Postmodern policy analysis: Discourse and identity in welfare policy

Postmodern inquiry into the discursive construction of identity has the potential to make a distinctive, democratizing contribution to public policy analysis. More so than conventional approaches, a postmodern policy analysis offers the opportunity to interrogate assumptions about identity embedded in the analysis and making of public policy, thereby enabling us to rethink and resist questionable distinctions that privilege some identities at the expense of others. Public policy analysis can benefit from postmodernism's emphasis on how discourse constructs identity. A review of postmodernism and postmodern approaches to interrogating identity is followed by an exercise in postmodern policy analysis. Social welfare policy in contemporary postindustrial America is shown to participate in the construction and maintenance of identity in ways that affect not just the allocation of public benefits, but also economic opportunities outside of the state. Mired in old, invidious distinctions (e.g., independent/dependent, contract/charity, family/promiscuity), welfare policy discourse today helps to recreate the problems of yesterday, particularly as a critical factor in reproducing women's poverty.     

The State of American Federalism, 1996-1997

Federalism enjoyed political and popular salience during theperiod 1996–1997 as the so-called "Devolution Revolution"began to be implemented and analyzed in the United States. Whilethere were a few examples of important Revolutionary efforts,the federal government continued to hold much of the power andsignificance it has achieved over the past sixty years. Evenin the area of welfare policy, where in 1996 there were historicreforms enacted to end the federal entitlement, the federalgovernment maintained a significant presence that made the ideaof devolution of welfare policy responsibility some what questionable.Nevertheless, states continued to lead in policy innovationin areas ranging from education to health, and the U.S. SupremeCourt continued to question the limits of federal power. Thepast year illustrated, once again, the complexity of our federalsystem and how difficult it is to reform federalism—particularlywhen it involves a shift in power and creates the perceptionof winners and losers.     

Accountability and Coercion: Is Justice Blind when It Runs for Office?

Through their power to sentence, trial judges exercise enormous authority in the criminal justice system. In 39 American states, these judges stand periodically for reelection. Do elections degrade their impartiality? We develop a dynamic theory of sentencing and electoral control. Judges discount the future value of retaining office relative to implementing preferred sentences. Voters are largely uninformed about judicial behavior, so even the outcome of a single publicized case can be decisive in their evaluations. Further, voters are more likely to perceive instances of underpunishment than overpunishment. Our theory predicts that elected judges will consequently become more punitive as standing for reelection approaches. Using sentencing data from 22,095 Pennsylvania criminal cases in the 1990s, we find strong evidence for this effect. Additional tests confirm the validity of our theory over alternatives. For the cases we examine, we attribute at least 1,818 to 2,705 years of incarceration to the electoral dynamic.     

The State of American Federalism, 1997 - 1998

Although it was a relatively quiet year for the courts and congressionalaction, 1997–1998 saw several developments that may significantlydefine federalism in the coming years. The 1998 federal budgetis projected to show a surplus, ending decades of deficit financinginWashington, D.C., but also raising questions about the budget'sfiscal impact on federalism and intergovernmental relations.Devolution took a back seat in Washington, D.C., as concernsabout managed care, education, and internet access led to proposalsfor increased federal involvement in state and local affairs.The states continued their implementation of welfare reformand launched other programs in health, environment.     

Polarized preferences versus polarizing policies

Much of contemporary political debate in the United States focuses on the issue of polarization: specifically, its causal antecedents and its consequences for policymaking and political conflict. In this article, we argue that partisan preference polarization—conventionally defined as the difference in the favored policy positions of legislators from the two major parties—is not a sufficient statistic for potential political conflict in national politics . Rather, a well-defined measure of potential conflict must take into account (1) the locations of status quo policies and proposed alternatives; and (2) the shape of underlying utility functions. We propose measures of the likely contentiousness of a given status quo policy and of a proposal to move that policy. We then demonstrate the usefulness of these measures using estimates of utility function and final passage vote parameters on enacted legislation from the 111th US Senate (2009–2011).     

Public service awards programs: an exploratory analysis

Abstract: Traditionally, there have been a small number of awards for public servants, given for lifetime career achievement by the most senior public servants. In the last decade, there has been a proliferation of new types of awards, including group or individual achievement awards to public servants at all levels, awards to functional or occupational groups, innovation awards, gain‐sharing awards, and organizational performance or quality awards. The proliferation of new awards is seen as a response to morale‐reducing cutbacks within the public sector as well as to external criticism of the public sector. The article discusses the possible impacts, both beneficial and harmful, of recognition and awards programs. It sets out how a benefit‐cost analysis of any award could be undertaken, showing the significance of time required by applicants among the cost factors. The article concludes with recommendations about how better to manage a number of the elements of awards, including publicity, the composition of selection committees, the award itself, feedback given applicants, and a department's comprehensive portfolio of awards. Sommaire: Traditionnellement, un très petit nombre de prix ont été décernés aux plus anciens et plus hauts fonctionnaires pour leurs réalisations au cours de leur carrière. Ces dix demières années, il y a eu une prolifération de nouveaux types de prix, y compris des prix pour réalisations collectives ou individuelles décernés aux fonctionnaires de tous les niveaux, des prix pour les groupes fonctionnels ou professionnels, des prix ä d'innovation, des prix de partage des gains, ainsi que des prix du rende‐ment ou de la qualité. On perçoit cette multitude de nouveaux prix comme une réaction compensant l'effet nocif qu'ont les coupures budgétaires sur le moral de la Fonction publique ainsi que les critiques extemes envers le secteur public. Dans cet article, on examine les répercussions possibles des programmes décemant des prix et des honneurs, répercussions qui peuvent être h la fois bénéfiques et nocives. On précise la maniére dont on pourrait entreprendre une analyse avantage‐coût de tout prix de ce genre, en explicitant l'importance de fadeurs de coût et de temps pour les postulants. L'article conclut en proposant des recommandations pour une meilleure gestion de certains éléments de ces prix, dont la publicité, la composition des comités de sélection, le prix hi‐même, les avis furnish aux postulants et la liste détaillee des prix d'un ministére.     

EXPENDITURES ON CHILDREN AND VISITATION TIME

In their critique, Garfinkel, McLanahan, and Wallerstein raise concerns about the representativeness of the authors' sample, benchmark approach methodology, and historical review of guidelines, all of which lead them to discount the evidence presented opposing the cliff-model assumption of father expenditures on children, and to laud instead child support guidelines that give little monetary credit or adjustment for visitation. This article presents evidence that (a) this sample is at most little biased, and remains trustworthy for the main implications presented; (b) although only a beginning, the benchmark approach is highly useful and most of the concerns raised about it are ill founded or implausible; and (c) the historical review suggesting that current guidelines assume zero visitation expenses is indeed accurate for the vast majority of states, according to the foremost authority. Thus, notwithstanding the critique, these findings have merit and importance and should be considered by policy makers. The authors also comment on the additional arguments against continuous and generous adjustments for visitation, finding them based on a weak foundation of evidence and reasoning.     

“Spin-In” Technology Transfer for Small R&D Bio-Technology Firms: The Case of Bio-Defense

This study investigates the types of factors which can lead to government acquisition, or the “spin-in” of bio-defense technologies from small bio-technology firms. Empirical findings suggest that for small biotechnology R&D firms desiring to increase “spin-in” technology transfer, there appears to be two distinct and important influence groups—the scientific community within federal agencies, institutes, and centers, and the more managerial, policy-oriented decisions makers. We found that personal communication and networking appear to be the primary factor that leads to a successful technology transfer, however, the form and substance of personal communication and networking will differ between the two influence groups.