Different Perspectives On The Field Of Policy Essay

The U.S. government’s expansive role in public policy is caught in a swirl of conflicting cross-currents. On the one hand, popular expectations about government’s

Chapter 8: A question that has stuck with Wheelan for years, asked by one of his peers was, “If people know so much about public policy, then why is everything so messed up” (175)? The reason for that is because it leads to something far more significant: Even when economists reach consensus on policies that would be to our advantage, they frequently run into political opposition. And when it comes to interest groups in politics, it pays to be small because the tail can wag the dog. This can have a huge impact on the economy. They are usually the most successful because the consequence of requests they receive are spread over a large, disunified group of people. Wheelan states that small problems begin to distort the simplest jobs of a market

Deborah Stone begins her book, Policy Paradox, by stating, “a theory of policy politics must start with a simple model of political society, just as economics starts with a simple model of economic society.” Deborah Stone examines two policy-making models to describe the paradox’s of the process model for public policy. The two models include: the market (rational model) and the Polis (community) model. Stone states she contrasts these two models to “illuminate some ways the market model distorts political life.” As discussed in class, the market model follows five steps:

Chapter one of American Public Policy, by B. Guy Peters, gives an in depth explanation of what American public policy is. The definition that Peters gives of Public policy is the” sum of government activities whether pursued directly or through agents, as those activities have an influence on the lives of citizens” (4). This definition of public policy can be categorized into three levels that will make differences in citizen’s lives. The first level is policy choices. This level is when, “decisions made by politicians, civil servants, or other granted authority that are directed toward using public power to affect the lives of the citizens” (4). All of these choices that are made by the president, congressman, or others can evolve into a

Being two of the most respected and qualified academicians on public policy, Charles Murray, and Robert B. Reich have never been short of making controversial and contradicting statements which arguably serves only their interest of getting an audience. Public policy as it is has been subjected to lots of changes throughout the history leading to different reactions and opinions from different individuals. “What it means to be a Libertarian-A Personal Interpretation” written by Charles Murray, explicitly describes how the society should view the government by claiming it can help in achieving overall happiness and allowing members of the society to have a right to individual freedom when coping with the changes brought by public policy. On the other hand, Robert B. Reich’s “Aftershock the next Economy and America’s Future” talks about overcoming our problems by keeping a tier of classes. This paper discusses the contradicting views of these two writers.

Deborah Stone compares the market and polis models of policy making with the intent to show that the original origin of the public policy discipline was to be grounded in a practical science, economics, but to also show how and why the economic approach to policy making has significant limitations. Stone is arguing against the view that policy decision making is rational decision making. Deborah Stone’s main reason for comparing the two models of policy making is to identify and critique the simplistic assumptions that have been used in the market and rationality project. Stone is attempting to point out the paradox that exists between the two because the two models are evidently contradictory, the market being ground in rationality and the polis being based on emotion. Stone compares the two policies in order to show that economics cannot be solely used to understand policy making because the two are fundamentally different. She also points out that policy is made in a political society and because of this the polis model seeks to explain public policy as it actually happens in reality since the field and study of public policy was created to allow government to make decisions that would best benefit their citizens.

This article is part of my series on Considerations and Ideas for Improving Government and Civil Society, and constitutes its second article.

Issues from the linkage institutions do not always make it to the policymaking system because if it did not get much attention from the people it would not be considered. Because interest groups and political parties sometimes are based off particular issues, they are not always apart of the government’s agenda.

In the book The Net Government of the United States by Donald F. Kettl is an inspiring and at times radical look at our government and its day to day attributes to our society. The ways in which the government operates and the agencies it employs are examined through and through. The author makes many arguments for their failures and against the system itself. This all leads to an opinion and analysis of a way to fix the system. The power of the government to make decisions should be purely of their own right and if the American people vote for these people then they are the leaders. There is no way to accurately fix our system and the theories and conclusions drawn up by Kettl are intriguing, but there is room for more calculation.

For many years, deferent social organization groups and activist have used different tactics to resolves different issues such as race. These claimants have dependent on tactics such as marchers, protests, sit-ins and even gone to extreme lengths in order to change and create policies. A policy is meant to address to address a particular troubling condition; however, there are many critiques of policies. A policy can be critiqued for being insufficient because it does not quite go far enough to actually resolve the issue. Secondly, a policy can be critiqued for to excessive by going too far, which could make the current situation worse or even potentially resulting for a new problem. Thirdly, policy are often criticized for being misguided

This conjoined perspective includes the idea that there is an elite hierarchy at play, but groups, such as civil rights activists and environmentalists, also have a strong influence on what gets decided in public policy. Afterall, there really are hardly any machines out there that run strictly from one source; the body has the heart, but also needs the brain, the car has the engine, but couldn’t go anywhere without

McCelland's afore mention quote recognises that actors involved in the policy making process, bring about a personal bias or belief in the role they perform. It may be likened to a microcosm of the world, as individuals or groups vie for power, working towards achieving their own interest and or the interest of society as a whole. Once these policies are implemented it requires the exercise of authority and systems to apply this authority. Take for example a community organiser who strongly believes in social justice for children living in poverty, they believe in policies that improve the well-being of children who share our society. These people may favour a system which corresponds to their ideology, that of a large welfare state and government.

Both of these views have many similarities and differences, exposed by many implicit messages in the writings. Through analysis one can discover those differences and similarities of the two views of government. Steinbeck makes his

Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2015). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press. ISBN: 9781483345789.

However these two perspectives have some traits which make one unique from another and these are discussions as below,