measurements, and the people who will interpret and uses the measures made by others! >umerical Strategies in Problem Jefinition 8! People react to being counted or measured, and try to look good" on the measure 9! The process of counting something makes people notice it more, and record keeping stimulates reporting ;! Counting can be used to stimulate public demands for change

<! -hen the measurement is e'plicitly used to e aluate performance, the people being e aluated try to manipulate their scores" =! The power to measure is the power to control! Measures ha e a lot of discretion in their choice of what and how to measure ?! Measuring creates alliances between the measurers and the measured @! >umbers don,t speak for themsel es, and people try to control how others will interpret numbers! >umbers are always descriptions of the world, and as descriptions, they are no more real than the isions of poems or paintings! Their ision of e'perience may correspond more or less with popular isions, 0ust as a realist, impressionist, and abstract e'pressionist paintings correspond more or less with common isions! >umbers are real as artifacts! .ut the dominance of numbers as a mode of describing society in public policy discussions is only recent, and perhaps temporary, phenomenon in cultural history I not the result of some underlying reality of numbers!

,hapter A% ,auses !his chapter focuses on the use of causes of problems that call for a policy to be enacted. Bo ever, one of the difficult things to do is pin;point an e$act cause. !he author states that the purpose of policy should be the addressing of a problem once a cause has been determined. While she states that causes can be used to bring about some justice for the parties ronged, it can also be used to shape alliances and assign responsibility. Causal Stories as Problem Definition !here are t o sides to the orld, in terms of causes. 6. =atural orld% this is here the undirected, the random, and the accidental occur 7. Social orld% intent, control of the situation, and influence are the causes. !here is a specified, calculated direction She then goes on to define C causal theories relating conse:uences and actions 6. 5ccidental causes% these are the product of a roll of the dice and are part of the natural orld of causes 7. 0ntentional causes% the e$act opposite of accidental causes, here, there is a direct assignment of responsibility. a. Rational actions result from intentional causes ith a good outcome; the achievement of a specific, positive goal b. +ad intentional causes are planned outcomes that result in people being ronged and the perpetrators

i. ,onspiracies run in this category 6. 8$ample used by the author% !obacco 0ndustry >. #nintended conse:uences% the unforeseen product of an action a. 8$ample% 9inimum age la s b. #nintended conse:uences can also be the result of negligence C. 9echanical causes% caused through human means by objects or people ith the inability to e$ercise discretion a. 8$amples% 9achines that malfunction, people tied to regulations and just doing my job 0n addition to these, the author suggests three more perspectives to address causes. 6. ,omple$ System% the accused can blame the cause of malfunction on a system that is so comple$ and is, at times, unmanageable. 0t is hard to anticipate every problem. a. !his ma/es blame harder to assign 7. 0nstitutional System% problems are caused by strong institutions that collude ith each other for mutual benefit. a. 8$ample% +ranches of the military getting a part of defense spending >. Bistorical% t o sides receive responsibility a. !he po erful use their clout to stop needed policy that addresses a problem they are responsible for b. !he po erless, convinced of their po erlessness, do nothing to combat the po erful, but accept the status :uo 0n the end, the actors trying to solve the problem are prone to define the cause, rather than loo/ at the problem as a result of multiple causes ith plenty of blame to go around. Ma in! Causes in the Polis !his section of the chapter is concerned ith strategies used to assign blame 2reference of blame 6. +est is to blame nature 7. Second best is to blame someone else, but that person or group could fight bac/ >. !hird alternative is to sho ignorance of the problem C. )east best alternative% admit the problem as intentional !he author defines the follo ing strategies hen it comes to assigning blame 6. !here is a conspiracy that secretly produced the action. a. 8$ample% =ader and complaints that manufacturers ere ma/ing inferior products to induce greater consumption 7. !eleological strategy a. 5ssuming the unfavorable effects of the action ta/en ere the intended effects of the actor i. 8ffective strategy, if true, for a call to change >. Ris/ as a factor implicating blame

a. ,alculated ris/% a company /no ing there is a possibility for unfavorable conse:uences, but uses the idea of calculated ris/s to cover up the outcome i. 5llo s for the toleration of harm by businesses as ell as regulatory agencies b. 9anipulation of ris/% mainly applied to civil rights litigation i. 5llo s for the determination of discrimination if the perceived ris/ of hiring one person is higher for that group as opposed to a random group of people or another specific group C. ,omple$ ,ause a. 5llo s the accused to shift blame to comple$ity 'related to the comple$ system( ?iven this, acceptance of the cause ill be determined by the public that is made a are of it. 0f the cause is in line ith public values and ma/es a compelling case, especially in the legal and scientific communities, there is a good chance it ill be accepted. 0f the cause goes against public values or is restricted in its ability to be e$pressed, then there is a lesser li/elihood of acceptance. "sin! Causes in the Polis 0f they are successfully accepted by the polis, causal theories can% 6. ,hallenge or protect e$isting attitudes and institutions 7. 5ssign blame a. +lame is still hard to define, given its comple$ities i. 8$. Drun/ drivers and ho is responsible 'driver, manufacturer of car or alcohol, bartenders( >. ,reate a reputation of a fi$er of problems C. ,an shift or create alliances organi<ed in common ,auses can be hard to define, but if they are convincing enough and stand the test of public scrutiny, they can be used, not only solve their problems, but as strategies for those forming the policy.

Stone 3 6. What are interestsD a. 0nterests are the sides in politics. 7. What1s the problemD a. !here is a difference bet een real interests 'problems and needs people have( and political demands ' hat people as/ from government(.

