What is Public Policy? Public policy can be defined most simply as the business of governments - what they do and do not do. Government policy can be broken down into three levels: policy choices, policy outputs and policy impacts. Policy choices are decisions made by politicians, civil servants, or others that use power to affect the lives of citizens. Policy outputs mean taking choices and putting them into action like spending money, hiring people, or writing regulations that affect the economy and society. Policy impacts refer to the effects of choices and outputs on citizens - are people richer/poorer, safer/in danger, healthier/sicker? It should be noted that the realm of public policy and what society perceives as government responsibility has grown substantially over the past sixty years. Over 4.3 million people currently work for the federal government (1.5+ million are in the military). Federal government spending currently accounts for about 22 percent of US gross domestic product (GDP) or $3.5 trillion in 2014. Two recent pieces of legislation further broadened the role of government. The first was the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act in response to the housing and financial crisis of 2008. This created the Troubled Asset Relief Program (\"TARP funds\") so the government could stabilize the housing market by spending $700 billion in public funds to purchase assets within the private sector, including many mortgage-backed securities. The second was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (\"ObamaCare\") to reform the US health care system. This expanded health insurance coverage to 25 million more Americans through a combination of public programs like Medicaid and private coverage subsidies. The estimate cost of health care reform is $1.3 trillion in public funds over ten years. We will talk about both policy reforms in much greater detail in the coming weeks. Policies emerge from a large number of programs, legislative intentions, and organizational interactions that affect the daily lives of citizens. Very few are decided and executed by a single government program. In fact, different levels of government (federal vs. state and local) conflict over policies and different federal agencies conflict with each other. Constitutional Distribution of Power Federalism is defined as the distribution of power between the federal government and each of the 50 states. Delegated powers are outlined in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. These powers belong to the federal government exclusively and include the power to regulate interstate commerce, make treaties with foreign nations, raise arms and declare war. Reserved powers (everything else) are left to the states and the people. The Tenth Amendment explains, \"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.\" Concurrent powers also exist and are responsibilities that are shared between both the federal and state governments. Finally, there are powers denied - inalienable rights granted to the citizens of the United States through the Bill of Rights that cannot be taken away by any form of government. While federalism is a key construct in historic documents like the Constitution, it is a concept that is constantly evolving. The boundaries between federal and state powers are not clearly outlined, causing conflicting policy positions at times. It appears that the federal government is growing in power and leaving smaller matters to be handled by state governments. Increasing Federal Power There is sufficient evidence that the federal government is continuing to grow in strength. The Supremacy Clause in Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution addresses federal power: \"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.\" Federal law trumps state laws if there is a conflict (e.g., legalization of medical marijuana by certain states, despite federal drug policies); however, this only applies if the federal government is acting within the realm of constitutionally authorized powers, which is at the core of this debate. Where are the limits and boundaries of federal power? This can be particularly troublesome in a crisis - think about the federal and state response to Hurricane Katrina. Coercive federalism describes the practice of creating federal mandates on state issues typically handled at a local level as well as controlling the funding through tools like federal grant programs. As individuals become more dependent on certain programs, the state government must deal with increasing service demands and ever-tightening budgets, which leads to even more federal intervention. Unfunded mandates are simply policy positions created by the federal government without the associated monies provided to the state. An example of an unfunded mandate would be the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This civil rights law forbids discrimination against those with physical or mental impairments but does not provide clear guidelines for \"reasonable accommodation\" of such individuals. Moreover, the law does not address conditions of implementation or provide sources of funding for improved access. This raises the question of who pays for ramps and other access requirements for the disabled. Other examples of the growth of federal power include Supreme Court decisions about regulating commerce and civil rights: Seventeen states in the mid-1950s required segregation Brown v. Topeka court decision in 1954 laid foundation for civil rights protection in the United States The Civil Rights Act of 1964 eliminated legal discrimination The massive expansion of government programs through the New Deal and the creation of government entitlements The shift