PUBLIC POLICY AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS: TEACHER EDUCATION, 1960–1972*

Abstract: This is a case study of some aspects of teacher education policy formation in Australia. Between 1960 and 1972 the States sought to obtain from the national government specific purpose grant-aid for the training of their teachers, in addition to that already provided indirectly by grants to the States for their universities. The national government gave way, step-by-step, to this pressure, but “imposed” the broad condition of corporate “autonomy” for grant-aided tertiary educational institutions, instead of State departmental “control” of teacher training. The paper also considers what perspectives are suggested by this case study for the development of theories of public policy in the Australian federal system of government.     

I Respectfully Dissent: Consensus, Agendas, and Policymaking on the U.S. Supreme Court, 1888–1999

Scholars have been intrigued by the abrupt change in the rate of nonconsensual opinions that the Supreme Court has published over time, which substantially increased beginning with the battles concerning the court's New Deal transition in the 1930s. Notwithstanding, none of the prior studies on this topic has made any link, whether theoretical or empirical, between the Supreme Court's issuance of these special opinions and the justices’ policy preferences. We utilize fractional cointegration to examine the relationship between consensus, agendas, and decisionmaking on the Supreme Court. We find that there is a systematic interrelation between the justices’ policy preferences and their issuance of nonconsensual opinions that is dependent upon the policy agenda before the court. In turn, this connection influences the court's policy outcomes, demonstrating that the justices’ behavior regarding nonconsensual opinion writing is a classic example of judicial policymaking.     

Procedural Contexts, Party Strategy, and Conditional Party Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1971–2000

In this article, we provide a critical review of the evidence and arguments about party polarization in the House of Representatives during the late 20th century. We show that inferences about party polarization are significantly affected by voting reform in the early 1970s. We observe that a decomposed roll-call record alters our view of the timing of changes in party polarization and therefore requires that we reconsider explanations of the trend. We revisit explanations of party polarization and establish a strong case for placing substantial emphasis on party strategies in explanations of party polarization in floor behavior during the 1980s and 1990s.     

NEGOTIATING HOUSING POLICY THE QUEENSLAND HOUSING COMMISSION AND FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, 1945–64

Abstract: An examination of a single institution and its relationships with different levels of government can be used to question commonly held interpretations. This study of the Queensland Housing Commission (QHC) indicates that there is some need to reassess the effectiveness of tied grants as a mechanism for commonwealth intervention in areas of state concern. In Queensland, at least, the state government played a much more significant role in determining both the overall direction of the housing authority and its day-to-day operations. This suggests that the assumption that statutory authorities have some autonomy from direct government intervention may not always be appropriate. The weakness of local government in Australia is acknowledged but it is important to note that state government instrumentalities have contributed significantly to this weakness. This study of the QHC provides one example of how local autonomy can be compromised.     

Merit, Management, and Neutral Competence: Lessons from the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, FY 1988–FY 1997

Despite the centrality of merit principles to governance in the United States over the past century, scant empirical research examines linkages between institutions, and outcomes in the implementation of merit system protections. We argue that the fate of merit principles depends, at a minimum, on two influences that may compete with neutral competence. The first is partisan responsiveness by counter bureaucracies charged with holding agencies accountable to merit principles. The second influence is the sacrifice of merit in the interest of managerial rerogatives at the agency level. This exploratory study assesses both of these influences within the federal government. Our data consist of personal interviews, analyses of U.S. Merit System Protection Board (MSPB) processes, case loads, and decisions between fiscal years 1988 and 1997, and a brief case study of the Justice Department. We find that the MSPB is largely the neutral and competent agency that Congress intended to create when it enacted the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Less positively, our analysis also reveals that federal agencies vary in how well their personnel actions fare with the MSPB. This finding is especially germane to reinventing-government reforms that decentralize personnel management to agencies or to line operators within agencies.