>. What ma/es up the problemD a. 0nterests can be vie ed from an individual level 'i.e., hat do 0 need to survive, hat do 0 need from the government( b. 0nterests can be vie ed on a class level c. 0nterests can be vie ed on a group level C. Representation is the process by hich interests are defined and activated in politics, and has a dual :uality% representatives give e$pression to an interest by portraying an issue and they also spea/ for people in policy debates. E. !hus, interests derive from these t o types of representation. F. 9obili<ation% the process by hich effects and e$periences are converted into organi<ed efforts to bring about change. !hus, hat /ind of interests ill mobili<eD !hose ho can offer selective benefits in order to avoid the free;rider problem. a. 5dditionally, the substance of an issue can determine hether and ho organi<ations get involved in promoting and e$panding the interests. 0n a game theoretic model, concentrated issues 'spread over a small number of people( versus concentrated issues are li/ely to result in stalemates or alternating victories for each side; diffused 'spread over a large number of people( versus diffused programs ill li/ely spread gradually. ,oncentrated interests ill li/ely defeat diffuses interest 'better organi<ational resources( !he point is that the distribution of costs and benefits in any program determines the type of political contest it ill undergo. +ut, politics shapes the ay problems and policy issues are perceived in the first place. G. ?roups often try to define issues so as to ma/e a concentrated interest appear general in an effort to gain broader appeal; and economic issues are framed into social issues. a. =arro interests broadened their efforts and too/ out the ,linton Bealth ,are Reform 5ct. A. Summary% problems are defined in politics in an effort to accomplish political goals, to mobili<e support for one side in a conflict. !o define an issue is to ma/e an assertion about hat is at sta/e and ho is affected, and therefore, to define interests and the constitution of alliances. !hus, the definition of any policy problem must also define interested parties and sta/es.

Policy Paradox: Chapter > $ 8nterests &nterest is considered the sides in politics," the group that benefits or are affected by an issue! &t can also be described as the acti e side of effects," where effects," as described by policy analysts, are enduring conse)uences of actions that e'ist whether we,re aware of them or not! 1ffects" are not important in the political arena until they become demands( therefore it,s important to know how, when, and why effects" transitions to political interests! One debate spearheaded by political scientists during the 8B=Cs and 8B?Cs was whether people affected by an issue automatically transition from a passi e stance into an acti e stance! One important challenge to the notion of automatic transition is that people can be mistaken about their interest, whether ob0ecti ely or sub0ecti ely! o Ob0ecti e interests are those effects that actually impinge on people whether they,re aware of it or not *ha ing an interest+! o Sub0ecti e interests are those things that people belie e affect them *taking an interest+! Fepresentation is the process by which interests are defined and acti ated in politics and has a dual )uality2 representati es gi e e'pression to an issue( and representati es speak for people, articulating their wishes in policy debates Mobili%ation is the process by which effects and e'periences are con erted into organi%ed efforts to bring about change! o The free$rider" problem is seen as a ma0or obstacle to interest mobili%ation! &ndi iduals ha e little or no incenti e to 0oin groups and work for a collecti e good! Since they recei e the benefit if others work for it and succeed in obtaining it $ $ also known as the logic of collective action theory! Three reasons why the logic of collecti e action does not always obtain in the polis2 8! The logic,s prediction is betrayed by reality! People do not e'ist in polis as autonomous, isolated atoms! 9! Collecti e efforts tend to follow the laws of passion rather than the laws of matter! The costs of collecti e action *i!e! time and effort+ are its benefits! ;! The importance of symbols and ambiguity! 1 ery political goal can be portrayed both as a good to be obtained and a bad to be a oided! People respond differently to bads and goods! Kohn S! -ilson,s distribution$of$effect theory is where the interest of small minorities intensely affected by something will dominate the interests of large ma0orities only incidentally affected by something! Making a particular interest appear to be in the interest of the general public is a classical political strategy *i!e! -hat,s good for #eneral Motors is good for the Country"+! Problems are defined in politics in an effort to accomplish political goals, to mobili%e support for one side in a conflict! To define an issue is to make an assertion about

what is at stake and who is affected, and therefore, to define interests and the constitution of alliances! Thus, the definition of any policy problem must also define interested parties and stakes, how the role of bully and underdog is allocated, and how a different definition would change power relations!

Stone Chapter 10

Stone prefaces the chapter with a quote from: President Warren G. Harding I isten to one side and the! seem right" and then I ta # to the other side" and the! seem $ust as right and there I am where I started%& decisions ma! 'e made '! ha'it" socia custom" impu se" intuition" consensus" de egation" 'argaining" mediation" or e(en f ipping a coin. )he! ma! 'e made a mu titude of (arious wa!s" 'ut more than often contemporar! po ic! ana !sts do not resort to simp ! $ust f ipping a coin. *ather" the! focus on rationa methods of decision ma#ing. The Concept of Rational Decision Making + rationa decision ma#ing mode depicts a po ic! pro' em as a choice facing a po itica actor +n actor is defined as an indi(idua " a firm" an organi,ation" or an! entit! capa' e of ma#ing a decision" who must choose a course of action in order to attain a desired end )his actor then goes through se(era steps 'efore arri(ing at a decision. o -efining goa s o Imagining a ternati(e means for attaining them o .(a uating consequences of ta#ing each course of action o Choosing the a ternati(e most i#e ! to attain the goa In regards to the rationa decision ma#ing process" there are (ariations to this mode o /ne such (ariation is the cost-benefit analysis It consists of tota ing a the positi(e and negati(e consequences of an action seeing whether it wi ead to an o(era gain or oss +dditiona !" this t!pe of mode is often measured '! quantit!" such as do ars. o +nother common (ariation is the risk-benefit analysis )his mode a so tota s the positi(e and negati(e consequences much i#e the cost 'enefit ana !sis" howe(er" the negati(e a so incorporates the measures of the i#e ihood of the negati(e effects as we as its magnitude. 012

