Showing papers on "Public policy published in 1969"
TL;DR: This article argued that the relative wealth of a state, its degree of industrialization, and other measures of social and economic development are more important in explaining its level of expenditures than such political factors as the form of legislative apportionment, the amount of party competition, or the degree of voter participation.
Abstract: We are now in the midst of a notable revival of interest in the politics of the American states. During the last decade many studies have been conducted of the social, political and economic determinants of state policy outcomes. Several of these writers have argued that the relative wealth of a state, its degree of industrialization, and other measures of social and economic development are more important in explaining its level of expenditures than such political factors as the form of legislative apportionment, the amount of party competition, or the degree of voter participation. It has been claimed that such factors as the level of personal income or the size of the urban population are responsible both for the degree of participation and party competition in a state, and the nature of the system's policy outputs. By making this argument these writers have called into question the concepts of representation and theories of party and group conflict which, in one form or another, are the foundations for much of American political science.There is a growing awareness, however, that levels of expenditure alone are not an adequate measure of public policy outcomes. Sharkansky has shown, for example, that levels of expenditure and levels of actual service are seldom correlated; presumably, some states are able to reach given service levels with much less expenditure than others. Besides establishing the appropriate level of expenditure for a program, policy makers must also decide about the program's relative scope, provisions for appeal from administrative orders, eligibility requirements, the composition of regulatory boards and commissions, and many other matters which have little to do with money.
1,494 citations
TL;DR: A question often posed by students of American state politics is: "Do state political systems leave a distinctive imprint on patterns of public policy?" Prior to recent years, the nearly automatic response of political scientists was an unqualified but increasingly confident "no" as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: A question often posed by students of American state politics is: “Do state political systems leave a distinctive imprint on patterns of public policy?” Prior to recent years the nearly automatic response of political scientists was an unqualified “yes.” More recent research has led to a qualified but increasingly confident “no.”Several recent publications have explored relationships between various indices of state politics, socio-economic characteristics, and public policy. The general conclusion has been that central features of the political system such as electoral and institutional circumstances do not explain much of the variation in policy. There are occasionally high correlations between individual measures of voter turnout, party competitiveness, or the character of state legislatures and some aspects of governmental spending. But these political-policy correlations seem to disappear when the effect of socioeconomic development is controlled.These are disturbing findings. They have not gone unchallenged. But the challenges, rather than reassuring those who have asserted the relevance of parties, voting patterns, and government structures, have demonstrated that the burden of proof now rests on those who hypothesize a politics-policy relationship. The problem has not been resolved.Part of the problem may rest on the conceptualization and measurement of the central variables. Electoral balance or alternation in office is not “inter-party competition,” except in the most mechanical sense. Compare Massachusetts' loose-knit party structure to the centralization of Connecticut's. “Party competition” is not the same as “party organization.” And party competition, voting habits, and patterns of apportionment fall far short of being equivalents of “political systems.”
208 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1969
TL;DR: The authors traces the development of radio from its beginnings in 1920 to the inception of television in 1952, and the formation of public policy throughout these years, and describes the contending forces, the politicians, pressure groups, newspapers, and business interests that joined in the fray.
Abstract: Still the focus of major political controversy today, the essential issues in Canadian broadcasting emerged thirty years ago. This fascinating book traces both the development of radio from its beginnings in 1920 to the inception of television in 1952, and the formation of public policy throughout these years. The course of the development was far from smooth. Professor Peers describes the contending forces, the politicians, pressure groups, newspapers, and business interests that joined in the fray. The inner story of the power struggles involved is told here thoroughly for the first time, and the significance of these struggles for the development of the system is placed in perspective.
41 citations
TL;DR: Golembiewski et al. as discussed by the authors found significant relationships between levels of urbanization, income, and industrialization on the one hand and interparty competition on the other.
