The Ability Of Overcome Degenerative Policy Making Is Through Policy Analysis

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:

One reason why Americans shouldn’t be required to vote is because voting without background information might lead to wrong decisions. Evidence supporting this reason is, in document G (New York Times) (Randy Cohen) states that people that are uninformed, will end up voting for something that doesn’t endorse their interests. This evidence helps explain

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.

The policy cycle suggested by Althaus, Bridgman and Davis consists of a continuous wheel which nominally begins with the task of 'identifying issues ' and progresses through 'policy analysis ', 'policy instruments ', consultation ', 'coordination ', 'decision ', 'implementation ' and 'evaluation ' before beginning the cycle again (Althaus et al 2013: 37-40). The authors admit that policy rarely actually follows this model sequentially in the steps outlined above and is really meant as more of a guide to good policy, rather than an evaluation of actual practice (Althaus et al 2013: 40-42).

This paper is a review of chapter’s one (1), two (2) and three (3) in Thomas A. Birklands (2016) fourth edition regarding policy process. The reading attempts to define and show what is meant by policy process, how government, politics and the public are intertwined, problems that are associated with the policy process and how we address the problems. Current day events as well as past history are applied to the practice of policy process which assists in defining the process and highlighting its connection and importance. Thomas A. Birklands refers to the Clinton administration, the Obama administration and the George W. Bush administration, the DARE Program, World War II, and the Vietnam War, in the chapters and leads us down a path discussing

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.

In this paper I will be discussing how our class came to a consensus on our policy analysis framework. To understand what we are attempting to accomplish, you need to understand the denotation of policy analysis. Policy analysis is a technique used in public administration so individuals can evaluate and scrutinize policies. Policy analysis is not only limited to policy’s that are already enacted, policy analysis can be used to analyze perspective policy’s. There are already a handful of policy analysis frameworks available for use. These include: Chambers 2009, Gilbert and Terrell 2009, Popple and Leighninger 2004, and Dobelstein 2003. Many of the frameworks are heavily influenced by the work of Eveline Burns, who was prevalent in the 1940’s and 1950’s. While these frameworks would have been suitable to use for our analysis our class chose to create our own framework to help with analysis. In these next few paragraphs I will explain how and why we chose what we did.

How do people compensate for their lack of knowledge? Many people use information shortcuts to help them make decisions on how to vote. An information shortcut is voting for a party because they know the beliefs of the party but not the specific facts of the issue or the specific candidate. Voters use information shortcuts in order to learn about a topic without spending more time. For example, author Ilya Somin wrote that 57 percent of the population did not know who Newt Gingrich was in 1994. Somin also stated, “70 percent cannot name either of their states senators. Overall, close to a third of Americans can be categorized as ‘know-nothings’ who are almost completely ignorant of relevant political information” (Somin 416-417).

Goldman believes that the solution to a fundamentally corrupt system is education. The struggle must not be left up to electoral politics, being that “correct ideas must precede correct actions.”8 She argues that when people are educated properly and arrive at a knowledge of the true principles of governing unanimous social relations, they will put them into practice by themselves without the ballot

The topic that I have chosen regarding Bryan Caplan’s book is the topic of rational ignorance. Bryan Caplan defines rational ignorance as a voter’s belief that one vote has a small probability of changing the outcome of an election. Several voters are rationally ignorant, myself included, which after reading The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies I have to ask myself why even vote at all other than it is considered by some to be a civic duty.

Section 1: In the first section of the paper, you should give careful thought to how you might define the policy problem.

Rational choice theories are among the fastest growing theories in social science today. Many sociologists and political scientists defend the claim that rational choice theory can provide the basis for a unified and comprehensive theory of social behavior. What distinguishes rational choice theory from other forms of theory is that it denies the existence of any kinds of action other than the purely rational and calculative. All social action can be seen as rationally motivated, as instrumental action, however much of it may appear to be irrational or non-rational. I believe that the Rational Choice Theory would be most beneficial in the reduction or control of crime.

The rational models of policy process are compromising a mechanical process in policy making. Theoretically, the models are helping managers of public sector to manage policy issues by using rigid components of procedure that likely use in laboratory. It means the administrators in public sector will follow some sequences, such as gathering important values that related with policy issue, examining the possible outcomes of policy issue by rating those important values that already established, and then he or she will try to make a decision on what is the best policy. The steps are continuing repeatedly in the same condition. The particular characteristics of the models are having valid data, reliable information and managers

This paper is a review of Chapters 1, 2 and 3 in Patton, Sawicki, and Clark, (2012) third edition, Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. Chapter 1 discusses problem review, the analysis of difficult problems, the complexity of problems and how the decision makers will make their decisions (Patton, 2012, p. 2, 3). Chapter 2 examines the policy analysis process, the types of policy analysis, the role of the analyst and ethical considerations. Chapter 3 discusses the gathering of data, interviewing, statistical analysis and communicating results. This paper contains (1) an overview of the chapters, (2) summarize the key points, (3) summary of the reading, and (4) underscore some implications/applications for policy and practice at a local, state or national context.

First I will provide an overview of what rational choice theory is and why it has staked such a prominent position in the discipline of political science. In this section I conclude that rational choice theory has indeed developed advanced methodologies at telling us how rational agents should behave. Then in my second section I will show, using the empirical case of the free-rider problem and collective action, as well as the case of suicide terrorism, that rational choice theory cannot adequately account for actual political phenomena. In my third section I will provide some reasons for why this is the case. Finally, in my concluding section I will posit a theoretical framework incorporating some refinements to the assumptions behind rational choice theory that would better aid a predictive (but not universalist) political science.