i.e. if a new drug has a 103 chance of #i ing 100 peop e" its e4pected cost wou d 'e estimated as 10 i(es which is 10 percent of 100 peop e. Making decisions in the Polis 5a#ing decisions in the Po is is simi ar rationa decision ma#ing" 'ut there are s ight (ariations to the formu a. 6or instance" pro' ems are portra!ed as decisions7 which a ows actors to contro its 'oundaries 5oreo(er" another strateg! actors emp o! in the Po is is to ma#e one8s preferred outcome seem i#e it is the on ! (ia' e so ution. o Stone terms this strateg! as Ho'son8s choice o )homas Ho'son was a 19th centur! i(er!man in .ng and who rented out horses. *ather than gi(ing the customer a choice" he opted to gi(e them the horse that was c osest to the door. o -efine: i(er!man : an indi(idua who wor#s in a sta' e o /ne e4amp e of a Ho'son8s choice wou d 'e in 6edera ist 10 In where 5adison offers two possi' e so utions in order to so (e the pro' em of factions See top of pg 0;9 for quote: +nother (ariation to the decision ma#ing formu a is to uti i,e what Stone ca s as issue framing o + frame is a 'oundar! that forces us to oo# at a particu ar part of the pro' em whi e simu taneous ! neg ecting a other aspects of it o <sing this technique a ows actors to frame a po ic! pro' em and create a Ho'son8s choice In addition to the pre(ious ! mentioned techniques" the Po is 5ode a so re ies on the fo owing tenets which further distinguish itse f from a traditiona rationa =ana !tic mode o State goa s am'iguous ! and attempt to #eep some goa s secret o >e prepared to shift goa s and redefine goa s as the po itica situation dictates o ?eep undesira' e a ternati(es off the agenda '! not mentioning them o 5a#e the preferred a ternati(e appear to 'e the on ! feasi' e so ution o 6ocus on one part of the causa chain and ignore others that wou d require po itica ! difficu t or cost ! po ic! actions

o <se rhetorica de(ices to ' end a ternati(es" don8t appear to ma#e a c ear decision that ma! ead to strong opposition o Se ect from the infinite range of consequences on ! those whose costs and 'enefits wi ma#e !our preferred course of action oo# 'est& o Choose the course of action that hurts powerfu constituents the east" 'ut portra! the decision as the ma4imi,ation of socia good for 'road pu' ic appea

Policy Parado' Ch!88 &nducements$ Carrot and stick$The idea behind inducements is that knowledge of a threatened penalty of promised rewind moti ates people to act differently! &ncenti es or Jeterrence$ An incenti e makes it easier or more rewarding to make someone do something *ta' credit+ Jeterrence makes it harder or more costly for them to act2 *criminal 0ustice system, income+ Most fa ored nation status is gi en by the /!S! #o ernment in e'change for political cooperation *threat of remo ing the status looms+! A problem e'ists when there is a di ergence between pri ate interests and public interests, or when indi iduals benefit *or lose+ from doing something that harms *or helps+ the community! The inducement system has three parts$ The inducement gi er The inducement recei er The inducement itself These all work together under the premise that people are rational by nature and will make the right decisions based on a calculated thought process! Pg 9?@, 6ow the carrot and stick inducement can be wrong! Jeterrence$ 1PA, School Principle, Kudge, &FS single actor acting on behalf of a much larger entity >egati e inducements can cause a climate of conflict and di ide two parties *tariffs, fines, embargos Positi e inducements create alliances and goodwill *producti ity bonuses, trade subsidies, foreign :

Chapter 11 Positi3e 8nd#ce)ents ?8ncenti3es6 and +egati3e 8nd#ce)ents ?Deterrents6

An incentive ma"es it easier or more rewarding to ma"e someone do something (ta! credit) ,eterrence ma"es it harder or more costly for them to act0 (criminal 1ustice system2 income) Most fa ored nation status is gi en by the /!S! #o ernment in e'change for political cooperation *threat of remo ing the status looms+! A problem e'ists when there is a di ergence between pri ate interests and public interests, or when indi iduals benefit *or lose+ from doing something that harms *or helps+ the community! The idea behind inducements is that people act differently than they might otherwise choose! The theory of inducements rests on a utilitarian model of human beha ior! The assumptions include2 8! People are adaptable I they ha e control o er their own beha ior , so that confronted with new knowledge of a penalty or reward, they can change their calculus and their beha ior! Problem I loyalty I people don,t change because they hang on to old habits, choices, and actions! 9! The gi ers and recei ers are unitary actors I gi ers must be able to implement a consistent policy of rewarding or penali%ing beha ior, and a target must be capable of making calculations and taking a single course of action! ;! The recei er has some orientation toward the future I &nducements can only work to the e'tent that the target cares about the costs and rewards to be faced in the future and is willing to modify current beha ior! &nducements far in the future ha e less impact than the ones that occur immediately! <! Of purposeful notions of cause &nducements applied when the cause of a problem is understood as intentional &ntended to alter the conse)uences to the target of taking the action in )uestion I such as criminal penalties on burglary! &nducements applied when the cause is understood to be inad ertent I unforeseeable side effects or careless mistakes!

Jesigned to make formerly in isible conse)uences isible to the target I such as ta'es on industrial pollution or consumer rebates for plastic bottles! These all work together under the premise that people are rational by nature and will make the right decisions based on a calculated thought process! The inducement system has three parts2 o The inducement gi er! o The inducement recei er *the target+! o The inducement itself!

?sing inducements as a policy instrument does not re-uire us to understand the causes of the problem or the reasons why people do what they do. o Politically much easier to accomplish than finding out the real problems and really fi'ing it! &nducements are determined by the targets e'pectations I not the gi ers! Positi e inducements and negati e inducements can foster different political relationships! o Positi e inducements *wage producti ity bonus, foreign aid, or trade subsidies+ can encourage two parties to cooperate! o >egati e inducements *fines, tariffs, and embargoes+ create a climate of conflict and may di ide the two parties! Making inducements in the polis &n the polis, inducements are usually designed by one set of people *policy analysts, legislators, and regulation writers+, applied by another *e'ecuti e branch bureaucrats+, and recei ed by yet a third *indi iduals, firms, and organi%ations+! >e er a direct correspondence between the inducement as proposed by the designer and as applied by the gi er! o Se eral elements of the polis make gi ing out inducements difficult! >egati e and positi e inducements can be di isi e! &mposing penalties and rewards can ha e ery concrete, material costs! o ; I Strikes rule! o .est thesis award! Sanctions designed may be too drastic that the sanction gi ers are e'tremely loath to impose them! &nducements may hurt the ery thing one is trying to protect! o 4ederal go ernment withdrawing funds from states that don,t pro ide ser ices to their citi%ens *Medicaid, federal highway subsidies, public housing+, thus depri ing the ery people they are trying to help! The costs of imposing sanctions may become resources for the gi ers!

o &n an embargo imposed to induce some political change, the sanction gi er incurs some loss of its e'port market as well as a loss of imports! The sacrifice increases credibility of it commitment toward policy change! The most important reason for slippage between the design of inducements and the target,s response is that people are strategic as well as adapti e! o They will try to reap a reward or a oid a penalty without changing beha ior! 1normous disparities in power and economic resources shape the impact of the more temporary inducements of day$to$day programs! o 4or people who don,t control any wealth or producti e assets, the o erwhelming incenti e is to ac)uire economic security by getting and keeping a 0ob! >o system of inducement is self$e'ecuting, automatic, or apolitical!

