Policy Paradox : The Art Of Political Decision Making

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 seven of Policy Paradox by Deborah Stone is about symbols in politics. The main components of this chapter include a description of what symbols are, symbolic devices, and ambiguity. Chapter two of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander is about how the War on Drugs and how the War on Drugs has no limit. The main components of the chapter include how the police have little constraints when it comes to the War on Drugs, being labeled, and how people cannot defend themselves from the War on Drugs. Both chapters include the main theme of symbolism in the justice system.

This article provides the audience with an adequately clear and convincing stance to explain what public policy is, and other academic literacy related to public policy, which included some famous theories. The main theme of this article is that public policy is intricate and no scholar can analyze any policies with one particular theory or model. In addition, the author argues that the public policy is multidimensional and it influences every citizen’s life profoundly.

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.

A voter can be defined as an individual who votes, or has the right to vote, in elections. Voting behaviour is explained using the concepts of expressive voting and strategic voting. A rational voter would act more strategically, that is, the voter would vote to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to his or her own policy preferences, rather than voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology, or social group membership (expressive voting). Strategic voting has become more important than voting on the basis of political cleavages (expressive voting), so voters have become more rational in their approach, however there is always an element of expressiveness in their behaviour. Political parties were initially formed to represent the interests of particular groups in society however, as these parties became more universal in the appeal of their policy programmes, voting behaviour shifted from expressive to strategic. This essay explores the reasons behind the declining importance of political cleavages, and the rise of strategic voting.

The purpose of this paper is intended to summarize my views on what has influenced my understanding of politics and government prior to taking this class, and how my understanding is now since completing this course.

In Chapter four, Citizen’s Participation, Hudson addresses, one of the greatest worries in the present day American vote based system is the absence of political hobby and support that has expanded following the 1960s. Most political researchers concur with the thought that a sound majority rule government needs a solid measure of support and political adequacy; be that as it may, the huge verbal confrontation includes realizing what is the sum important to be viewed as "solid". Some political researchers trust the hypothesis, in which normal American 's absence of interest is in compelling damage for our popular government. All things considered, there are another gathering of political researchers that are in the camp that trusts that equitable interest is too high, with the approach of political promotion gatherings campaigning government officials, the country has made a gridlock where such a large number of thoughts are in the coliseum, that this nation can 't achieve an agreement any longer. The writer of the book, Hudson, concurs with the first hypothesis that our absence of investment is destructive, and I agree with Hudson, wholeheartedly. The absence of association in the American political procedure, that is at present being

1) All Politics Is Local: The aforementioned maxim, popularized by Thomas Tip O’Neill, emphasizes the importance of satiating the diurnal minutiae of a pol’s constituency. This political precept acknowledges the incontrovertible truth manifest in the Harry Truman quote, “It’s a recession when your neighbor loses his job; it’s a depression when you lose yours.” Adhering to this maxim necessitates a prioritization of the monotonous realm of one’s constituency, concomitantly presupposing an emphasis on “retail” politics. This political stratagem emerged by virtue of the unassailable truth that people vote with a predilection for what will ameliorate their own circumstances, political affiliation notwithstanding. The relevance of this maxim is

Based on this, if we assume that individual rational actors are most concerned with – and thus decide for whom to vote based on - economic policies, one might expect people of lower socioeconomic status to generally support Democratic politicians and people of higher socioeconomic status to only support Republican politicians. This pattern does not necessarily hold true, for multiple reasons. Gelman et al. note two relevant trends in their examination of voting behavior:

Policy-makers need a “certain measure of agreement on what is just and unjust” (Rawls, 1999: 6) to coordinate their policies efficiently, meet expectations and grant stability in society. Answering whether policy-makers should listen to a statement like this, we will explore what impact contemporary political theory should have on policy-makers and examine the nature of their relationship.

The ability to overcome degenerative policy making is through policy analysis which deconstructs policy designs in order to expose degenerative characteristics and deceptions (Schneider & Ingram 1997). Public policy needs to be inclusive and should provide a clear vision of possibilities, explanations of how and why antidemocratic elements are embedded in policy designs, and interpretations of how designs impact democratic life (Schneider & Ingram 1997, 207). According to Stone (2011), knowledge tools reduce the need for coercive action or force because in the rational model, information will resolve conflict between actual behavior and desired behavior.

The tragedy of the commons and the problem of collective action are two key concepts in the world of political science. They act under the assumption that man is a rational being who will act in his own self interest. Humanity id broadly diverse meaning that each individual has their own ideas as to how society should run and how people should live.(heywood) This inevitably results in disagreement and this is where politics steps in. Aristotle described politics as the ‘master science’, ‘the activity through which human beings attempt to improve their lives and create the Good Society.’ Through the tragedy of the commons and the problem of collective action we can see how politics is essentially the ‘search for conflict resolution’

When making public policy decisions, policy makers must face a world with imperfect information and a finite amount of resources. Both of these realities put limitations on how effectively a policymaker can make people’s lives better off. Obviously, it is impossible for anyone to perfectly predict how a certain policy will play out when it is enacted. This includes policymakers, who despite their noble goals of increasing the well-being of society, can only make an educated guess about the effects a policy will have. Factors such as the fickleness of human nature or hidden information creates uncertainties that are hard to address when making policy. For example, in 1929 the causes of the Great Depression were not fully understood, but

Rational choice theory is actually more than one theory per se, but the basic similarities among its variants mean that they can be intelligibly amalgamated for the purposes of critiquing its implementation in political science. Therefore public choice theory, positive political science, rational actor models, and the economic approach to politics, among others, refer to what we may call rational choice theory for the purposes of this essay. (See Green and Shapiro 1994, xi.