11 Public Policy Associated Press/David Coates Learning Objectives By the end of this chapter, you should be able to De ine public policy, and describe the tension among its various goals. Discuss agenda setting as part of the policymaking process. Examine the politics surrounding the public policymaking process. Explain how ideology shapes the policymaking process in the United States. Describe how the tools of U.S. economic policy are used to maintain a stable economy. Trace the background of social policy in the United States. Trace the evolution of American foreign and defense policy, and describe its limitations given a strong American tradition of isolationism. On Labor Day 2013, fast food workers around the country staged a one-day strike for a $15.00 per hour minimum wage. They have periodically staged one-day strikes since. Meanwhile, a number of localities around the country, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle, have enacted $15.00 per hour minimum wage laws. On one level, these new laws are simple policies requiring employers to pay their workers a minimum of $15.00 per hour. But on another level, they are the culmination of a policymaking process that says much about American politics and the interplay among competing American values, interest groups, and, ultimately, money. At irst glance, paying workers so they can support themselves should be a matter of economic security. Moreover, it should be a matter of fairness: Is it fair that some earn millions of dollars while others earn so little that they are forced to live in poverty? One possible answer to that question is clear if we consider the American tradition of individualism, upon which the American political system rests and which animates much of American politics. According to this view, individuals are free to make choices for themselves, and they are entitled to reap the rewards of their efforts. In other words, one who invests in obtaining the education and skills necessary to command a high income is entitled to that income. One who has chosen not to is not entitled to any more than he or she is worth. Of course, this is an oversimpli ication of a very complex issue: Income is not only a matter of the choices that people may have been free to make. Those born into poor families do not necessarily enjoy the same opportunities as those born into wealthier families, in which case individualism may be a convenient rationalization for inequality. Moreover, all people are not the same because not everyone is born with the same natural endowments. Therefore, when approaching a particular policy, it is necessary to understand that while the policy may result in security for some and greater equity, it may also infringe upon the liberty of others. Employers forced to pay higher wages will argue that if they are required to pay a minimum wage, their liberty to contract for less, and even the liberty of workers to work for less, is being infringed upon. Those same employers will argue that the ef iciency of the marketplace is also being undermined, which in turn may threaten the economic security of others. The minimum wage, like any policy issue, involves tradeoffs, compromise, and the building of consensus. To a large extent, the consensus necessary to enact policy in the United States is typical of the consensus needed to do anything within the U.S. political system because of the fragmentation underpinning it. 11.1 De ining Public Policy Public policy can be de ined as a plan of action that re lects the collective will of the political community. Political scientist Deborah Stone (2002) has de ined public policy as communities trying to achieve something as communities. In this vein, public policy represents the collective will of communities and, as such, is very democratic. Stone offers two models: the polis and the market. The polis, a term that comes from ancient Athenian democracy, is the political community, and it assumes both collective will and collective effort. The market, however, is an arena in which individuals pursue their objectives and make exchanges. The market begins with individuals and assumes no goals, preferences, or intentions other than those held by individuals. Social and economic rights, as well as political ones, are de ined by membership in a community. What makes a collection of individuals a community is not only a matter of specifying who is in and who is out, but also a matter of mutual understanding among members. It is the sharing of burdens and bounty that holds people together. The objective in the polis is to pursue the public interest, but how the public interest is de ined is © Toby Talbot/AP/Corbis often a matter of politics. One approach is to de ine the public Town hall meetings are examples of a polis, interest as the summation of individual interests, which may be a political community that gathers to make consistent with a traditional understanding of liberalism, de ined in decisions based on the collective will of the Chapter 1. Another approach is to say that there is a transcendent people. public interest, which is more consistent with republicanism, also discussed in Chapter 1. In the polis, there must be cooperation. The polis is therefore de ined in the following way: a community—maybe even multiple communities—with ideas, images, will, and effort quite apart from individual goals and behavior. There is indeed a public interest. What typically makes an issue a policy issue rather than an individual one is that it seeks to address common problems. Goals of Public Policy On the basis of this de inition of public policy, the goals of policy would be whatever the community seeks to achieve, so long as it is arrived at in a democratic fashion. Stone, for instance, has suggested that policy in the United States is guided by four basic goals: equity, ef iciency, security, and liberty. At the Heart of Public Policy The issues that sociologists study shed light on the fundamentals of public policy. Equity Equity can be a dif icult term to de ine because it is often relative. If goods are to be distributed, it should be on the basis of needs, rather than with each person receiving the exact same bene it. A larger family, then, should receive more public assistance than a family of two. In this vein, equity has more to do with fairness than with equality. To achieve equality, each would receive the exact same share regardless of need. If those in less need should receive something while those in greater need do not receive enough, that would strike many as being unfair. Ef iciency Ef iciency is often de ined as getting more output for fewer inputs. In the marketplace, it often amounts to maximizing pro its while minimizing costs. Markets are often presumed to be more ef icient than the polis because transactions are based on price. A policy that distributes goods to a group of people, even for noble Critical Thinking Questions reasons, may be deemed inef icient if it raises the costs of goods and services in the marketplace through the imposition of a tax. At issue for policy is the most ef icient distribution or allocation of resources. Here, the question is how the most can be distributed at the least cost. 1. How can knowledge of the social issues at play shape public policy? 2. What can you do to ensure you are making informed decisions at the polls? Security Security often refers to feeling secure in one’s person. At a minimum, it entails physical security, which is to be free from bodily harm. Since the government became more active, beginning in the 1930s in the wake of the Great Depression, the de inition of security has been broadened to include economic security. Liberty Liberty is a term used often in the United States because it represents a core American value. In American public policy, there is a presumption in favor of individuals’ liberty unless the exercise of that liberty would cause harm to one’s self or to others. Recall from Chapter 1 John Stuart Mill’s famous de inition of liberty and the ensuing “harm” principle in On Liberty (1859/1956): The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection. . . . The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. Rolls Press/Popperfoto/Getty Images During the Great Depression of the 1930s, the homeless and unemployed could receive free meals from soup kitchens. Mill’s harm principle has been the basis for governmental intervention. Because there is a presumption in favor of individual liberty, the result has often been reactive public policy—policy in response to a speci ic problem—rather than proactive public policy—policy intended to prevent problems in the future. Policy Process The public policy process in the United States could be thought of in very linear terms, as described in Figure 11.1. However, constructing policy in response to a problem is not like following the owner’s manual for a car. It is not a matter of simply following the low chart. Each step in the process is a political process unto itself. For each group whose interests are served by de ining goals in response to a problem, there will be another group whose interests are served by not de ining a problem at all. Because not all people may agree that a problem exists or on what the goals ought to be, political contests emerge between different groups and interests in every step of the process. Figure 11.1: Policy process low chart The process for public policy can be dif icult to de ine due to the various interest groups in the United States. However, many of the steps in the linear low chart could aid in the construction of a policy process for any group. Even constructing a policy around the goals of equity, ef iciency, security, and liberty often entails balancing the tradeoffs between them, and this balancing is political. On one level, all policy seeks to attain at least one, if not all, of these goals. However, each goal in and of itself is dif icult to achieve because not everyone in a political community, especially one as large and diverse as the United States, may be in agreement over how these concepts are de ined. In fact, de ining and taking ownership of these terms shapes American politics. Moreover, de inition affects the distribution of power, which itself is at the core of politics. Policy outcomes often show who received something and what this person or group received, which, in turn, says something about the power of individuals and groups relative to others. Agenda Setting Associated Press/Paul Sancya Detroit, Michigan, once a thriving industrial city, experienced social problems associated Because public policy is an inherently political process, the key question is how what might appear to be a problem for one or some becomes what we would otherwise de ine as a policy problem. What is a problem for Group A may not be a problem for Group B. For legislators to even address an issue, it has to be on the public agenda for discussion, but agenda setting is not an easy process. If a group can succeed in getting an issue on the agenda for public discussion, that group might be said to have power. The group that thinks a problem exists for policy discussion seeks to get it onto the agenda. The group that does not think a problem exists seeks to keep the issue off of the agenda. Still, at the heart of agenda setting is irst de ining a problem, and second who de ines the problem. Problem de inition is also critical because it ultimately determines the scope of policy, if there is to be policy at all. with the decline of the automobile industry in the early 2000s. Its economy was affected by this decline, illustrated in this image of a padlocked chain-link fence in front of the former General Motors engine plant. Consider for a moment that a manufacturing plant in upstate New York is about to close. Is the plant closing necessarily a problem? Surely it may be a problem for those who are about to lose their jobs. For those who believe in free markets, however, there is no problem because this is simply the marketplace running its natural course. Still, a question remains: How do those who see it as a problem convince others that it should then be placed on the public policy agenda? A common way to de ine a policy problem is to measure it. Numbers move something