Policy Paradox Chapter 11 8nd#ce)ents

The pro erbial carrot and the stick$ getting other people to chose actions we desire &ncenti es and Jeterrence *rewardsHpunishments+ ; parts to the &nducement System$ #i er Fecei erHTarget &nducement itself All ; need to work together for the desired change &nducement Theory Assumptions *based on utilitarian model+ 8+ People are rational 9+ #i ersHrecei ers are unitary &nstead of one trainer working with one donkey, rather one trainer with 8CC donkies ;+ .ased on a Purposeful notion of cause Make isible unforeseen conse)uences of inad ertent actions Positi eHnegati e inducements conceptually same, yield different political relationships Positi e$ goodwill, alliance, reciprocity >egati e$ di ision, conflict &n the Polis Parties to inducement process$ Jesigners *legislators, regulators+ &mplementers *e'ecuti e bureaucrats+

Fecei ers Passage between parties is treacherous for se eral reasons$ Costs of handing out rewardsHpunishments &nducements can ha e symbolic meanings 4or the target, inducements are simply another option Adapti e measures of the targets

Chapter 12: RULES This chapter focuses on rules that impose obligations and duties Policy$making relies hea ily on official rules *rules consciously designed to accomplish social goals+ Policy analysts must also account for unofficial rules and how they interact with more formal official rules! Fules deri e their power from legitimacy! 5egitimacy is rather obscure and can be considered the political scientist,s e)ui alent of the economist,s in isible hand! >e ertheless, rules work best when they are percei ed as legitimate! The most important problem in the design of rules is the tension between precision and fle'ibility! Precise rules are said to ensure that like cases will be treated alike, they insulate people from the whims, pre0udices, moods, or predilections of officials and pro ide predictability! A down side to precise rules though is that they cannot be sensiti e to some kinds of indi idual conte'tual differences *i!e! different cases will be treated alike+! Precise rules also stifle creati e responses to new situations! MChart on page 9B9 e'plains precise s! fle'ible rulesN = unattainable ideals in rules2 Optimum social balance between discretionary power and control by formal rules( The perfectly precise rule( The perfectly fle'ible rule( The neutral rule( The perfectly enforced rule! -riting a rule is 0ust the beginning! >o rule or set of rules, e en the Constitution, is written once and for all! Fules ac)uire their meanings and their effects as they are applied, enforced, challenged and re ersed!

Stone: Chapter 12
Fules are designed to accomplish a social goal! Policy$makers relies hea ily on for)al r#les, generally referred to as laws, originating from different platforms! They can be a result of2 legislati e bodies *Statutory laws+ Administrati e bodies *regulations+ Courts *common laws+ State or 4ederal constitutional laws Fules2 mandate beha ior, or confer power onto pri ate citi%ens or organi%ation Public officials or organi%ation &f you want the power of the law behind you, you much follow these rules which are imposing obligations and duties onto you! There is another category of rules, the infor)al r#les, which include social and traditional customs, moral rules and principles, and internal bylaws of pri ate organi%ations! &nformal rules often guide the formation of formal rules and the interpretation along with the enforcement of the formal rules! The author feels that if policy analysis is not accounting for the interaction between these two types of rules, then a needed component is missing! & strongly agree, but there are two points & would e'pand on, first, if the design of a policy are using informal rules", from a source with strong internal beliefs, the process will be slanted toward an isolated group! Secondly, the ma0ority of people Fules, informal or formal, need to be percei ed as legitimate to function! The context in which a rule is applied to, can mean whether or not the rule was broken! 4or an e'ample, it is against formal and informal rules to kill someone, but if it is in self$ defense, or an accident which is not your fault, or you are in the military directed to act against an enemy, it is acceptable beha ior! The classification of an action can result in the application or non$application the rule, this creates a di ision of society by including or e'cluding, and uniting or di iding people, making alliances between people who benefit or are caused harm by a rule! This grouping occurs naturally as the balance of policy analysis is based on a medium which does not totally benefit one people o er another!

