The top down policymaking model:

1
The top down policymaking model

• A model of how elites translate their values,
  goals, preferences into policy. This can be
  seen at different stages of the policy process
• The policy formulation process
• The leadership selection process
• The Interest Group Process
• Opinion Making process
• Policy Legitimation process
• Policy Implementation
• Policy Evaluation Process

2
Counter-argument to the Top Down Model

• THE BOTTOM-UP PROCESS MODEL
• Median voter model-competitive elections
• Pluralist model-competing interest groups
• Responsible party model - policy divergent parties

3
So where to we start our top down analysis?

• George Bush? Bill Gates? George Soros?
• No
• We study Institutions, Organizations, and Groups

4
Policy Formulation

• Policy Formulation occurs from the top downwhen
  institutional leaders, primarily in business,
  finance, and the media, begin to complain about
  societal developments they perceive as
  threatening to their own values or interests.

5
A Political Institution is a web of relationships
lasting over time, and an established structure
of power.

• Media institutions
• Banking institutions
• Rules and Regulations as institutions
• Distribution and regulation of airwaves
• Rules governing PACs
• Universities, Foundations, Think tanks as
  institutions

6
(No Transcript)
7

• THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN VALUES, POLITICAL
  INSTITUTIONS, AND POLICY OUTCOMES
• Certain political institutions in government
  promote different behavior

8

• Types of government behavior
• responsive (to societal needs)
• representative (to public demands)
• bargaining (negotiating between conflicting
  interests)
• coercion (maintain stability through the use of
  force)
• manipulation (acquiescence via misinformation
  bait and switch)
• symbolic politics (rhetoric v. action)

9

• The Role of Institutions
• Clingermayer and Feiock (2001) state simply,
  first and foremost, institutions matter because
  they affect the behavior of policy makers.
• Similarly, institutions influence how
  policymakers respond to public opinion and
  interest groups. Rational choice theorists, like
  Downs (1957) and Buchanan (1967), suggested early
  on that scholars should examine how preferences
  and institutions interact and affect public
  policy. They argued that preferences alone
  cannot predict policy outcomes.

10

• Political institutions influence the policy
  process by limiting the nature and scope of
  political actions and choices (Bickers and
  Williams 2001 41) by placing constraints on
  political actors (i.e., rules and norms), or by
  insulating political elites from public
  pressures.
• Heclo (2000) argues that much of the written
  Constitution helps keep the citizenry at arms
  length from the governing process (p. 18).

11

• Examples of these institutions may include
  election rules on who and when people can vote or
  rules that are placed on judges discretion in
  sentencing. Some studies assume that certain
  political mechanisms are designed to link citizen
  demands with policy actions (Downs 1957
  Barrilleaux and Miller 1988),

12

• While other scholars have observed, that
  democratic institutions in the United States may
  be decreasingly compatible with democratic norms
  (Hartley and Russett 1992 Jacobson and Shapiro
  2000). Whether it is the dominance of incumbents
  in elections, bureaucratic autonomy, declining
  voter participation, or special interest
  influence, various scholars contend that
  democratic mechanisms are not functioning as
  conceived by democratic theory or models
  (Ginsberg 1990).

13
What is a political institution?

• A Political Institution is a web of relationships
  lasting over time, and an established structure
  of power.

14

• What is a Political Institution? Examples?
• Constitutional
• Electoral
• Administrative
• Legislative
• Executive
• Judicial
• Statutory
• Cultural
• Etc., etc., etc.

15

• Institutional setting that might promote
  representation
• Federalism
• Elections every two years
• Ballot Initiatives
• Judicial Elections
• Term limits

16
Institutional settings/rules that might reduce
representation
17

• Jacobson (2001) argues that the structure of the
  U.S. Congress and congressional elections creates
  incentives for symbolic position taking, leading
  to a type of responsiveness without collective
  responsibility. These incentives potentially
  lead to policy decisions and outcomes incongruent
  with constituent preferences.

18

• Non-elected Bureaucracies
• Legislative Committees
• Life tenure for judicial officials
• FED
• Staggered elections
• Term limits?
• Registration requirements

19

• Neo-Institutionalism v. the Limits of
  Institutions
• Much of the political science literature holds
  institutions as important, if not the primary,
  factors in politics and political behavior. But
  institutions are only as strong as we are. And
  even the best laid plans have limitations.
  (Yugoslavia, Hiati, Lebanon, Iraq?)

20

• Kenneth Arrows Possibility Theorem
• Arrow showed that it is impossible to produce a
  social choice mechanism that doesnt violate the
  basic conditions of democratic choice
• Universal admissibility of individual preference
  orderings All policy alternatives are on the
  table/agenda
• Citizens Sovereignty citizen preferences matter
• Unanimity Unanimous choices always win
• Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives the
  introduction of a third alternative doesnt
  effect the preference ordering of a set of two
  choices.
• Nondictatorship no single group should be able
  to determine a social choice outcome.

21

• A simple example of the limitation of
  institutions in solving collective action
  problems (policy disagreements)
• Three Legislators with differing preferences on
  whether a bridge should be built, a road or
  neither (status quo)
• Official 1 BpRpS
• Official 2 RpSpB
• Official 3 SpBpR

22

• Need a two stage voting process because if we
  have a one stage process it ends in a three way
  tie

23

• One possible outcome
• Agenda 1
• vote 1 B vs R B wins
• vote 2 B vs S S wins
• Remember
• Official 1 BpRpS
• Official 2 RpSpB
• Official 3 SpBpR

24

• Agenda 2
• vote 1 B vs S S wins
• vote 2 S vs R R wins
• Remember
• Official 1 BpRpS
• Official 2 RpSpB
• Official 3 SpBpR

25

• Agenda 3
• vote 1 R vs S R wins
• vote 2 R vs B B wins
• Remember
• Official 1 BpRpS
• Official 2 RpSpB
• Official 3 SpBpR

26

• What does this mean?
• Institutions may be incapable of producing
  stable, predictable outcomes
• William Riker the political entrepreneur /
  strategic politician (helps) determine the
  outcome by setting the agenda, introducing a
  third alternative, etc.