from singular to plural. As an example, to convey a problem of poverty, someone trying to get the issue on the agenda may want to begin with a story of one family living in poverty so that people can relate. But one family in poverty is not enough to constitute a problem. This person needs to show that there are millions of families like this one to convey a sense of crisis. It is not enough to show that this plant closing in upstate New York is a problem; rather, it needs to be apparent that plants like it throughout the country are closing, affecting millions of workers and others. Still, measurement is subject to interpretation, and hence manipulation. To say that millions are affected suggests that the impact is large. But in a country with more than 300 million people, a few million—perhaps 6 million—is a problem for only 2% of the nation. For those who seek to keep the issue off of the agenda, thinking of only 2% rather than 6 million serves their purpose well: Now the problem is not nearly as large as it appears, and talking in terms of percentages depersonalizes the issue. Percentages do not have human faces; people do. In de ining a problem, it is necessary to mobilize bias—that is, get people to join the con lict. E. E. Schattschneider (1975) de ined politics as con lict consisting of two sides: actors, who are actively involved in the con lict, and spectators. Those who want to put the issue on the agenda will mobilize bias—essentially, sell their position to others— and try to socialize the con lict. They will turn those spectators into actors. Those who seek to keep the issue off of the agenda will seek to localize the con lict by attempting to keep the number of actors small and the spectators removed from the con lict. In addition to manipulating numbers, both sides will rely on studies by think tanks and universities and will use the media to their best advantage. At the end of the day, how the agenda is set and by whom says much about who gets what, when, and how (Lasswell, 1936). 11.2 Policy Politics Political scientist James Q. Wilson (1992) described four types of politics surrounding public policy: majoritarian politics, entrepreneurial politics, client politics, and interest-group politics. In each of these types of politics, there are perceived bene its and perceived costs. Majoritarian Politics Majoritarian politics involves both distributed bene its and distributed costs, which means that the bene its are enjoyed broadly and the costs are widely shared. It often involves making appeals to large blocs of voters and their representatives with the intent of securing a majority. Because the appeal is to the majority, interest groups tend to be absent. Although majoritarian politics can be controversial, controversies tend to be over matters of cost or ideology. Interest-Group Politics Interest-group politics entails concentrated bene its and concentrated costs. Here, interest groups are heavily involved in the policy process, and the policy that is adopted very much re lects the power of respective interest groups. Plants close all the time, costing many Americans their jobs. Congress passed the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Noti ication Act (WARN) in the summer of 1988, which mandated that irms employing more than 100 workers give their workers 60 days’ prior notice of intent to close. The bene its are concentrated among those who work for these plants, while the costs are concentrated among their employers. Issues like these are fought out by organized interest groups. Workers’ groups and unions support the interest groups because they will derive bene it, while business groups who will pay the costs oppose them. Each side will also seek ways to mobilize bias. Client Politics Client politics involves concentrated bene its and distributed costs, which is to say a few derive the bene its while many in fact pay. Because the bene its are concentrated, the group that is expected to receive them now has an incentive to organize and work toward them. At the same time, the costs are so widely distributed that on a per-capita basis they are so small that most individuals will either miss them or be indifferent to them. Agricultural price supports are a good example of client politics at work. Since the New Deal, the federal government has been paying farmers to plant less as a way of driving up prices. During the Great Depression, when prices were depressed, this was very important. Even after the Great Depression, the government continued these subsidies because politicians from farm states lobbied for them, and being able to deliver them to farmers ensured that the farmers would vote for them. Meanwhile, the average consumer has often been unaware of how these subsidies affect food costs. Client politics, which is effectively a way of shoring up political support, could be said to fall into the broad category of pork barrel projects discussed in Chapter 4, in which politicians use earmarks to provide funding for projects in their district. But it is also an example of what economists refer to as rent-seeking, whereby actors in the marketplace seek bene its. Here, political actors are seeking bene its, or constituent support, by delivering something of value to constituents, such as a policy. Spaces Images/SuperStock One of the provisions of the Agricultural Act of 2014 enacted by Congress is the ending of direct payment subsidies that allowed farmers to be paid whether they produced crops or not. Entrepreneurial Politics Entrepreneurial politics involves distributed bene its and concentrated costs. Here, the bene its are expected to be widespread, while costs are expected to be concentrated. Certain types of environmental protections might be a good example. Anti-pollution laws are proposed as ways to improve the health and well-being of all people at the expense of a few: those who pollute, who may be mainly corporations. These types of policies are often led by policy entrepreneurs—people both inside and outside government who are able to cobble together coalitions of support to attain a legislative majority. Policy entrepreneurs may or may not accurately represent the interests and wishes of the public at large, but they are often able to galvanize the public through the mobilization of bias, if for no other reason than that their arguments appear to be reasonable. Lowi’s Typology Chapter 1 explored political scientist Theodore Lowi’s (1964) identi ication of three types of politics: regulatory, redistributive, and distributive. This typology applies to policy as well. With regulatory policy, government is regulating the activities of some in order to protect the interests of others. It is not hard to see how this model is consistent with Wilson’s model of interest-group politics. In redistributive policy, a group receives certain goods, which another group pays for. This can it into interest-group politics or even entrepreneurial politics if, for example, the wealthy are being overtaxed for the bene it of the broader middle class. And in distributive policy, all groups are getting something as part of the politicians’ desire to seek political rent. This then is consistent with both majoritarian and client politics. Wilson’s types of politics can be easily classi ied in a grid, as shown in Table 11.1. Table 11.1: Wilson’s types of politics 11.3 Policy Based on Ideology Policy in the United States often re lects a particular worldview and tends to be highly ideological. These worldviews certainly re lect a position with regards to the role of government in society. Indeed, the nature of policy—what the response to a problem is, if there is any—makes an effective statement about the appropriate role of government in society. Contemporary American politics and policy might be said to revolve around three different but competing ideological positions: conservative, liberal, and libertarian. Conservatism Conservatives in the United States place great emphasis on conserving the traditions of the past. They believe that individuals should be free to pursue their interests consistent with their human agency, and that with individual freedom of choice comes personal responsibility. Therefore, when it comes to the marketplace, they do not see much of a role for government, and by extension public policy. Rather, the appropriate role for government is to regulate behavior that is considered harmful. There is no need for policy to assist the poor because the poor are considered to be responsible for their own fate. Their poverty is believed to be due to their own moral defects, not lack of opportunity. Because conservatives believe in moral order, they believe that there is a role for government to regulate individual behavior when it comes to matters that are seen as affecting the traditional family, such as who can get married, and abortion. Otherwise, they believe the role for public policy should be a limited one. Conservatives may see a need for negative public policy from time to time, but never for positive public policy. Liberalism Contemporary liberals in the United States recognize that there are forces beyond individuals’ control that result in poverty and inequality. Markets, in other words, are not always perfect, and they often fail. Liberals see a need for greater public policy, especially positive public policy, in order to remove barriers caused by discrimination and generations of poverty, which have put some at an unfair advanwtage. Therefore they believe policy is needed to level the playing ield in order to ensure equal opportunity for all. Libertarianism Jim West/SuperStock People are protesting legislation that Michigan passed that would drop more than 12,000 families from welfare rolls. A public policy conservative may approve of this measure, while a policy liberal may disagree. Libertarians in many respects represent an extreme form of liberalism married to extreme conservatism. Individual liberty is considered to be sacred, and therefore the government should be limited in its function to no more than protecting individuals from bodily harm, maintaining law and order, protecting private property, and enforcing contracts, which are considered essential to the operations of a free market economy. The ideal state is the nightwatchman state. Other than minimal regulation, there is absolutely no role for positive public policy for the libertarian. Public policy, especially positive public policy, is seen as interfering with individual liberty. The libertarian certainly believes in the conservative’s view of personal responsibility. But the libertarian also shares the liberal’s view of human agency. 