*An e'ample is the water grab issue, once the rule on the ac)uisition of water rights is applied, it di ides the people of >e ada into two groups, the farmers and others who are harmed by this action, and the city dwellers which gain some benefit!+ The legiti)acy of r#les comes from how the conte't and classification follow infor)al rules of society! The creation of an accepta%le r#le is rooted in the tension between precision and fle'ibility of a rule! Precision is the ability to describe action and conte't without ambiguity! There are three foundations which are re)uired for precision2 5ike cases will be treated alike, demonstrating e)uality and fairness to all! The author points out that alike is a )ualitati e 0udgment, open to interpretation! &nsulates people from whims, pre0udices, moods, and pre$di$lection of officials! -e are to be go erned and punished by laws, not by an indi idual,s will Pro ide a degree of predictability, we know what beha ior is breaking the rules, and we know the punishment applied to that infraction! Though precision pro ides us protection from in0ustice, it creates crude classification, so cases can differ, but the same decision is applied, thereby creating an in0ustice by ignoring mitigating circumstances! 4le'ible rules, with broad criteria,s and room for discretionary thinking enables adaptation to changing situations, these :ag#e =#les call for the use of Tacit @no2ledge, which is an intuiti e sense of what is right or true! Gague rules can con ey a hard line determination to sol e an issue to the community, and at the same time gi e fle'ibility of the le el of enforcement! &t is noted that depending on which end of the fle'ibility you are on, can make this a good or bad feature of agueness! Precision in rules ersus discretion dilemma2 1ach has their irtues, and the belief is that one can percei e if either one is being allied properly! The assumption is that only necessary discretion is applied to the rules in society, and unnecessary discretion is eliminated! &n the case of 0udges, decision, if the society feels strongly about a certain application of the law, the discretion can be limited or remo es! An e'ample is the ; strikes, and you,re out, rule! The author feels there is not an optimal balance between precision and discretionary, only attempts that placate our need to be 0ust, a oiding the impossibility of putting society alues in stone! Kust as the ideal balance is unattainable, so is the ideal precise rule! The thought of defining a rule to ha e all the possibilities co ers is not realistic! 6a ing the perfect fle'ible rule would create a framework so ague( it would present the polar opposite to the three foundations of precision! All cases differ, unconstrained sub0ecti ity, and little predictability of conse)uences! Therefore the author states that the balance is ne er static, mo ement is necessary to con ey changes in society and the informal rules! Static rules, o er time, become more beneficial to those who learn to manipulate them for their benefit! The perfectly enforce rule ignores the circumstances! 1 en the most noble among us are ictims of circumstances! Fules are in a constant flu' between precision and agueness, between centrali%ation and discretion, with public and pri ate agendas, trying to define it to their

benefit! >ew rules are generally written aguely, depending on the informal rules in society to fine tune their meaning and enforcement! The author interprets the effect of the Constitution as a reaction to tyranny, creating a pre$crisis management system which doesn,t address the feasibility! &n democracy, the politician is always conscious of his reelection, the ways to a oid conflict is to Shun statutes which harm your constituents such as 8! Constituency ser ices *4ighting red tape and pro ide helpful information+ 9! 5ogrolling *getting 0ob and money into one,s district, by supporting similar programs in other districts!+ ;! .y supporting feel$good policies, i!e! street naming .ut when there is a need to show support for legislation which may be contro ersial to some, ambiguity is a means to reflect opposition directed at the politician! There is a pressure on rules created from the potential for disobedient, this pressures is called per erse incenti es! This means there is a trade$off between ob0ecti es, but the rule rewards or penali%es only one of them! A local e'ample is the way the water rights doctrine is written in the S- and how the agriculture industry and farming community has responded o er history, The law says the first to use it for a beneficial propose has complete rights to the water, but if you don,t use any portion of the claim, you lose it and someone else can claim it! So it is common practice to flood fields, without any conser ation practices, and effecti ely preser ing water for future use by wasting it today! The author says that, though one might think it is poorly designed rules causing per erse incenti es, really anytime you ha e a rule curbing an acti ity, which is profitable or en0oyable, people will find ways to manipulate them to their benefit! The discretionary application of the r#le of th#)% enforcement of law causes the bending of formal rules, similar to speeding at ?= in a ?C, most patrolman will not ticket you, or knowing what amount you can fudge on and not cause an audit on your income ta' return, this is accepted practice in our society, but the more common this practice becomes, the greater breakdown in the effecti eness of the law!! &n the Polis, the myth of perfectly precise, neutral, and enforced rules are essential to the legitimacy of laws, but the ability for enforcers to treat like rule breakers alike is an impossibility as, not only do enforcers application of laws ery, but also the informal rule aries from town to town, and state to state, and in liberal political theory, these myths are necessary to 0ustify why one should gi e up their autonomy! 4airness, to our society would be likes are treated alike, and each person should get his or her due, to accomplish this each mitigating circumstances must be considers when applying the formal law, so the informal rule applied to ague formal rules, gi es the greater fle'ibility in reaching an acceptable decision in society and keeping the myth of perfectly precise, neutral, and enforced rules ali e!

Policy Paradox Chapter 1& S#))ary

&! The Two 4aces of Persuasion a! Feason and &nformed Jecision i! Fational &deal ii! &ndi idual .eha ior as rational decision iii! 1steems reason, denigrates impulse b! Feason as basis for go ernment i! #roups emulate indi idual rational deliberation ii! People are educated, not coerced iii! &nformation and knowledge can resol e conflict 8! Fational persuasion and oluntary beha ior change a! Stop littering and smoking, use seat belts and dri e safely c! Persuasion as propaganda and indoctrination i! &ndoctrination 8! &ntentionally manipulati e 9! Fobs people of their capacity to think independently ;! Preceptoral system a! &ndi idual is puppet &nformation Propaganda 1nlightens .enights 5iberates 1nsla es 1ducation .rainwashing 5earning Compliance <! .oundary between is blurry Making 4acts in the Polis a! Fational &deal i! >eutral 4acts 8! 4acts do not e'ist independent of interpreti e ideas 9! Act of naming is classification, a political act a! Terrorism s Police action b! >uclear Power &ndustry Stand$insHtemporary KumpersHsponges employees Part$time ocationsHcareers Meat marketHdying for a li ing ;! Jistinguishing information from propaganda a! 4acts are produced in social processes i! 5egislatures conduct hearings 8! -ho testifies, how much time! <! Scientific 4acts

&&!

a! Fandomi%ed Control Test *FCT+ i! Mushy Fesults 8! Must choose between basic definitions and ways of counting 9! 6uman influence =! Fational &deal O erstates purity of information b! &ndoctrination in liberal democratic polis i! Jominant elites control peoples beliefs and knowledge 8! Schools a! 6idden Curriculum 9! .usiness ;! Mass Media <! #o ernment Social Ser ice Organi%ations =! -ithholding &nformation a! Secrecy

Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, Chapter 1&: Aacts -e ha e already discussed two mechanisms for changing people,s beha ior2 chapter 88 dealt with creating incenti es and penalties and chapter 89 with mandating rules! Chapter 8;, titled 4acts," deals with persuasion strategies, which change people,s beha ior by influencing their minds and their perceptions of the world, not by offering the carrot and stick or permissions and prohibitions! The Two 4aces of Persuasion The first is reasoned and informed decision I the rational ideal! propaganda and indoctrination! The second is