of political power to federal agencies and the Department of Defense as a result of modern war (World War II, the Cold War, and the global war on terror). Unclear Boundaries and Federalist Conflicts The boundaries between federal, state, and local powers are not clearly outlined, especially with concurrent powers. There are also simple administrative challenges that exist with more than 89,000 separate government entities across federal, state and local communities. There is a risk of creating conflicting policy positions or having significant push back by states against federal law. Recent policy debates on topics such as same-sex marriage, medical marijuana, gun control, physician-assisted suicide, and immigration demonstrate that state power may not be diminishing as rapidly as some believe. For example, abortion remains a contentious issue, despite declines in the practice. The 1973 Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade left the decision to woman to bear or not bear a child, but also ruled that states can set standards for abortion procedures. As such, legal restrictions on abortions vary by state, they include: prohibition of public financing, testing requirements, options for health professionals to refuse to perform abortions, requirements to inform patients of alternatives, informing parents of minors, and required waiting periods. Video Icon Watch - Federalism: Lessons of Katrina (from ABC News) Societal Influences on Policy Policy is strongly influenced by socioeconomic concerns and our political environment. Participants in the policy-making process are not just government officials, but also interest groups, citizens, think tanks, and the mass media. There are three theoretical approaches to the exercise of political power and the formation of policy agendas. The pluralist approach sees policymaking in government as divided into a number of separate arenas where the interests and individuals who have power in one arena do not necessarily have power in others. The elitist approach believes in the existence of a power elite that dominates public decision making and whose interests are served in the policymaking process. The same interests in society consistently win, and they are primarily those of business, the upper and middle classes, and nonminorities. Finally, the state-centric approach, which is similar to the concept of an "iron triangle," where the bureaucratic agency or the congressional committee is the center of the process. Organizations obtain larger budgets and complete for attention for their particular legislative concerns. Interest Groups and Lobbying Interest groups influence government policy in five main ways: direct lobbying ($2.4 billion was spent in 2005, $3.3 billion in 2008, and $3.5 billion in 2010), campaign contributions, interpersonal contacts (schmoozing to gain insight into the legislative process and influence the outcome of votes), litigation, and grassroots mobilization (made stronger through the use of social media). Interest groups have a greater likelihood of shaping policies because they have subject-matter experts who can provide information and analysis. However, there are always counterbalances. For every interest group with one opinion, there is another vying for an opposing policy. Which group has access to legislative officials and the strongest voice is a determining factor, a fact that brings us to an often-publicized concern: lobbying and campaign contributions. In a push for transparency, President Bill Clinton signed the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) into law in 1995. It was amended in 2007 by President George W. Bush through the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which put more restrictions on monetary donations and other gifts (e.g., trips, admission to special events) to Congress members and staff and created additional reporting requirements, such as earmark disclosures. To comply with the LDA, both the House of Representatives and the Senate maintain records of lobbying activities. In addition, the Government Accountability Office does an annual report to Congress that evaluates how well lobbyists are complying with the LDA and other recently passed reforms, such as President Barack Obama's Executive Order 13490, Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel. This executive order was signed into law in January 2009 and was designed to stop the revolving door of officials taking positions within lobbying organizations immediately after leaving government service. Video Icon Watch - Keeping them Honest: Secret Spending (from CNN) The Role of the Media Mass media also is playing a growing role in informing the US public. The use of the Internet and social media has magnified the role of media in our lives, and the effect of media is complex. We cannot overestimate how much influence the media has on policymaking. While it is possible to persuade individuals, people's core values are determined strongly by their upbringing. It is debatable if news coverage can truly drive policymakers to make certain decisions. Rather, the media may pressure policymakers to take action on agenda items that were not previously a high priority. A 2012 Pew research study shows that 67% of Americans feel that there is a "great deal" or a "fair amount" of political bias in news coverage. As such, we must be mindful of media bias, especially with the development of cable news networks who must cater to a specific audience and advertisers. Values and Culture American values and culture also shape policy. The wealth of the United States allows for great latitude with government spending, but this does not automatically translate into a desire for a greater role for government. The