11.4 Economic Policy Economic policy might strike some as being ambiguous because it is not clear to all just what it is. From the standpoint of the tensions that exist in American political culture, there is the larger question of whether there should even be a role for economic policy in American society. Still, economic policy has amounted to managing the economy. Government attempts to promote economic growth and stability with low in lation and unemployment rates. Associated Press/Paul Sakuma Unemployment rates reached more than 10% after the Great Recession of 2008 and 2009. People could ile for unemployment insurance and receive bene its for 6 months. Full employment has traditionally been de ined as containing a certain percentage of those in the labor force not working. These people might be retraining, in school, taking time off to raise children or care for sick parents, or simply between jobs. In other words, there will always be a certain number of people out of work for whatever reason. Still, there are issues with the of icial de inition of unemployment. To be considered of icially unemployed, one has to have been looking for work within the previous 4 weeks. A person is categorized as unemployed when he or she of icially iles for unemployment insurance (UI), but these bene its are typically available for no more than 6 months in most states. Therefore, one could exhaust one’s bene its and no longer be considered of icially unemployed, or simply give up and drop out of the labor market. Such a person is neither employed nor unemployed, but technically jobless. Similarly, those who take part-time work because that is all that is available but are still seeking full-time employment are not counted among the unemployed either; they are considered underemployed. Since the Employment Act of 1946 was enacted, it has been the of icial policy of the United States to ensure as high a level of employment as would be “practicable.” This act created in the White House the Council of Economic Advisors, whose job it is to monitor the economy and prepare an annual report on it. The president is then responsible for transmitting the annual reports to Congress, with recommendations for how to achieve as high a level of employment as practicable. To this end, government pursues two basic approaches: iscal policy and monetary policy. Both of these approaches involve pumping more money into the economy during a recession to spur investment, and contracting money during in lation in order to lower prices. Fiscal Policy Fiscal policy involves enabling individuals to purchase more by lowering tax rates during a recession and increasing taxes during in lation. In lation occurs when prices for goods and services increase and, as a result, individuals can buy less with the money they have. By lowering taxes, the government essentially gives individuals more to spend, and they can thus demand more goods and services. Then, during in lation, the government may raise taxes, which will lead to less demand for goods and services because individuals will have even less money to spend. The basic problem with iscal policy, however, is that it generally requires congressional action. While lowering taxes will always be politically popular, raising taxes will never be and may cost members of Congress reelection. Still, there are policies within the iscal family that Congress often pursues. Often, they are labeled “stimulus” plans because the objective is to stimulate demand for goods and services by increasing the purchasing power of individuals. Monetary Policy Monetary policy involves making money more available, usually by lowering interest rates, which makes it easier for individuals to obtain money to purchase big-ticket items such as cars and houses and for irms to obtain money to invest, which may create jobs. Then, during in lation, interest rates are raised in order to make money more expensive and more dif icult to obtain, thereby leading to less spending and ultimately the lowering of prices. As a policy tool, monetary policy is usually inferred from the language of the Employment Act of 1946, but it is usually administered by the Board of the Federal Reserve System, often referred to as the Fed. The Fed has two principal tools in its policy toolbox. The irst are the reserve requirements, the amount of money that member banks are required to keep on hand. The more banks are required to maintain, the less they have to loan, which results in a higher interest rate, thereby making money more expensive. The second are the discount rates, which are the interest rates the Fed charges to its favorite member banks. The lower the discount rate, the lower overall interest rates will be, thereby making money more available because it is cheaper to obtain. Monetary policy, however, usually involves a tradeoff between employment and in lation. By pumping money into the economy in order to create jobs—raise employment— the inevitable result is usually in lation. But by controlling for the effects of in lation by contracting the money supply, the inevitable result is a slowdown in the economy, thereby leading to higher unemployment. Theories of Economic Management With the tools of iscal and monetary policy at the government’s disposal, is there an ideal way for it to manage the economy? Various economic theories offer prescriptions that the government can espouse to maintain stable economic growth. The two main approaches can be described as Keynesian economics and supply-side economics. Keynesian Economics John Maynard Keynes (1964) was a British economist in the early part of the 20th century who maintained that unemployment is caused by the absence of demand for goods and services in the aggregate. Keynesian economics suggests that by creating programs that enhance purchasing power, government could stimulate demand for goods and services, thereby leading to an economic recovery. The Keynesian approach embraces the use of iscal policy and government spending, and critics, including economist Milton Friedman, argued that using monetary policy was a better way of ensuring stability. Using monetary policy may be more desirable because it may be politically neutral, whereby the government is not choosing to spend on one person’s good over another’s. Furthermore, monetary policy is administered by the Fed, which is politically independent: In other words, the Fed is not subject to the political pressures of Congress and can therefore make hard and otherwise unpopular choices. Supply-Side Economics © Bettmann/Corbis/AP Images British economist John Maynard Keynes theorized that, in times of recession, the government should run de icits to boost the economy. His theories were vital to the U.S. economy when it was trying to come out of the Great Depression and all the economic problems that it produced. There is another approach to economic management known as supply-side economics, which is the idea that big tax cuts should go to the rich because they will invest responsibly, thereby creating jobs for those down the income distribution. This is the notion that the bene its ilter down from the top to the bottom. Rather than creating large-scale government programs, the goal is to unleash the marketplace by allowing investors to have more of their money to invest. Supply-side economics are often criticized by liberals who maintain that large tax cuts to the wealthy are unfair, as there is no guarantee that those at the bottom will derive any bene it. There is also no guarantee that these investors will invest in new plants and equipment that might create jobs; they may simply invest more in stocks and bonds, which only enhance investors’ portfolios without iltering down to those at the bottom. Further, as less revenue is coming into the treasury, it has the potential to expand the de icit. The Great Depression and the Second New Deal A classic example of Keynesian economics is Franklin Delano Roosevelt's response to the Great Depression, known as the First and Second New Deal. This video focuses on the Second New Deal. The Second New Deal From Title: The Great Depression (https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx? wID=100753&xtid=36219)   © 0:00 / 3:39  1x    f Critical Thinking Questions 1. What New Deal policies remain in place today? How would you describe their scope and in luence on today's life? 2. What similarities and differences can you detect between the Second New Deal and the stimulus enacted to respond to the more recent Great Recession? 3. Consider reading more about the First New Deal. How did the Second New Deal build upon its predecessor? Globalization and Rising Economic Inequality Increasingly, economic policy in the United States is forced to grapple with globalization, which is the process of increasing interdependence between nations. In the globalized world, economic crises in other countries have an impact on the economic health of the United States. Supporters of globalization tout it as a sign of progress and often support free trade, reduced government spending, and lower taxes so that the United States can compete better in the global marketplace. Opponents of globalization often want to erect trade barriers in order to protect the domestic economy. Often, in a global economy where goods and capital can easily move across national borders, many U.S. companies lee the United States, where wages are higher, particularly in manufacturing, and relocate to developing nations where wage rates are considerably lower. As a result of globalization, the United States inds itself with a two-tiered economy where at the top of the income distribution are highly educated (skilled) and highly paid workers and at the bottom are poorly educated (unskilled) and poorly paid workers. In between, the middle class that used to exist is no longer. This has led to another issue very much alive in the current political debate, which is economic inequality and the widening gap between the top and the bottom classes. This drives discussions on the types of policies that ought to be pursued. Should government be spending more on education and training programs so that workers will be better prepared for the new economy? Should government enact barriers to trade? Liberals often argue that government should pursue policies that help workers adjust. Conservatives, however, argue that barriers to free trade should be eliminated and that the responsibility for education and (re)training should be on the workers themselves. 11.5 Social Policy Social policy in the United States often revolves around issues of welfare, including education, health care, and retirement security. It is not always clear what is meant by “welfare,” though, which makes social policy controversial. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution mentions forming a “more perfect union” to promote the general welfare. Yet welfare brings with it multiple meanings tied to physical security, health, and economic security, and different de initions result in different policy approaches. It is often around welfare issues that we see glaring differences among conservatives, liberals, and libertarians. Background Many of the nation’s social policies are centered on preventing individuals from falling below the poverty level by ensuring that they have income. They include Social Security, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, and other social insurance programs, through which the government protects individuals from economic concerns and risks. In the United States, poverty is de ined in terms of an of icial poverty line developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture; it is intended to be the minimum level of income a family would need in order to subsist. Consequently, a poor person may live above the poverty line. Associated Press/Bill Clark Individuals lacking job skills will more likely be employed in the lowPeople hold signs in support of food stamp wage labor market, where wages are insuf icient to lift them above funding. The Farm Bill’s Supplemental the poverty line. Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is one The American welfare state is essentially a bifurcated one whereby type of national welfare program that was insurance is provided to the middle class and public assistance is instituted by the federal government. provided to the poor. The Social Security Act of 1935 contained two essential components: retirement savings for the elderly, which they were entitled to because they paid into it, and public assistance for the poor through Aid to Dependent Children (ADC). Recall from Chapter 3 that ADC was a children’s program, with assistance going to their mothers. During the 1960s, ADC was expanded into what became known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). This bifurcated state essentially re lected a traditional distinction between “worthy” and “unworthy” poor: One school of thought held that poverty is a function of market failure. Poor people have insuf icient income because the market failed to provide enough jobs that would enable them to live out of poverty. If one is poor, it is through no fault of one’s own. Another school of thought held that poverty is a function of individual moral character and behavior. People are poor because of a moral defect. Associated Press President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into effect in 1935. The Act provided the elderly with retirement savings and gave public assistance to the poor. By some measures, the effect of the bifurcated welfare state was to stigmatize the poor. By other measures, however, many of the poor relief programs (food stamps, Medicaid, and so on) re lected the assumption that poor people needed assistance and that their poverty was not their fault. During the 1960s, as the Civil Rights Movement was ighting for political empowerment, a so-called legislative “War on Poverty” would create various programs aimed at providing more opportunities for poor people. For some, the War on Poverty was the next phase of the ongoing Civil Rights Movement, shifting the focus of African Americans’ struggle from political to economic empowerment. Eventually, though, a political backlash would emerge demanding welfare reform based on the assumption that those collecting public assistance were actually unworthy. By the 1980s, and into the 1990s, social policy discussions were marked by calls for welfare reform. Critics believed that welfare encouraged individuals to have more children out of wedlock just in order to collect more welfare, and many proposals centered on attempting to force people back into the labor market. Some advocated the complete elimination of welfare. Others argued that welfare recipients should be required to work in exchange for their bene its. This was the idea that welfare should be replaced with workfare. Critics of workfare, however, claimed that workfare programs were akin to slavery. To force recipients to work in exchange for their bene its was essentially punishing them for being poor. Such an approach was considered to be all the more punitive if the recipients were just doing “busy work” and not acquiring real, transferable job skills. In the summer of 1996, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), the most dramatic welfare reform since its inception with the Social Security Act of 1935. The new welfare program imposed cumulative time limits, required recipients to participate in work programs, called for reduced funding for food stamps by $28 billion over a 6-year period, and denied assistance to legal immigrants for at least 5 years. The new law’s most radical aspect was that it put an end to welfare’s entitlement status and its guarantee of national funding and subjected it to the annual appropriations process. Health Care In recent years, social policy has been expanded to include health care. Health policy is an issue that has evoked a great deal of emotion in many people. It has certainly been an issue that has affected the key policy goals listed at the beginning of the chapter. The key issues in health care have been access and cost. Until the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010, the United States did not really have a health care policy like those of many other industrial countries. Britain, for example, has socialized medicine, whereby hospitals are run by the government and doctors and nurses are government employees. Canada, on the other hand, has a single-payer system, whereby every citizen is covered by the state insurance system. Doctors are in private practice, as they are in the United States, and hospitals are also private. Associated Press/Evan Vucci Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, testi ied before the House Energy and Commerce Committee in October 2013. There were failures with the government website created for Affordable Care Act implementation. The United States has traditionally had what can be referred to as a health care regime, which is effectively an arrangement between public and private actors for the provision of some common goods. Most Americans get their insurance from their employers. Medicare is government-sponsored health insurance for the elderly, and Medicaid is government-sponsored insurance for the poor. Those who have not received insurance from their employers have often gone uninsured, and the costs of purchasing insurance have been prohibitive. The issue of the uninsured becomes even more acute during a recession, when many lose their insurance when they lose their jobs. Therefore, the limited access becomes a matter of personal economic security. It also becomes a matter of ef iciency because when uninsured people get sick and have to go to the hospital, the cost is ultimately picked up by the broader population, especially those who are insured. An increasing number of uninsured people means that those who are insured will be paying higher premiums. When Medicare was enacted in 1965, it was viewed by many as the irst step toward universal health insurance. But there was intense opposition from many groups, including insurance companies, businesses, and the American Medical Association. The result was that Medicare remained a health care program for the elderly. Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 on a platform of health care reform, but his proposal for managed care, which still relied heavily on employers to provide health insurance, went down to defeat. He had convened a panel chaired by his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to draw up a plan. What it produced was 2,000 pages of federal regulation, and it created ample opportunity for those opposed to mount a public relations campaign against it. What resonated with the public was the idea that it would not only limit their freedom of choice, but also result in the rationing of care. Still, the issue of affordable health care did not disappear, and costs continued to rise. Finally, in 2010, Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While the ACA may have increased access to insurance, its rollout was not without problems. First, the government websites were not working, and people could not sign up. Then, many people who had had affordable Associated Press/Andrew Harnik Senators speak in support of the Affordable Care Act, which was enacted by Congress in 2010. insurance received cancellation notices from their insurance companies because their policies no longer met federal minimum requirements. With insurance canceled, they were now forced to purchase more expensive insurance. Companies that provided what was referred to as “Cadillac” insurance were to be subject to a tax, all but ensuring their employees would be forced into cheaper plans of less quality. In particular, the individual mandate was challenged in the Supreme Court: Could the government require individuals to purchase something, or was the mandate tantamount to a tax? The Obama administration had always maintained that it was not a tax. In 2012, the Supreme Court held that it was, on the grounds that the penalty for not purchasing insurance was a tax and Congress had the authority to impose taxes. Three years later, the ACA was again before the U.S. Supreme Court on the basis of more technical if not overly arcane arguments. When Congress set up the law, it had provided for subsidies to be available to quali ied individuals who signed up through state exchanges. Many states opposed to the ACA refused to set up these exchanges, so the federal government made these subsidies available to those signed up through the federal exchange. The ACA, however, stipulated that these subsidies were to be available through “state” exchanges and did not mention the federal exchange. A group of states challenged the law on the grounds that these subsidies constituted federal overreach. In a 6–3 decision in June 2015, the Court did not quite see it that way. Although the Court acknowledged that Congress had been sloppy in writing the legislation, it also stated that it did not believe that it had been Congress’s intention to deny subsidies to those living in states that failed to create their own exchanges. Now, it was a foregone conclusion that the ACA was here to stay unless a compositional change in Congress and the White House would result in its repeal. Social Policy and Core American Values? Given the American political and cultural tradition of individualism, social policy raises a fundamental question: Do Americans have a right to be taken care of? Conservatives often maintain that social insurance and public assistance lead to moral hazard, in which the recipients may be motivated to act differently if they feel protected against harm or loss. Although it is noble to care for the poor, does the receipt of public assistance create a disincentive to work? If individuals can collect money and do nothing, why would they go to work, especially if it is low-wage work? The United States has a tradition of rugged individualism, whereby people rely on themselves and pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. In fact, it is American mythology that if one works hard, one can be self-suf icient and potentially become wealthy. But liberals believe that if people are poor through no fault of their own, then providing assistance and creating opportunities for them can enable them to live their lives with some dignity, which in and of itself is a precondition for human agency. Though this is an ongoing debate, it is important that in American politics the poor have always tended to be stigmatized. In evaluating policy, it is not enough to ask whether it works and whether monetary bene its outweigh monetary costs, but also whether it conforms to American values. 11.6 Foreign and Defense Policy Like all nations, the United States pursues both a foreign policy and a defense policy. Defense policy often involves the strategic use of military force and decisions about the scale of those forces to defend the nation. Defense policy is irst and foremost about national security and maintaining secure borders. It can also involve the protection of U.S. interests abroad. Foreign policy, however, is much broader and deals with an array of military, diplomatic, economic, and security exchanges that the United States has with other nations. On leaving of ice, the irst president, George Washington, warned his countrymen against getting involved in foreign entanglements. For most of the nation’s history, the United States could be characterized as isolationist, in that it has sought to isolate itself from the rest of the world. That did not mean the United States did not strive to defend its basic interests. Monroe Doctrine Perhaps the irst major statement of foreign policy regarding European nations was given by President James Monroe in 1823. This statement, which came to be known as the Monroe Doctrine, stated that European efforts to colonize land or interfere in states in North, Central, and South America would be viewed by the United States as acts of aggression requiring U.S. intervention. This particularly applied to Caribbean islands off of U.S. shores. In effect, the United States was making it clear that it would maintain a zone of in luence: It would not tolerate European countries’ presence in its backyard, where these countries would then be better positioned to possibly invade the United States. American Imperialism During the late 1800s into the early 1900s, especially under President Theodore Roosevelt, the United States began to assert itself in Latin American and Caribbean countries. As European nations were colonizing land in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, the United States, in part as an extension of the Monroe Doctrine, sought to colonize some territories close to home. The principal reason for this was a fear that, if it did not, European countries would move in. Although the United States sought to be politically isolated from European countries and the rest of the world, it certainly wanted to trade around the world in order to grow its economy. Although the United States did not really enter the imperial realm until 1898 with the Spanish-American War, it was beginning its march to becoming an imperial power in the 1850s. Portrait by William James Hubbard, ca. 1832 The Monroe Doctrine, given by President James Monroe in 1823 during his State of the Union address, emphasized that any colonization efforts by Europe in North, Central, or South America would be viewed by the United States as acts of aggression. By the turn of the 20th century, the United States was becoming a world power. It had interests around the world and was particularly interested in securing its market share in China. During the presidency of William McKinley, Secretary of State John Hay initiated what would come to be known as the Open Door Policy, which declared that all nations trading with China should have equal privileges and also opposed the partition of China by foreign powers. Essentially, Hay was demanding that China grant the United States most favored nation status, which held that