Persuasion in the Fational &deal Model *the good face that we hope sustains democracy+ $ &n this model, indi idual beha ior is rational! People make goals, get information about ways to achie e those goals, e aluate those alternati es, and choose the best ones! $ The rational ideal offers reason as the basis for go ernment! This means that groups, organi%ations, and societies go through the same rational process as indi iduals when making decisions! $ &nformation and knowledge can resol e conflicts, and force is replaced by discussion! $ An e'ample from a policy analysis te'tbook2 Policy disagreements would lessen I and perhaps anish I if we could predict with certainty the safety conse)uences of the breeder reactor, or the costs of annual upkeep of clay courts, or whether a special shuttle bus for the elderly would be hea ily used! *)uoted from Stone ;C?$@+

$ This depends on facts" being impartial and accurate and on e eryone ha ing similar rational goals! Persuasion as Propaganda and &ndoctrination *the bad face that many political scientists feel is only in totalitarian political systems+ $ &t has two elements distinguishing it from the rational ideal! $ 4irst, it is intentionally manipulati e! $ Second, it robs people of their capacity to think independently by, for e'ample, appealing to fears and insecurity! Jifferent language for the two models2 Fational ideal information enlightens and liberates educations learning Preceptoral System propaganda benights and ensla es brainwashing compliance

-hich ision is correct: The boundary between the two is blurry! Making 4acts in the Polis &f you look at both ersions, you will see that neither ersion can e'ist in pure form! Persuasion is somewhere in the middle! 4acts in the Fational &deal Model $ &t assumes the e'istence of neutral facts, but facts do not e'ist independent of interpreti e lenses! 1 en naming an ob0ect, action or policy is a political act *terrorism s! security measures+! $ The problem goes beyond naming! Most of our knowledge comes from social knowledge, but the institutions charged with finding facts make choices in de eloping the information *e!g!, what kind of data to collect+, and they can ha e a pri ate agenda! $ 1 en scientific facts are not always perfectly accurate or unbiased *placebo e'ample+! $ The rational ideal o erstates the purity of information and people,s rationality, as we are influenced by more than 0ust facts *Uennedy s! >i'on e'ample+! &ndoctrination in 5iberal Jemocratic Polis: $ Stone re0ects the idea that a totalitarian go ernment is a necessary condition for indoctrinations! &nstead, she describes it as a relationship in which dominant elites control people,s beliefs and knowledge in a manipulati e and self$interested way! $ Schools ha e a hidden curriculum to teach obedience, authority, etc! $ .usinesses work to indoctrinate citi%ens to accept its pri ileged position! $ The mass media $ Street$le el bureaucrats *e!g!, oting registrars, teachers, police, 0udges+ can also effect client beha ior, such as this Te'as 0udge to a bilingual 6ispanic mother2

Oou,re abusing the child and you,re relegating her to the position of housemaid! >ow get this straight! Oou start speaking 1nglish to this child because if she doesn,t do good in school, then & can remo e her because it,s not in her best interest to be ignorant! *)uoted from Stone ;8A+ $ & disagree with the idea that communist regimes, with their effort to make a new man ha e ser ed as the archetype of political indoctrination for American social scientists! Stone uses a )uote dealing with practicing irtues in order to be irtuous through habitutation *Stone ;8B+! This is Aristotelian, not Mar'ist! $ 4inally, indoctrination can happen through withholding information! Conclusion The rational ideal is incorrect because it assumes facts are accurate and impartial! The preceptoral model is incorrect because it assumes indoctrination only happens in totalitarian states, but it also happens in liberal democracies! Again, persuasion lies between the two!

Stone Chapter 8< Fights The chapter on rights is within the section of the book termed Solutions" in the Policy Parado'! Fights are fre)uently decided in litigation e en though the inciting e ent is one regarding standards of beha ior and whether a beha ior is reasonable! The chapter presents Fights through two traditions2 Positi e and >ormati e Positi e Fights A right is a claim backed by the power of the state Fights deri e from the power of the go ernment People can ha e rights only to those things they claim and for which the state backs them up! >ormati e Fights A right is whate er people in a gi en society ought to be able to do, ha e, or e'pect from fellow citi%ens and the go ernment *but is without power of enforcement+ Fights deri e from some source other than power, such as morality, religion, rationality, or natural law People can ha e rights to things they don,t acti ely claim, and for which the state would not back them up!

6ow Positi e rights work2 8! Call for a right through legal mechanism using types of rights Type Jefinition Subset Procedural Process by which Fight important decisions must be made! Joes not define outcome, only

1'ample Fight to -ork Anti$ discrimination 4air hearing

process! Substanti e Fight Specific action and entitlement people may claim

4air housing 1)ual education >egati e$ right to be 4ree speech free of restraint, can not Fight to ote be pre ented from Fight to doing something assemble Positi e$ an entitlement to ha e or recei e something, holder of ser ice is responsible for pro ision of necessity! 6ealth Care 1ducation 1mployment

9! /tili%e a mechanism to assert rights! Type 1ntity 4ormal Statement of the right 5egislatures must be in place or new legislation must be enacted Constitutions Agencies Courts #rie ance Process is the system to determine contested rights 1nforcement Process is a remedy to mandate the relationship between two contesting parties 5itigation Ad0udication

4orm Statutory 5aw$/!S! or State /!S! or State le el Administrati e law$ Fules of authoritati e agency Common law$ Past decisions at any le el of the court system Courts Administrati e Agencies

*&nitiated by contestant+ Ad0udication Pro ided by go ernment Compliance Mostly compliant by citi%en report of iolations

6ow >ormati e Fights work2 >ormati e Fights are absent of criminal code but are typically the basis for ele ating a standard of beha ior to consideration of a policy change! Tort law gi en as e'ample of standard for policy change for normati e rights! Tort law uses normati e ision of three standards to deliberate resolution of dispute2 8! Standard of Jecency 9! Public &nterest ;! Ci ili%ation of Society Political basis of rights2 8! Competing interest in a single contest