principles of conservatism and limited government interference in American's daily lives is important - skepticism and distrust of government remains high in public opinion polls. There is strong participation of the public and voters in political discourse (social media encourages this), but this contrasts with very low voter turnout. The United States is a highly diverse country with relatively open immigration laws. It remains a \"melting pot\" that tries to bring many different perspectives into the creation of policies. The Policymaking Process The policymaking process has six steps: problem identification, agenda setting, policy formulation, policy legitimation, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. While this process tends to be linear in nature, many of the steps overlap or may need to be repeated as a policy is developed. Problem Identification is when citizens, interest groups, or politicians bring attention to a problem in society and demand that the government do something about it. This is a two-part process, as not all issues in society are best solved by government intervention. As part of the political dialogue surrounding problem identification, individuals must decide whether civil society (e.g., church programs, nonprofit organizations) or the government is best equipped to generate change. Agenda Setting occurs when those in positions of power decide the government should address specific issues. Even if citizens would like government involvement, it may not end up on the agenda because of competing priorities. Questions that may be asked include whether the public is highly interested in the issue and feeling personally impacted by it, how resource-intensive a solution will be, and whether it is a politically contentious concern. Agenda setting can happen from the bottom up (public opinion or citizens demanding change from those in leadership positions) or from the top down (elites in society observing a change that can be a threat to their interests or an opportunity to advance themselves and dictating policy down to lawmakers). It is only when a problem is placed on the agenda and made available for active discussion that the forces of change have some opportunity for success. One risk to a policy in this stage is a short attention cycle. An issue temporarily becomes great public concern and generates some response from government. Initial enthusiasm for the issue is tempered by the reality of costs and the difficulties of making effective changes, which leads to period of declining interest. The public moves on to the next issue and the policy never evolves. Policy Formulation is the creation of policy proposals and an actionable plan to solve a problem. This activity is led by the executive branch (either White House staff or analysts within a government agency), congressional committees, subject-matter experts from interest groups, or outside consultants and think tanks (who are often hired by the executive or legislative branches to provide the technical knowledge to formulate a plan). Analysts review data and research about the problem, weigh options, and consider outcomes. The final plan is then presented to leaders within a government agency or congressional leaders for approval. Policy Legitimation is the process of formalizing a policy by codifying it into law and publically promoting initiatives. This step is what many see as a politician's everyday job. There is a detailed process that must be followed to bring a bill through Congress and then to the president for signature so that it becomes an official law. How does a bill become a law? Here is a fun way to learn this process... Schoolhouse Rock Policy Implementation occurs once a policy becomes a law. The federal bureaucracy (e.g., the executive branch) is responsible for implementation. Organizations of the executive branch transform laws into programs staffed by personnel who perform tasks in support of a policy goal. Bureaucracies by their nature tend to continuously grow in size and scope and have a perceived inability to undergo change. However, bureaucracies have benefits, such as the many layers of decision-makers potentially ensuring that choices are not knee-jerk reactions and providing a means to manage risk. After all, Congress provides little guidance on how exactly to execute federal mandates. Congressional language often defines program goals or general requirements, but it is up to federal agencies to develop rules, regulations, and even penalties for noncompliance. Policy Evaluation looks at how policies are impacting target groups and conditions. Specifically, are we achieving our goals, at what cost, and with what effects on society? It is important to note the difference between policy impacts and policy outputs. Outputs from a government agency (how much has been spent or the number of people served) are not a measure of the impact (whether people's lives have improved). Impact must be measured to truly gauge program success. Program evaluation tools include before and after comparisons, site visits and citizen feedback, trend analysis of conditions, and even controlled social experiments that monitor the outcomes of two separate groups of people. The policymaking process begins with identifying a problem in society and ends with an evaluation of the effectiveness of the solutions that are put in place. There are many players in this process besides government officials. These players can influence whether an issue will rise in importance and become the focus of government policies. In the end, we must be critical of our government programs, looking not only at efficiency, but evaluating if policies are effective and creating the results we desire