Abstract: Attempts to analyze systematically the relationships between public policy outputs and the political process1 and socioeconomic variables in the states have blossomed in the i96o's. Earlier, only a limited amount of scholarly attention had been devoted to such relationships. For example, in V. O. Key's Southern Politics published in 1951, it was found that states with loose multifactional one-party systems with little continuity of competition tended to pursue conservative policies biased toward benefiting upper socioeconomic groups, while states with bifactional one-party competition tended to be states wherein more liberal policies were translated into laws on behalf of less affluent interests.2 Similarly, in 1959 Duane Lockard found that the twoparty states of New England (Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island) pursued more liberal policies than the one-party states (Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont).3 Both Key and Lockard implied a cause-and-effect relationship between political competition and policy outputs but did not take systematic regard of intervening variables, such as differences in levels of socioeconomic development. The first broad-scope, systematic analysis of the relationships between the socioeconomic characteristics of the states and the political processes within them was made in 1958 by Robert T. Golembiewski.4 He found significant relationships between levels of urbanization, income, and industrialization on the one hand and interparty competition (IPc) on the other. It was not until 1962, though, that the first hint
39 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Toward a national urban policy, Toward a National Urban Policy (NUP) as discussed by the authors, Toward National Urban Strategy (NURS), and Towards a National urban policy (NUPS).
Abstract: Toward a national urban policy , Toward a national urban policy , کتابخانه دیجیتال و فن آوری اطلاعات دانشگاه امام صادق(ع)
35 citations
TL;DR: Primary medical-care programs are legitimate and central concerns of every university medical school, and sufficient engagement in the community to learn how better to meet the needs of large numbers of patients who are now without care is necessary, but overcommitment to service programs should be avoided.
Abstract: Primary medical-care programs are legitimate and central concerns of every university medical school. Sufficient engagement in the community to learn how better to meet the needs of large numbers of patients who are now without care is necessary, but overcommitment to service programs should be avoided. The role of the university is to develop new programs, study them and especially teach within them. Health-services research offers an intellectually rewarding and academically legitimate field for faculty members engaged in this area. They should use the knowledge developed in such research to help forge public policy for health, but only to the degree that they have data. When they move beyond the data they cease to be experts. Some must seek to combine the difficult tasks of remaining experienced clinicians, doing research, advising on public policy and teaching. Of these, teaching is the unique function of the university and must be a part of any university primary-care program.
35 citations
TL;DR: This is a base paper for discussions at the annual meeting of AAEA in Lexington, Kentucky, in August, including a panel concluding the meeting, and contributed papers commenting on this paper are invited.
Abstract: explanation of its purpose is as follows: "This is a base paper for discussions at the annual meeting of AAEA in Lexington, Kentucky, in August, including a panel concluding the meeting. In addition, contributed papers commenting on this paper are invited. Selected ones will be accepted for presentation at the meeting." These papers must adhere to the rules for contributed papers as they were announced in the February Journal, except that (for these papers only) the due date is on or before July 1 and only three copies are required. See announcements section for an additional supplementary note on contributed papers.
34 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors have assembled data that indicate both performance and policy differences between large owner-controlled and manager-controlled firms in the same industry, showing that firms controlled by their owners have both much higher rates of return on investment and lower dividend pay-outs.
TL;DR: This article explored the linkage between some major structural characteristics of state government and the content of public policies in the states, focusing on the policy consequences of the organizational structure of state executives and the formal powers of governors.
Abstract: T HE PURPOSE of the research reported below was to explore the linkage between some major structural characteristics of state government and the content of public policies in the states. Specifically, the focus is upon the policy consequences of (1) the organizational structure of state executives, and (2) the formal powers of governors. What are the policy consequences of a fragmented state executive with many separately elected officials and independent boards, in contrast to a more streamlined executive organization? Does it make any difference in educational outcomes whether the chief educational officer in the state is elected, appointed by an independent board, or appointed by the governor? Are welfare benefits noticeably more liberal in states with an appointed welfare director in contrast to an independent welfare board? Does it make any difference whether the highway department is headed by an appointee of the governor or an independent board? What are the policy consequences of providing the governor with strong budgetary, appointive, and veto powers? Are there any significant differences in the public policies of states with strong and weak governors? Or are public policies primarily a function of the economic environment of a state its wealth, industrialization, urbanization, and educational level? In assessing the impact of structural variables on public policies in the fifty states, we will inquire: (1) whether states with fragmented executive structures and weak governors pursue significantly different policies than states with streamlined executive structures and strong governors, and (2) whether any policy differences which are observed can be traced to these structural variables rather
TL;DR: In this article, the authors developed the idea that the answer depends upon the comparative effects of rehabilitation and new construction on the future maintenance costs, economic life, and shelter amenities of the renewed structure.