9! .oth parties may be repeat players in court$ low stakes in outcome ;! .oth parties may be one$shotters$ significant e ent in their li es <! Probably are repeat player and one$shotter$ not e)ual before the law Participants in contest utili%e strategic maneu ers2 8! Test cases are common 9! Characteristic of plaintiff are specific #ood public image Admirable )ualities 6a e a situation that results in broad sympathy .e able to withstand the process to change the rules ;! Class action to group of persons that ha e a similar situation that impacted each indi idual Stack plaintiffs Congregate large number to sway 0udge Ticket balancing$ multiple interest groups of persons in ol ed The most distinguishing feature of rights as a policy instrument is that they pro ide occasions for dramatic rituals that reaffirm or redefine society,s internal rules! Fights morali%e about what beha ior is good and bad and dramati%e societal alues through contests between real people on a public stage! Fights &ssue as defined by components of Policy Parado' by Jeborah Stone2 Chapter 8< &ssue2 1ducation &nitial Standard defined in the Jeclaration of &ndependence$ A normati e term used -e hold these truths to be self$e ident, that all men are created e)ual, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Fights, that among these are 5ife, 5iberty and the pursuit of 6appiness!" Supporting standard defined in the Constitution, a 4ormal Statement, appended .ill of Fights, and the creation of a 0udicial system2 Positi e Fights! Plessy 8AB? called for e)ual education for black children2 a procedural right! Met the positi e rights standard but was interpreted through societal interest *normati e rights+ measure! 4inding was for e)ual but separate facilities for education of black children! Mr! Plessy was a one$shotter participant against a repeat player$ une)ual before the law! .rown ! .oard 8B=< called for desegregation of public schools! >ormati e conditions, the ci ili%ation of society, had finally changed enough for the Supreme Court to o erturn the pre ious ruling from 8AB?! This pro ided the 4ormal Statement of rights needed for change! Attitudes and procedures failed to change! Token integration occurred, this nullified the #rie ance process to challenge the failure, and an 1nforcement process was absent to assist in e)ual access to education2 a Positi e substanti e right! 8B=@$ >ational #uard is mobili%ed in Arkansas for school desegregation! #rie ance process enacted and 1nforcement process utili%ed, but only in a singular e ent! Citi%en reporting still re)uired to engage the grie ance process and enforcement protocol! 4ederal regulatory sanctions are absent!

8B?; Kames Meredith, an African American adult male, obtained a federal order citing the 4ormal statement of a Procedural Fight to allow entrance into a segregated uni ersity! The go ernor and courts of Mississippi defied the order! The president federali%ed and dispatched the Mississippi >ational #uard and pro ided 4ederal Marshals to protect Mr! Meredith, enacting an 1nforcement Process! Mr! Meredith was a B year Air 4orce eteran, and had ser ed in the war! 6is was a test case, selected because he had the positi e characteristics desired of a plaintiff in the strategic maneu er of the >AACP! The rest of the storyB 8B?; Jr! Martin 5uther Uing speech at the 5incoln Memorial in -ashington J!C! culminating the March on -ashington and urging the President to enact a Ci il Fights Act to end desegregation and other forms of discrimination! 6is speech to 9CC,CCC people contained the words of the Jeclaration of &ndependence! 8B?< Ci il Fights Act passed after marches, demonstrations, and class action" strategies employed, utili%ing a negati e substanti e right! This Act pro ided further desegregation enforcement by withholding federal funds from school districts that did not integrate! 8B?B The /!S! Supreme Court upholds the order of desegregation of all schools! 8B@8 The /!S! Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of busing of children to areas apart from where they li e to achie e integrated school districts! Chapter 8< Summary Fights 'ights as a policy instrument 'esolve policy problems with legal rights Concepts of Rights in the Polis Positive Rights 'ight is a claim bac"ed by the power of the state Normative Rights 'ight is whatever people in society ought ot be able to do2 have2 or e!pect from fellow citi7ens and the government. 'ights come from some source other than power2 such as morality2 religion2 rationality2 or natural law. People can have rights to things they don(t actively claim2 and for which that state would not bac" them up

'ights derive from the power of government People can have rights only to those thins they claim and for which the state bac"s them up.

 An e!ample of normative rights0 wives have a right not to be beaten by their husbands2 even though many never see" help and much wife beating is ignored by law enforcement agencies. )n the positive tradition2 wives have a right to be free of beating only if2 when they protest beatings2 the state ta"es their side and restrains the husbands. Rights as Policy Instruments Types of =ights Procedural Fight Jefines a process by which decisions must An e'ample2 1mployers would be entitled be made to conclude that all blind people are incapable of operating a machine! They would ha e to find out what are the capabilities of each applicant! Substanti e Fight Jefines specific actions or entitlements people may claim >egati e Substanti e Fight Fight to be free of restraint( says no one 4irst Amendment freedoms are e'amples of can pre ent you from doing something this Positi e Substanti e Fight 1ntitlement to ha e or recei e something( The AJA of 8BBC2 re)uires employers to specifies obligations of someone to pro ide redesign tasks, e)uipment etc! to whate er the entitlement is accommodate people with disabilities! So#rces of =ights 5egislatures Statutes passed by a legislati e body at any le el *federal, state, local+ Constitutions Constitutions of the /S or any of the states Administrati e agencies Fules and regulations proclaim under agency authority Courts Past decisions and precedents of 0udges at any le el of the court system Mechanis)s of =ights 4ormal statement #rie ance Process 1nforcement Process Case of Kames Meredith2 black man in 8B?; got a federal court order which allowed him to enroll at the /ni ersity of Mississippi! The #o ernor said he would #i en in one of the four sources abo e Ad0udication between two or more parties to a conflict by a neutral third party *0udge+ .egins with people who belie e their rights ha e been iolated, or by corporations! Ad0udication process done by the go ernment

defy the order and personally blocked Meredith,s way! Pres! Uennedy federali%ed the Miss >ational #uard to protect Meredith while he enrolled and had federal marshalls protect him until he graduated!

4ollowing the courts, ruling rest on the peoples oluntary cooperation!