if Country A (such as China) has a special relationship with Country B (such as Great Britain), then the United States should also have a special relationship with Country A because the United States is an ally of Country B. In 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt issued the corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which reasserted American opposition to European intervention in the Western Hemisphere. Roosevelt claimed that the United States had a right to intervene in the domestic affairs of its neighbors if they proved unable to maintain order and national sovereignty on their own. Ostensibly, the corollary was intended to ensure that other powers would not enter into the region, but it did pave the way for the United States to intervene in a number of Caribbean countries, including Cuba, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. Moreover, the United States was able to consolidate its dominance in the hemisphere with the opening of the Panama Canal in 1914. The Road to Being a Superpower © Underwood and Underwood/National Geographic/Corbis When the United States entered World War I in 1917, men were recruited to join the army. When World War I broke out during the summer of 1914, the United States declared its neutrality. But the United States was eventually pulled into the war in 1917 despite President Woodrow Wilson’s best efforts to keep the nation out of it. In 1918, with the end of the war, President Wilson went to Versailles to participate in the treaty negotiation. Wilson sought to create the League of Nations in the belief that, through collective security, it would prevent future wars. The U.S. Senate never rati ied the Treaty of Versailles, nor did the United States enter the League of Nations. Rather, the American tradition of isolationism reared its head. Still, the United States emerged from the irst world war stronger, as a creditor nation rather than a debtor nation. Isolationism remained very strong through the next two decades and made it very dif icult to get involved in World War II even as Britain and its allies were close to being overrun by the Germans. It was not until the Japanese attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor that the United States inally entered World War II, at the end of 1941. When the war was over, the United States emerged as one of two superpowers, with the Soviet Union emerging as the other. Both the United States and the Soviet Union possessed large nuclear arsenals and could dispatch military forces quickly around the world. In 1947, President Harry Truman issued what came to be known as the Truman Doctrine, which made it clear that it was the intention of the United States to support free peoples who were resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures. This doctrine would then inform the U.S. policy of containment, which would represent the United States’ attempt to limit, or contain, Soviet or other Communist in luence to where it already existed. Where there was an attempt to spread Communist in luence, the United States and its allies, through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), would seek to stop it. At the same time, the Soviets also practiced their own version of containment through the Warsaw Pact to stop the spread of Western and democratic values. The Return to Isolationism The doctrine of containment was also used to justify wars with perceived Soviet surrogates such as North Korea and North Vietnam. However, as the United States continued ighting a seemingly hopeless guerilla war in Vietnam from the 1960s until 1975, Americans essentially began to call for a return to isolationism. The death toll of the Vietnam War was being broadcast into American living rooms across the country. When the Selective Service adopted a lottery system for the draft, which meant that the children of the af luent could no longer be excused from military service because of student deferments, massive protests against the war broke out. Aside from the fact that Americans could not see the value of involvement in foreign entanglements, there was no clear sense of victory, as there had been in World War II, where both Germany and Japan surrendered unconditionally. This only created a sense of self-doubt. Unless it was clear that the United States could be absolutely victorious, Americans preferred that military might be eschewed. Still, the Cold War continued through the 1980s. The United States and the Soviets still had large stockpiles of nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, U.S. nuclear policy was informed by the principle of mutually assured destruction (MAD), which presumed that neither superpower would be the irst to launch a nuclear attack because such an attack would lead to certain destruction. But the principle of MAD also assumed that nation states were rational actors—that they could calculate what was in their best interests and that nuclear war was not because rational beings sought to live. Did this apply to all countries? Do all nations share Western rationality? Nevertheless, there were attempts during the Cold War to negotiate nuclear arms control and reduction treaties. The New World Order and Terrorism With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States was left as the world’s only superpower with military bases and interests to protect around the world. Among those interests were protecting the low of oil into the country. When Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, attacked Kuwait in 1990 and was on the doorstep of American ally and major oil producer Saudi Arabia, President George Herbert Walker Bush organized an international coalition to eject Iraq from Kuwait. Coalition forces, however, stopped short of toppling the Saddam Hussein regime. During the 1990s, U.S. interests around the world fell victim to terrorist attacks, but the country chose to treat these matters as law enforcement issues and not acts of war. When the U.S.S. Cole was attacked while docked in Yemen and the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia were bombed, the United States sent over FBI agents to investigate and talked about bringing the perpetrators to justice through arrest and trial. When, on September 11, 2001, the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by terrorists lying airplanes into them, killing more than 3,000 Americans, the United States would no longer treat terrorism as a simple law enforcement matter. This was now an act of war. President George W. Bush declared a war on terror and made it clear that the United States would use force against terrorists and those nations that harbored terrorists. Because alQaeda, the group responsible for the September 11th attacks, had been training in Afghanistan, the United States felt it was within its rights to declare war on Afghanistan as part of the larger war on terror. Because Saddam Hussein was inancing terrorists, even though no link could be established to the September 11th attacks, the United States decided to go to war in Iraq too. This time, the goal Associated Press/Patrick Sison was regime change, where the objective would be a change not only in The World Trade Center, as well government, but also in the underlying political culture. as the Pentagon, was the site of a With these twin wars in the Middle East came Bush’s doctrine of preemption, terrorist attack on September 11, which enunciated that the United States would be permitted the use of force to 2001. prevent hostile acts (such as those using weapons of mass destruction), even when it was not clear when and where an enemy attack occurred. Moreover, these hostile acts needed to be prevented in order to protect U.S. national interests, which consisted of the constellation of military, economic, and ideological concerns surrounding the nation’s security. It was now deemed to be in the United States’ national interests to engage in nation-building, where the United States would remake other nations, preferably into democracies modeled on the United States. Obama’s Foreign Policy: Two Views Listen to this debate moderator characterize President Barack Obama’s foreign policy from two viewpoints. Proponents at this debate will argue that Obama’s foreign policy spells the United States’ decline. Obama's Foreign Obama’s Foreign Policy Spells America’s Declin... Policy: Two Views(https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx? From Title: wID=100753&xtid=58313)   © f 0:00 / 3:00  1x    Critical Thinking Questions 1. Which characterization of President Obama’s foreign policy do you agree with? 2. What arguments would convince you otherwise? Summary and Resources Chapter Summary Public policy re lects the collective will of communities attempting to achieve things for themselves. The policy process in the United States is a very political one, which does not easily follow a linear low diagram. Because different groups seeking to serve their interests seek to attain different objectives, there will never be a clear de inition of what constitutes a policy problem, let alone what the solutions are. Groups see these issues through the prism of not only their respective interests, but also their respective political ideologies. It is through policy that American politics is played out, because the outcome of policy tells us much about who has power, when they have it, and how they have it. The type of policy that the United States pursues as a nation also says something about how Americans de ine terms such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness from the Declaration of Independence. Public policy in the United States has fallen into three principal domains: economic, social, and foreign/defense. In economic policy, the government seeks to manage the economy with the goal of maintaining high levels of employment and generating opportunities. It often pumps more money into the economy during periods of recession through iscal stimulus packages and monetary policy centered on low interest rates. In social policy, government creates a safety net to ensure that people do not fall below the poverty line, and in recent years social policy has been expanded to include health care. In foreign/defense policy, the United States seeks to secure its interests around the world. This often means maintaining access to markets for American goods. In the past, it meant preventing other countries from having in luence in the U.S. sphere of in luence. And yet, despite the United States being the only superpower today, much of its foreign and defense policy is informed by a deep-seated tradition of isolationism. Key Ideas to Remember Public policy re lects the collective will of the political community. Policy in the United States is often designed around the objectives of ef iciency, equity, security, and liberty. Agenda setting, which is key to formulating policy, is inherently a political process. Government seeks to manage the economy through the use of both iscal and monetary policy. Social policy in the United States has revolved around issues of welfare, which often include education, health care, and retirement security. The United States pursues both foreign and defense policy. The United States has long had a tradition of isolationism in foreign policy. Over time, the United States has become a global superpower, but American foreign policy politics often revolves around the desire of many to remain isolated from the rest of the world. Timeline: Evolution of U.S. foreign policy Photo credits (top to bottom): JimLarkin/iStock/Thinkstock, moodboard/moodboard/Thinkstock, Niyazz/iStock/Thinkstock, Culver Pictures, Inc./SuperStock, Underwood Photo Archives/SuperStock Questions to Consider 1. What are the principal objectives of public policy, and what are the tradeoffs between them? 2. What is the principal difference between the polis and the market, and what are the implications of this distinction for policy in the United States? 3. What is the dif iculty in de ining a policy problem and determining whether such a problem is placed on the agenda? 4. What are the four types of public policy politics that James Q. Wilson identi ies, and how do they coincide with Theodore Lowi’s three types of politics? 