Abstract: Although rehabilitation has become an alternative to new construction in virtually all applicable public policy situations, few guidelines or criteria exist for determining whether rehabilitation or replacement is the most desirable way to improve a given portion of the housing stock. This study develops the idea that the answer depends upon the comparative effects of rehabilitation and new construction on the future maintenance costs, economic life, and shelter amenities of the renewed structure. A model is formulated that determines the feasibility of rehabilitation as compared with new construction and specifies the cost level of renewal that will maximize shelter output per unit of input.
TL;DR: In this paper, a growing body of research has used multivariate statistical techniques to examine the relationship between aggregate environmental characteristics and the public policies of state and local governments, and a number of hypotheses have been suggested by studies employing either the case study or aggregate approaches.
Abstract: In recent years a growing body of research has used multivariate statistical techniques to examine the relationship between aggregate environmental characteristics and the public policies of state and local governments. This research has been concerned primarily with isolating or demonstrating the social, economic, and political correlates of either public policies (e.g., expenditures, revenues and referenda issues) or governmental structures (viz., form of government, size of election districts and type of ballot).' One advantage of the aggregate approach, beyond the relative accessibility of data, is that it permits a systematic, comparative study of states or cities. On the local level this comparative approach provides a convenient supplement to the earlier case study approach which was concerned with the political processes and issues of particular cities. A number of hypotheses have been suggested by studies employing either the case study or aggregate approaches. In those observations dealing with government structure, attention is usually directed to the council-manager plan as an example of progressive government. That is, city governments which are reform-oriented are likely to be found in more affluent, better educated, homogeneous, middle-class cities. The notion is that the middle class prefers a more efficient, professional city administration. Conversely, the mayor-council plan is usually associated with older, machine-type politics which allegedly reflects the preferences of the less affluent, less-educated, working class and ethnic minorities who are most concerned about political representations
TL;DR: In this paper, an operational definition derived from a fundamental assumption about democracy is offered, followed by a consideration within that context of styles of administrative behavior in formulating public policy. But consensus on the concept of public interest is not anticipated.
Abstract: IMATIONG STUDENTS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION the concept of "public interest" has occasioned considerable debate, yet little consensus. Ironically, the lack of consensus in the academic community seems equalled only by the certainty with which official pronouncements are uttered in the name of public interest, a circumstance leading many scholars to abandon the concept altogether. While it is tempting to follow suit, such a collective quietude will in the long haul relegate the public interest to an innocuous position in the conventional wisdom shared by The Essential Brotherhood of Man and The American Way. In the hope that it is still a viable concept, an operational definition derived from a fundamental assumption about democracy will be offered, followed by a consideration within that context of styles of administrative behavior in formulating public policy. While unanimous agreement on the matter is not anticipated, the argument is advanced that the fundamental premise underlying democracy is that the ethical or moral "correctness" of political and social values, and of resultant policy, is not subject to proof.1 Freedom to propose change, or indeed to defend the status quo, is simply assumed because the legitimate limitation of such activity requires proof of an alternative position. Freedom's traditional democratic counterpart, equality, is justified on similar grounds. We need not contend that "all men are created equal"; rather, since no one
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the feasibility of alternative government policies in a way operationally useful as part of policy analysis and propose methods for the more systematic exploration of the feasibility.
01 Jan 1969
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore various dimensions of the problem with a view toward presenting a better delineation of the issues involved, a critique of regulatory policy, and recommendations for improving commission control.
