Public Policy

This unit includes an examination of the multitude of public policy makers and their environment. It begins with an overview of the American political system. By constitutional principle and political practice, power in the United States is fragmented and dispersed. This is primarily due to the separation of powers among three branches (executive, legislative, and judicial) with a system of checks and balances. The effects are the decentralization of power, the need for compromise, and an inefficient operation of government. Power is further dispersed by federalism, which gives separate national and state governments power derived from the Constitution. The national government is granted delegated and implied (necessary and proper) powers, whereas the states are given unspecified reserved powers. The Constitution also limits the powers of government over the people. Over time, the scope of the national government has expanded into the domain of state governments, but state and local governments continue to be significant policy makers for many issues. Because analyzing policymaking at three levels of government is too extensive, the focus of the lecture is on the national government’s domestic policy.

The public policymaking cycle is a sequence of functional activities. This lecture analyzes the first two activities—public problem identification and agenda setting and the formulation of policy alternatives. While they are the predecision aspects of policy formation in that they do not entail formal decisions, they are essential in determining which issues will be considered, given further attention, or abandoned.

This unit centers on the third stage of the public-policy process: adoption. Adoption encompasses policy decisions that are the actions taken by an official policy maker to select, modify, or reject a favored policy alternative. A policy decision, such as legislation or an executive order, is usually a culmination of many decisions made during the policy cycle. The formal authority to make public-policy choices rests with executives, administrators, judges, and most particularly legislators in a democracy. During adoption, legitimacy is very important for the development of public support and acceptance of a public policy. Legitimacy directs citizens’ attention to the appropriateness of government action for how something is done, as well as what is being done.

Before the Budgeting and Accounting Act of 1921, national budgeting was a fragmented process. With this reform, the budgetary system was centralized through the use of the executive budget, giving the president the responsibility for the formulation of the budget. This section focuses on the policy implications of the budgetary process. First, it examines how the budget and budget decisions affect public policies. Second, it clarifies the structure and operation of the national budgetary process. Finally, it discusses the political struggle over budget deficits and debt.

The purpose of this unit is to provide students with an overview of the process of policy implementation, as well as of the main actors involved and the interplay between them.

Once adoption is completed, the accepted solution is now called public policy. However, policymaking is still not finished as further development is almost always required. This section focuses on what happens after adoption—the fourth step of the policy cycle, implementation. Implementation entails whatever is done to carry out a policy, apply it to the appropriate population, and accomplish its goals. Administrative agencies and their procedures, techniques, and politics are at the center of implementation study. Although much of what agencies do may appear routine, the implementation consequences for policy content and success are vital. American federalism further complicates these consequences for national policies through cost shifting and mandates.

There are four main theories or philosophies of punishment intended to provide the logical foundation needed to create and justify crime and criminal-justice policy: retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation (see, generally, Packer, 1968). This unit briefly summarizes the key elements of the first two philosophies, and then delves into an in-depth analysis of the latter two. Because deterrence and incapacitation are the primary frameworks guiding crime and criminal-justice policy in the United States, and because they will crop up repeatedly, they are the theories given prominence in this section.

This unit discusses the major historical and contemporary trends in drug use and policy. We will see that the most popular (and infamous) approach—the war on drugs— has been declared a failure. Drug courts may have a bright future as an alternative to harshly punitive approaches, but typically produce only modest reductions in drug use.

The first juvenile court was created in 1899 in Chicago. Its founders promoted it as a way to help youth in need by responding to youth crime in developmentally appropriate ways. The creation of this type of court was a very popular legal reform, and states across the United States quickly copied Chicago's idea and began their own juvenile courts.

More than 100 years later, the system of juvenile courts is still in place. But, often children under age 18 are prosecuted in adult criminal courts instead of juvenile courts, due to a policy called juvenile waiver. Waived juveniles are identified as better suited for the adult court, and their cases are transferred, or waived, there. In this section, we describe how the numbers and use of juvenile waiver policies has expanded in recent years and the effects of these policies.

This unit will critically examine SORN and RR laws. We will trace the history of sex-offender laws and policies, examine the rationales underlying them, review empirical tests of their effectiveness, and discuss promising avenues for future policy approaches. While most of the policies covered here affect people convicted of all kinds of sex crimes perpetrated against both adults and children, offenses against children occupy a central role in public dialogue and policymaking activity. This unit reflects that focus.