5. What are the implications for policy of how liberals, conservatives, and libertarians view the role of government? 6. In terms of economic management, what is the difference between iscal and monetary policy and supply-side economics? 7. How do liberals and conservatives differ on how policy should respond to increasing globalization? 8. What distinguishes social policy from economic policy? 9. In what ways does welfare reform represent a return to the American tradition of individualism? 10. What has been the impact of isolationism on the evolution of American foreign and defense policy? 11. Does the Truman Doctrine represent a radical departure from the Monroe Doctrine, or is it actually a continuation of it? 12. In what ways does the war on terror demonstrate the limitations of isolationism? Key Terms client politics When politicians view constituents as clients who need to be served and where bene its are concentrated but costs are distributed. containment Refers to a military strategy that attempts to limit the enemy’s expansion and in luence; during the Cold War, the United States practiced containment when it sought to limit both Soviet and Communist in luence to where it was and prevent its expansion. Council of Economic Advisors An of ice in the White House that prepares annual reports on the state of the economy; created by the Employment Act of 1946. defense policy The government’s strategic use of military forces and decisions about the scale of those forces. discount rates The interest rates that the Fed charges its favorite banks. entrepreneurial politics Where the bene its of policy are distributed, but the costs are concentrated. iscal policy The government’s approach to spending and taxation, with the goal of in luencing the nation’s economy by affecting consumer spending. foreign policy The government’s approach to the array of military, diplomatic, economic, and security exchanges it has with other nations. globalization Refers to a process whereby there is greater economic interdependence between nations. in lation The rise in prices of goods and services. interest-group politics When politicians seek to satisfy interest groups and both bene its and costs are concentrated. isolationist Refers to a foreign policy approach that aims to keep a country out of the affairs of others; a historically U.S. desire to separate from the rest of the world in foreign affairs and avoid entanglements abroad, speci ically in Europe. majoritarian politics When politicians appeal to large blocs of voters and where bene its are broadly enjoyed and costs are widely shared. monetary policy The central bank’s approach to in luencing the size and rate of growth of the money supply through interest rates, with the goal of in luencing the nation’s economy. Monroe Doctrine Articulated by President James Monroe; stated that European efforts to colonize land or interfere in states in North, Central, and South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, thereby warranting U.S. intervention. most favored nation status Refers to the special treatment one country gives another in international trade. mutually assured destruction (MAD) A principle that presumed that neither superpower would be the irst to launch a nuclear attack because it was understood that such an attack would lead to certain destruction. nation-building Refers to attempts by one power to remake another, preferably into a familiar model (e.g., the United States trying to install democracies in other countries). Open Door Policy The United States’ policy that declared that all nations trading with China should also have equal privileges in China. policy entrepreneurs People both inside and outside government who are able to put together coalitions of support and achieve a legislative majority. preemption A foreign policy principle emphasized by George W. Bush that held that the United States is permitted to use force to prevent hostile acts. proactive public policy Policy measures intended to prevent problems in the future. public policy A plan of action that re lects the collective will of the political community. reactive public policy Policy measures taken in response to speci ic problems that have already occurred. rent-seeking When actors in the marketplace seek bene its. Applied to politicians, it means that they are seeking something like constituent support in exchange for delivering something like a desired policy. reserve requirements Refers to the amount of cash that member banks of the Federal Reserve System must keep on hand. social insurance Usually refers to an array of government programs to ensure that individuals will have economic security and will be immunized from risk and the vagaries of the marketplace. supply-side economics An economic theory that holds that big tax cuts should go to the wealthy because they will invest responsibly, thereby creating jobs and bene its for those at the bottom. Truman Doctrine Policy that asserted that it was the intention of the United States to support free peoples who were resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures. underemployed Usually refers to those who would like to be employed full time but took part-time jobs because that was all that was available. unemployment insurance (UI) Funds that workers receive while unemployed that allow them more time to search for jobs that are a better match for their skills. workfare A welfare reform whereby recipients of public assistance were required to work in exchange for their bene its. Click card to see term 👆 When politicians view constituents as clients who need to be served and where Further Reading Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The political system (pp. 87–124). Washington, D.C.: The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Katz, M. B. (1989). The undeserving poor: From the war on poverty to the war in welfare. New York, NY: Pantheon Books. Keynes, J. M. (1964). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. New York, NY: Harvest/Harcourt. Mead, L. C. (1986). Beyond entitlement: The social obligations of citizenship. New York, NY: The Free Press. Mead, L. C. (1992). The new politics of poverty: The nonworking poor in America. New York, NY: Basic Books. Murray, C. (1984). Losing ground: American social policy, 1950–1980. New York, NY: Basic Books. Rushefsky, M. E. (2008). Public policy in the United States: At the dawn of the twenty- irst century. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Schattschneider, E. E. (1975). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York, NY: Anchor Books. Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co. Wilson, J. Q. (1992). American government: Institutions and policies. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company. Speci ically Chapter 15: “The Policy-Making Process.” 12 The Mass Media Associated Press/Pablo Martinez Monsivais Learning Objectives By the end of this chapter, you should be able to Describe the evolution of the media in American politics. Outline the role of the media in political campaigns. Demonstrate how the media monitors and in luences government. Examine the role of the Internet as a contemporary media source. Analyze media bias and the role of the media in shaping public opinion. On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old Black teenager and recent high school graduate, was shot and killed by police of icer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. Brown was shot at least six times, including two shots to the head, one of which resulted in Brown’s death. On November 24, the St. Louis County prosecutor announced that Wilson would not be indicted by a grand jury. Demonstrations and protests erupted after both the police shooting and the grand jury’s decision. The media was criticized for its coverage of these events and for inadvertently fueling the subsequent violence because of how it portrayed the Ferguson story. Some television stations presented the public’s response as consisting solely of riots and excessive property damage; other media outlets indicated that the crowds were protesting corruption in the Ferguson police department. Many argue that the media shaped the events in Ferguson by in luencing how the public both outside and inside Ferguson responded to the protests. In essence, critics suggest that how the media framed the issue shaped public perception of the events that unfolded in August and later in November. For example, several major news outlets, including the New York Times, printed only Of icer Wilson’s account of the events the next day and did not report the story from any other vantage point. The New York Times reported St. Louis Police Chief Jon Belmar’s statements from a news conference that indicated that Brown had been shot and killed after he and another man had assaulted Wilson and that Brown and Wilson had struggled inside a patrol car. At least one shot was ired from inside the car, the police chief claimed. This report placed the blame for the event solely on Michael Brown and his accomplice. Questions later emerged as to who had begun the altercation in the vehicle, whether the irst shot had been ired inside or outside the car, and how far away Of icer Wilson had been when he had shot the remaining bullets. Critics of the reporting also questioned why the New York Times did not ask what would motivate a recent high school graduate to assault a police of icer as well as why Of icer Wilson would leave his patrol car. In essence, the New York Times and other media outlets were criticized for not investigating whether there was another side to the story. It was not for another two days, amid protest and criticism, that the New York Times and other well-known and highly used media outlets reported something other than the police department’s version of events. Critics suggest that the way the events were handled by the police, along with the media reporting, provoked the protests and riots. The mass media plays many roles and serves multiple functions in American politics. Some say that it is the “fourth branch” of government, which means that it checks the other branches, while others suggest that the mass media shapes the relationship between the public and government. Protecting the public, iltering information, and setting the public’s agenda as to what government should do round out the roles of the media. This chapter will include a discussion of how media has evolved in American politics, focusing on its functions of reporting the news and serving as a vehicle for campaign advertising. Finally, this chapter will address concerns about media bias. The chapter will be framed within the context of how technology has in luenced the emergence of the mass media. 