Abstract: Government regulation in the field of common carrier communications has always been a subject of controversy. However, the adequacy and role of regulation have received increasing criticism in the last decade. The validity of this criticism insofar as the future is concerned will depend upon the flexibility and responsiveness of regulatory policies to changes that are transforming both the common carrier concept and the entire communications industry. A recognition of this challenge is particularly important at the present time. Public policies which are adopted in response to the pressures for change will have profound consequences for the structure and performance of the communications industry in the I970s and i98os. Inaction, misplaced emphasis, and false assumptions will have far-reaching effects. Yet the current level of performance of the common carrier sector belies the magnitude of the issues and problems involved. Indeed, if the present availability of service to the general public through the voice and record networks were the only evidence of impending crisis, there would be little indication of the far-reaching decisions that must be made. The pervasive forces influencing the future of the common carrier sector and the role of regulation stem from market growth and technological change in the postwar years. This pressure has eroded established market structures. It has developed new markets and created new options for supplying communications requirements. It has created a need to focus attention on the market structure dimension of regulatory policy as the possibility of new entrants appears with increasing frequency. Further, it has blurred the traditional distinction between common carrier activities and other elements of the communications and data processing industries. The success of future regulatory action will depend in large part on its ability to accommodate these factors. This paper will seek to explore various dimensions of the problem with a view toward presenting a better delineation of the issues involved, a critique of regulatory policy, and recommendations for improving commission control.
TL;DR: For a brief account of revisionism see Francis E. Rourke, Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy (Boston: Little, Brown, 1969), pp. 119-122 as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: 16. Charles S. Hyneman, "Administrative Reorganization," The Journal of Politics, Vol. I (1939). 17. For a brief account of revisionism see Francis E. Rourke, Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy (Boston: Little, Brown, 1969), pp. 119-122. 18. Rossiter, op. cit., p. 143. 19. Neustadt in Brown and WahIke (eds.), The American Political System: Notes and Readings (Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1967), p. 389. 20. See Nelson W. Polsby, The President and Congress (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1967), for a useful discussion of the President's "clerkship" for Congress. 21. Rossiter, op. cit., p. 144. 22. See Walter W. Heller, New Dimensions of Political Economy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966). 23. See Fred I. Greenstein, "Popular Images of the President," The American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. CXXII, No. 5 (1965).
31 Dec 1969
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss some questions relative to current educational policies in three countries of Latin America: Argentina, Brazil and Chile, by means of literature review followed by documental research, including pertinent legislation in each country and documents produced by International Organizations linked to the UN which work in the Region.
Abstract: The article discusses some questions relative to current educational policies in three countries of Latin America: Argentina, Brazil and Chile. By means of literature review followed by documental research, including pertinent legislation in each country and documents produced by International Organizations linked to the UN which work in the Region, we attempted to observe in which measure the changes occurred within the educational legislation in these three countries delineated a new educational policy which translates into different mechanisms of regulation. It is considered that the public policies adopted in these three countries in the last decade have undergone changes in virtue of the processes of reforms which presented as a common trace a new educational regulation based on three axes: local management; per capita financing and systemic evaluation.
31 Dec 1969
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide an analysis of policy discourse as it concerns Indigenous labour market development in Northern Alberta and uncover the hidden power structures, misrepresented inequities, historical injustices, and biases of development.
Abstract: This paper provides an analysis of policy discourse as it concerns Indigenous labour market development in Northern Alberta. In the process, the authors unearth the manner in which current federal and provincial government policy obscures a long history of attempted colonial domination with respect to Indigenous peoples in Canada more generally. Typically, economic booms are spoken of as an opportunity to democratize labour opportunities, through the discourse of “partnership” and “social inclusion” in particular. Ignored in this discourse is the reality that the exploitation of natural resources always takes place in particular political, social, cultural and historical contexts. Critical discourse analysis serves to expose these contexts and, in so doing, uncovers the critical role played by institutions, ideologies, and processes in constructing and maintaining existing inequalities. In the process of digging up the roots of current Aboriginal labour market development policy discourse, unveiled are the concealed power structures, misrepresented inequities, historical injustices, and biases of development.