=ights in the Polis =ationality Model People rely on official statements of rights found in constitutions, statutes or court opinion, etc! Statements of rights are clear, and 0udges merely apply formal rules to facts of the case, using logic and reason Kudges are not influenced by power of disputants, money, or anything e'cept reason and facts! All citi%ens ha e e)ual access to the courts to claim their rights( identity of litigants does not influence outcome of litigation Polis Model People get beliefs and ideas about rights from moral philosophy, media, and other people! Statements of rights are ne er clear( 0udges must interpret formal rules and they use norm and beliefs as well as logic and reason Kudges are influenced by their own e'periences, beliefs about 0ustice, and understandings of society! Parties who are repeat players in courts ha e more power than those who use courts once or sporadically! Money helps &nterest groups and organi%ations deliberately structure and manage disputes to increase their chances of winning Courts rely on oluntary compliance( in e'traordinary conditions, they can call on legislati e and e'ecuti e branches to help enforce contested decisions Kudges use rhetoric to increase oluntary compliance with their decisions! 5egislati e and e'ecuti e branches get in ol ed often, both to enforce court decisions and o errule 0udges!

'ights are a way of governing relationships and coordinating individual behavior to achie e collecti e purposes! /he most importantAdistinctive feature of rights0 they provideAoffer the opportunity to reaffirm or redefine society(s internal rules and its categories of membership

Policy Paradox, De%orah Stone S#))ary of Chapter 1, $ Po2ers Chapter 1, is about policy solutions that in ol e modifying decision making processes, what Stone terms constitutional engineering and restructuring authority! Constitutional engineering is a way of changing who makes the decisions and who controls a sphere of policy! Stone states that the processes of defining policy problems and establishing policy solutions are political e'ercises that yield differing problem definitions and highlight the authority structures currently in place! This translates into two le els of policy analysis2 8! Problem Mechanics 9! Jecision Making Structure Mechanics -ith these two le els of analysis in mind the author presents three strategies for constitutional engineering! Change the )e)%ership of the decision )aking %ody. 6ere the author e'plores which characteristics are important membership determinants e!g! demographic and accountability issues! Change the si.e of the decision )aking %ody! 6ere the author discusses how 4ederalist Paper 8C fa ored large federations! This began a whole genre of abstract arguments purporting to show that large units logically led to better public decisions! Stone then describes the e)ually strong American tradition fa oring small community based go ernment! Stone finishes with mentioning the more modern thinking that each policy problem has its own implicit scale characteristics! Change the federalis) of the decision )aking %ody. Stone looks at the difference between the distributi e results of centrali%ed ersus decentrali%ed decision making bodies! >amely, do they consistently benefit different sets of people! As an e'ample, the author discusses the control of population growth and the possible effects of control authority resting with state as opposed to local go ernment! Mo ing growth control authority to the highest le el increases the possibility that growth will be distributed e enly across communities! As long as local go ernment retains authority, they can displace the burdens of growth elsewhere, pushing low income, minority and large family home seekers into other communitiesH Ch! 8=

Po2ers This chapter co ers policy solutions that entail reforming the decision$making process or what the author calls Constitutional 1ngineering! This concept is a way of changing who makes the decisions and who controls the policy making! The pattern in America has been to restructure the authority system to sol e policy problems! This only changes the who" in ol ed not necessarily the why or what! -hen changing authority structure the author suggests e'amining these two )uestions first2 Joes it make the trains run on time: Joes it work" to sol e the nominal problem: The definition of the nominal problem is usually the issue! To find the nominal problem you might need to answer2 -hat is the nature of the community that is constituted by the type of authority structure uses to sol e" the problem: -ho is gi en the right to make decisions about the problem: -hose oice counts, both for choosing leaders and for choosing policies: -ho is subordinated to whom: -hat kind of internal hierarchy is created: -ho is allied with whom: 6ow does the authority structure create loyalties and antagonisms among members of the community: The pre ious two )uestions break down as2 8! Problem Mechanics 9! Jecision Making Structure Mechanics The author e'plains a few ways to deal with each! Changing the Me)%ership: 4irst one must understand the )ualities and interests of the policy maker to understand how they will affect the policy! The author looks at e'clusions" *age, race, se', etc!+ or ote )ualifications" to see how a particular demographic might ha e their issues more or less represented! Descripti3e representation2 when representati es share important demographic characteristics with their constituents! S#%stanti3e representation2 representati es that share important policy beliefs and goals with their constituents! These become important when deciding upon a candidate that may li e in a racially charged neighborhood or a one$policy specific district!

Changing the Si.e:

The author e'plains Madison,s rational in the /ederalist Paper +o. 01, on promoting a large go ernment! 6e belie ed smaller communities ha e less )ualified candidates to choose from and would ha e to dig deeper to find them! 6e also belie ed it would be more difficult for a unworthy" candidate to win o er a large constituency! Also, he belie ed the larger the community the more likely there would be a ariety of parties and interests! 6e belie ed larger is better" in regards to the republic! On the other side of the argument the author then ga e an e'ample of someone li ing in a condominium with 8C$9C units as opposed to 8CC units and to see if the group would ote in the best interest of how to spend your money! The assumed answer is no, a larger group will not be as concerned about the indi idual! The author continues on to gi e a few more e'amples for each side of the argument! Changing Aederalis) This section looks into changing the number of decision$making units from few to many or many to few! Jecentrali%ation puts the authority in the hands of the people who are close to the problems" and know the lay of the land"! Centrali%ation ad ocates say that decentrali%ation allows authority in many small 0urisdictions to be dominated by elite, policies that maintain the status )uo, enactment of racial and other pre0udices, and little or no redistribution! See chart on page ;@<! 4ederalism also re)uires deciding how the branches of go ernment interact! -hich branches should ha e authority o er others and where the balance of power should lie! There are many theories on how to balance centralist and decentralist arguments! The arguments are usually based upon efficiency, 0ustice, or public interest! The author belie es that the underlying argument for all of this is changing the power structure and how to split up old alliance, establish new ones, or place a fa ored interest in a powerful position! &n the end all of the sides of the arguments come down to politics3