12.1 The Evolution of the Media in American Politics The notion that the media is an effective mechanism for informing the public about and in luencing the public’s relationship with government is not a new one. During the French and Indian War (also called the Seven Years’ War), which took place between 1754 and 1763, a political cartoon composed by Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790) and published in the Pennsylvania Gazette on May 9, 1754 depicted the colonists’ lack of unity. The cartoon, titled “Join, or Die,” represents a snake cut into eight parts with each part representing most of the 13 colonies, as either individual colonies or regions. The cartoon was published to accompany Franklin’s editorial about the fractured experience of the colonies, which contributed to colonists’ collective struggles and desire to support Great Britain in winning the French and Indian War. The cartoon later came to be seen as a call for independence and a symbol of the colonists’ pursuit of freedom during the American Revolutionary War. Soon after the French and Indian War, the British Parliament enacted the Stamp Act in 1765 to raise revenue to pay for the costs of the war. Requiring a stamp on every piece of printed paper not only added to the cost of doing business but also limited the level of the public’s information about government. Fewer people purchased newspapers because the stamp increased the cost. One other use of the media during colonial times was as a call to action. In January 1776, Thomas Paine (1737–1809) published Common Sense, which encouraged colonists to seek independence from Great Britain. The pamphlet accused King George III of England of tyranny, challenged his right to hold power over the colonists, and blamed him for treating the colonists unfairly. Paine also wrote that Everett Collection/SuperStock the colonies needed a written constitution with a set of rules that “Join, or Die” is a political cartoon created by everyone would have to follow and a government that could not Benjamin Franklin in 1754 showing the abuse its power. disunity of the colonies and advocating for These three examples show how the media affected the colonists and unity. how a free media was a meaningful priority for them. The use of political cartoons to take a point of view as well as advocate a call to action demonstrated the positive effects of a free media, while the Stamp Act showed the colonists how limits on the media affected the low of information. The First Amendment and Freedom of the Press Recall that one of the key debates over whether to ratify the U.S. Constitution focused on whether an enumerated bill of rights should be included. Opponents of the proposed Constitution, the Anti-Federalists, thought it was important for the Constitution to include a bill of rights. This listing of speci ic rights included protections of freedom of the press, among others. The Bill of Rights was eventually added to the U.S. Constitution in 1791, and it included the First Amendment, which reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The fact that freedom of the press was included in the irst 10 amendments to be added to the U.S. Constitution is evidence of the primacy of a free press. The First Amendment has since protected the freedom of the press in multiple ways. Freedom of the press has been protected as a news source and as a mechanism for candidates, political parties, interest groups, and advocates to communicate their messages to the people. The media has also served in a hybrid role by taking part in the political process and endorsing candidates, broadcasting campaign debates, taking positions on policy questions, and publishing diverse opinion pieces and columns produced by political elites. The In luence of Technology © Nik Wheeler/Corbis The media is often referred to as the black box between the public and government because the public learns most of its information about government and politics from the media. The image of a black box is itting; individuals cannot see what is between them and the other side. The public must trust the information that they receive through the media, as they have no real means to verify it. The black box metaphor also works in reverse; government and political entities such as political parties, candidates, and interest groups know that the media is reporting on their activities. Being aware of the media’s presence shapes their behavior. Individuals on both sides of this relationship depend on the media to receive or transmit information. Newspapers used to be a main source of news, but the media has evolved to include television, the Internet, and social media for its coverage. As technology has evolved, so has the public’s access to information about government through the media. Technological and educational advancements have broadened how the news is consumed and who consumes it. These technological and educational advancements have occurred parallel to advances in political rights. Universal suffrage is now the law of the land and enshrined in the U.S. Constitution through multiple amendments, which means that the percentage of citizens eligible to vote is at its height. Together, this means that the media can now reach far more people and the percentage of those people eligible to vote has never been higher. The implication is that government, political parties, interest groups, and issue advocates must now reach the largest number of people ever in order to accomplish their objectives, and they have the technological means to do so better, faster, and through more methods of communication. The large number and percentage of people who are able to access information about government because of advances in education and literacy also contributes to increases in the number of media consumers and their consumption levels. The opportunities for the media to serve in its role as the black box of American politics have never been greater. The Rise of Regulation As technology has advanced, questions have arisen as to whether the press should be free to function without government intervention and regulation. After all, if the government regulates the media, one could argue that it is limiting and shaping what the public learns about government to the government’s own advantage. For instance, the Federal Communications Act of 1934 (FCA) created the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable communications throughout the United States, including the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. The FCA includes Section 315, the Equal Time Provision, requiring that television and radio stations give candidates seeking the same of ice the same opportunity to use those stations. Translated into practical terms, this means that stations give candidates seeking the same of ice reasonably equal news coverage with three key exceptions. First, if one of the candidates is engaged in a bona ide news event, such as an incumbent ful illing his or her obligations of of ice, that coverage time is not considered in terms of determining equal time. An example of this exception took place in 2004. The state of Florida was hit by three intense (Category 4 and 5) hurricanes between August and September 2004. The last of the three hurricanes, Ivan, began at the end of the Republican National Convention. George W. Bush was running for reelection while U.S. Senator John Kerry was seeking to unseat Bush. Both Bush and Kerry traveled to Florida, one of the largest electoral vote states, to survey the hurricane damage. While coverage of Bush did not fall under the Equal Time Provision because he was surveying the damage in his role as president (a bona ide news event), coverage of Kerry, who represented Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate, did fall Associated Press/Charles Dharapak President Bush and Jo Bonner, former U.S. representative for Alabama’s irst congressional district, tour the damage done under the provision because Kerry was spending time in Florida as the Democrats’ nominee. during Hurricane Ivan in Orange Beach, Alabama. The president’s media coverage in this event did not fall under the equal time coverage rule of the FCC. The second exception is that the media does not need to extend equal time to minor party candidates. Finally, the third exception is that the tone of the coverage does not need to be equal; one competitor may receive mostly positive coverage while another candidate for the same of ice may receive mostly negative coverage. In addition to the Federal Communications Act, the FCC created the Fairness Doctrine in 1949 to ensure that controversial issues would be presented in a balanced manner. The Fairness Doctrine was eliminated by the FCC in 2011, on the grounds that the Obama administration deemed the doctrine to be “outdated and obsolete.” Measures of consumer preferences, such as ratings and circulation, also in luence the types of stories that the press report on, the amount of time (if on television or radio) or print (if in a newspaper, on an Internet site, or in a news magazine) devoted to any subject or story, or the overall length of the broadcast or printed text in a publication. Because press organizations are themselves private entities, their desire to succeed as corporations in luences how they operate. News coverage, including campaign coverage, is no different. Coverage that does not interest the public will result in lower ratings or circulation, which affects the media outlets’ pro its. Taken together, this means that media organizations make strategic choices when deciding which aspects of campaigns to cover and how that coverage will take shape. 12.2 The Media in Political Campaigns The media also takes an active role in political campaigns. Freedom of the press extends to election campaigns, where press coverage includes providing information and commentary about the candidates, issues, and political parties. The media also serves as a vehicle for candidates, political parties, interest groups, and even ordinary citizens to convey their messages during election campaigns through advertising. Each role the media plays in luences the course that campaigns take, affecting the campaign messages put forward by candidates, interest groups, and political parties; the manner in which these messages are presented; and how the public receives and responds to those messages. Providing Information and Commentary The way that the media covers campaigns can have a strong impact on elections. The nomination process is especially affected by media coverage because primaries often bring out candidates who lack widespread name recognition, especially in open-seat races where there is no incumbent. The media lacks the time to give all candidates equal press coverage. Consequently, the media focuses on those candidates believed to have a serious chance at winning. Critics argue that such practices demonstrate media bias, the idea that the media chooses how news is presented to the public. These practices create a self-ful illing prophecy where the media pays more attention to “serious” candidates. Voter interest and support then follow. The opposite is also true. If a candidate is portrayed as a loser, it is then Associated Press/Mark J. Terrill more dif icult for that candidate to raise money and other forms of support. Lacking inancial and volunteer support makes it more Because there were so many 2016 Republican presidential candidates, media dif icult to enhance name recognition and voter support. coverage could not accommodate all of them Regardless, the media provides commentary on all aspects of political in the GOP debates. The candidates with campaigns, including the role of the media in political campaigns. One lower poll ratings participated in lessform that such commentary takes is with cartoons that often appear publicized debates at earlier times on the in newspapers on the opinion or the comics pages. It should be noted same day. This could be considered media that those news outlets that perform editorializing functions, such as bias. newspaper editorials, retain free speech and press protections when performing these functions. This means that newspapers may endorse candidates for any of ice on their editorial pages, but not in any other place. Still, researchers have found that newspapers that endorse candidates tend to extend more positive news coverage toward those candidates that they have endorsed compared with candidates not endorsed by those newspapers. Scholars have noted that the news focuses far more attention on characteristics about the campaign itself—such as who is ahead or behind in public support, fundraising, or votes (the “horse race” aspects of the campaign)—than it does on information about the candidates themselves or candidate issue positions. One consequence of news organizations’ tendency to focus on horse race aspects of campaigns is that commercials and other campaign messages may end up doing a better job of informing voters about policy positions, helping voters distinguish between candidates, and educating the electorate about candidates compared with the news media. This means that campaign communication is a more essential voter information resource than is campaign-related news coverage. Hosting Advertising Campaign-related entities pay media outlets to advertise their messages. Unlike news coverage, where the news organizations control what they broadcast, print, or produce, campaign advertising gives candidates, interest groups, and political parties the opportunity to control their messages about themselves and their opponents. Most campaignrelated advertising is available where there are the most consumers. There are far more television consumers than there are radio, Internet, newspaper, or news magazine consumers. Thus, far more campaign-related advertising is found on television than in any other medium. Among non-television media, radio and the Internet, including social media (see section 12.4: Media and the Internet), are far more often used as campaign advertising outlets than are newspapers or news magazines. Electronic media draws far more consumers than does print media. Electronic media enjoys a core advantage for reaching large audiences because these outlets are free to use, provided that one already owns or has access to a television, radio, or computer. Print media must usually be purchased in order to enjoy access, and periodic issues, such as daily, weekly, or monthly publications, render regular purchase or access necessary in order to keep current. As accessing electronic advertising is much easier than accessing print advertising is, it follows that the more readily available media will enjoy higher consumer use and will attract more campaign advertising dollars. Televised campaign advertising spots were irst aired in 1952. The cost and use of television advertising has grown exponentially since then, which has resulted in shorter television spots (and, critics argue, the inclusion of less information and a greater emphasis on entertaining viewers). More recent presidential campaigns have seen television advertisement spots run from 30 to 60 seconds. Large-scale races are often contested using television, which is the most widely used news source in the United States. Television commercials tend to blanket the airwaves during highly contested elections; their short duration means that they are easily broadcast during regular television programming. However, as freedom of the press is not absolute, neither is freedom of the press in campaigns. Campaign coverage and advertising has been regulated by the federal government since the Federal Communications Act of 1934, discussed earlier. Since then, other laws have been enacted that limit and otherwise regulate campaign coverage and advertising. More recently, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) placed restrictions on campaign advertising sponsored by interest groups. BCRA bans corporate or union money from being used to pay for broadcast advertising that identi ies a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or nominating convention, or within 60 days of a general election. These restrictions were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission 540 U.S. 93 (2003). 12.3 Monitoring and In luencing Government Individuals and organizations seeking to in luence government will use the media to bring attention to government actions. The media also acts alone to bring attention to government actions, thereby enabling the public to use its First Amendment rights to monitor and in luence government. Interest groups form to draw attention to government actions, encourage their members to interact with government and with the press, and raise money to accomplish their political and policy goals. The Media as Watchdog The Founding Fathers believed that a free media was necessary to monitor government. In fact, in a 1787 letter to Edward Carrington, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” Jefferson believed that an independent media was needed to prevent government from abusing its power. Government functioning out of the spotlight might take actions violating the public interest, while a media free to watch and report on government to the people keeps government honest and the public informed. Freedom of the press allows the media to serve in a watchdog role as one means to protect individuals from the government infringing on their rights. Media independence occurs when the media brings attention to government actions. In bringing attention to the public about government actions, the media informs the public about possible government wrongdoing. Democracies require an independent and free press to add another check and balance on the potential abuse of power. A story in the press about a Cabinet member may catch the attention of members of Congress, leading to oversight hearings into the actions of the executive branch. In this case, the press serves as a watchdog to help keep public of icials honest. Related to the media’s watchdog role is the preponderance of © Bettmann/Corbis televised campaign debates. The media plays critical roles in these Bob Woodward (left) and Carl Bernstein debates. First, because the television networks broadcast the debates research the Watergate case at their (and they are simultaneously broadcast on the radio), they have a say Washington Post desks. They were the two in various debate-related aspects, including the length of the debate key investigative reporters covering the (some debates last an hour, while others may last 90 minutes or scandal. more), the date that the debates take place, and whether the debates will take place toward the earlier or later part of the evening, which affects viewership in different time zones. It is unlikely that candidates would participate in debates that they were not certain would be broadcast widely. The second role that the media plays in debates is that one or more well-known news media personalities moderate the debates— they write the questions, ask follow-up questions, and oversee the debate as it transpires by ensuring that participants do not go over their allotted time and that candidates have the chance to make rebuttals if they are entitled to do so. That media personalities, and not well-known leaders from other sectors of society, moderate the debates suggests that the public perceives the media as an objective watchdog and is comfortable with the media holding this role. The Media as Gatekeeper Another way that media independence occurs is through the media’s gatekeeper role. When members of the media act as gatekeepers, they decide which information to share with the public. In deciding what the public should know, the media is deciding which stories are appropriate as well as identifying the most appropriate sources to use when reporting a story. The reason that gatekeeping is essential is that the public depends so much on the media for quality information about subjects they would otherwise have little to no access to. In fact, the public now depends more than ever on the media acting in a gatekeeping role during election campaigns. Journalists engage in fact-checking when candidates make claims about their record or the record of their opponents. The Tampa Bay Times investigates politicians’ claims through a tool called PolitiFact. The truthfulness of politicians’ statements is reported to the public with such labels as “False” and “Pants on Fire” for particularly problematic claims. The Washington Post reports on the truthfulness of politicians’ statements using “Pinocchios,” where the more Pinocchios a politician’s claims are assigned, the worse the lie is. In reporting the results of its research, the media strengthens its gatekeeping role with the public and reinforces to politicians that their claims will be investigated before being reported as factual. The public and government both rely on the media taking its gatekeeping role seriously, because the public’s primary means of learning about government is through the media, and politicians depend on good coverage to earn the public’s trust. Another perspective on the media’s gatekeeping role is linked to whether a story should be reported because of concerns about national security. One well-known instance in which this issue arose was in the “Pentagon Papers” case. The U.S. Supreme Court decided New York Times v. United States in 1971 in response to President Nixon trying to keep the New York Times from publishing classi ied Defense Department materials that included a study of U.S. activities in Vietnam. President Nixon argued that the Defense Department materials included “classi ied information,” which justi ied that the New York Times should exercise “prior restraint” and not publish the Pentagon Papers. In Nixon’s view, national security should take precedence over freedom of the press. The U.S. Supreme Court took the side of the New York Times in a 6–3 decision that the Nixon administration did not justify the need for “prior restraint” in this situation in part because it had failed to properly outline the speci ic national security concerns and the threat to the safety of American forces that justi ied limiting the freedom of the press guaranteed in the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in the Pentagon Papers case reinforces the media’s role as gatekeeper in that the decision demonstrates the media’s right to report what it deems worthy of reporting. The media’s role as gatekeeper focuses on its value to the public in keeping it informed by reporting what it deems important for the public to know, broadcasting and moderating campaign debates, conducting research on claims made by candidates and of iceholders, and reporting about government actions even if the government would prefer to operate out of the public eye. The Media as Agenda Setter The Pentagon Papers What was so threatening about the Pentagon Papers? Get the story behind the classi ied documents, including thoughts from Egil "Bud" Krogh, the head of Nixon’s "Plumbers" investigative unit. Krogh was eventually jailed for his role in Watergate. Pentagon Richard Nixon: Commander in Chief Papers (https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx? From Title: wID=100753&xtid=59326)   © 0:00 / 1:20  1x    f Critical Thinking Questions 1. When do you think the need for national security outweighs the public’s need to know? 2. Connect the Pentagon Papers case to those of other so-called "whistleblowers," such as Edward Snowden. When are whistleblowers justi ied in their actions? 3. How should the press and the government treat or react to whistleblowers? The primary way that government of icials communicate with the citizenry is through the media. Public of icials are well aware that the media is monitoring them and reporting their actions to the public; at the same time, policymakers fully understand that, if they want the public to know and understand their motives and actions, they must use the media for that purpose. The idea that the news media can in luence what the public considers important is known as agenda-setting theory. Government of icials manage information for public consumption in how they present issues. Issues about which government of icials seek public support may involve those of icials using the media for press coverage of their actions. For example, government of icials will try to use the media to set the public agenda such that the media prioritizes issues that the government wishes for the public to focus on and presents the information in a way that causes the public to support the government’s position on those issues. An independent media sets the public agenda as to what is important and which aspects of it the public should focus on. 12.4 Media and the Internet The media takes many forms. Various forms of more traditional media, including print (newspapers, news magazines) and broadcast (television, radio), have been discussed earlier in this chapter. Over the last generation, there has been a meaningful increase in the use of social and interactive media that has changed the face of American politics. Of particular interest is the preponderance of the Internet in American political life. The advent of the Internet began sometime in the early 1980s when the U.S. Department of Defense created a computer network whose primary purpose was to link the Pentagon to faraway military bases and defense contractors. Soon after, large research universities joined the network. At that time, its applications were limited. Since then, the Internet has become a multipurpose communication tool. Its value for education, political mobilization, information dissemination, marketing, and social networking has brought the Internet into multiple, farreaching private and public realms. The opportunity to disseminate real-time and immediate information updates to Internet consumers has transformed the Internet into a critical, functional link between gover...
Purchase answer to see full attachment