MPP404: Public Policy Process
Fall 2014
Tuesdays, 4:15-6:45
Professor: Meghan Condon, Ph.D.
Email: mcondon1@luc.edu
Phone: 773-508-2008
Office Hours: Room 427, Granada Center, Mondays 4 – 6 pm, Tuesdays 7 – 8 pm
Course Overview
This is a graduate seminar on the policy process. Our objectives are three-fold. You will have the
opportunity to: (1) develop a deeper understanding of politics and policy making, (2) hone your
professional skills, and (3) consider the role you will play in the process.
1. Your Understanding:
Politics can be thought of as the struggle for power, or, alternatively, the collective decision making
process. Public policies are the outcomes of the struggle; they are the decisions we make. But policies
also set the “rules of the game” and distribute costs and benefits. In these ways, policies are more than
outcomes; they structure politics and determine who has power. By the end of this course, you will have a
strong grasp of how the interplay between policy and politics occurs. You will be able to:




Explain how institutions, ideas, and individuals determine what policies emerge
Explain why some efforts at policy change are more successful than others
Describe the ways in which policy decisions shape future politics
Summarize, evaluate, and apply major theories of the policy process
2. Your Skills:
The assignments for this course are intended to replicate a policy work environment. In most policy
careers you need to be able to:




think analytically
communicate clearly and concisely
collaborate effectively
issue clear, informed recommendations
Assignments and class sessions are designed to give you an opportunity to develop those skills.
3. Your Role:
You will have multiple opportunities to consider your own professional path. By the end of the semester,
you should have (at least the beginning) of the answers to these questions:




What policy processes and practices do I enjoy? At which tasks do I excel?
Which issues and controversies capture my interest?
If I am interested in a particular policy change, where should I direct my efforts?
Which groups, agencies, or institutions are intriguing employers?
1
Readings
1. Required Book
Paul Sabatier, ed., Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2007.
In the rest of the syllabus (TPP) indicates that a reading can be found in this book. If you decide to buy a
used copy online, please make sure you are buying the second edition.
2. Other Readings
Each week you will read a selection of book excerpts and articles from scholarly journals, policy
organizations, and the popular media. All of these readings will be made available on Sakai or are linked
to this syllabus.
Some weeks, you are also asked to familiarize yourself with websites of institutions, groups, and
agencies. In these weeks, you will have some choices so you can learn about those that interest you most.
For example, if you are interested in housing policy, you may choose to spend your time on the websites
of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, the IL Housing Development Authority, the
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and Harvard University’s Joint Center for
Housing Studies. Lists of relevant sites are provided. Spend an hour or so browsing through the websites.
What do the organizations do? What are their goals? What information do they provide online? Who
works there? In addition to their importance to the policy-making process, these organizations employ
many people with policy degrees. For each website ask yourself: could I see myself working here? What
skills and expertise would I need? (You might even check out open positions while you are at it.) Because
you will all be visiting different websites, I may ask you to brief the class on the website(s) you visit.
Finally, in addition to articles and book excerpts, for most weeks you will read a case study. A case study
is a description of a real (or sometimes realistic) situation, often in which a decision must be made. Most
cases present information, but not analysis. We will discuss your analysis of the cases, and your
recommendations for action as a class. These exercises will help you connect theories and concepts from
the course to real problems in public policy. They will also give you a chance to practice making
informed and well-reasoned decisions as a professional in the field. Though most cases are short, reading
them thoroughly and preparing to discuss them can take considerable time. Please read the guide for
preparing to discuss case studies (provided via email) prior to the first class. Cases will be posted on
Sakai.
Assignments and Grading
A Short Note on Short Writing Assignments:
“I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I’ve written a long one instead.”
– attributed to Cicero, St. Augustine, Blaise Pascal, and Mark Twain
An excellent professional policy writer grabs your attention, gets to the point, and boils difficult ideas
down to their essentials. Do not be fooled by the short required length of the writing assignments. You
will be asked to state and defend complex arguments and provide evidence. Doing so and sticking to the
page limits will take work.
All assignments except the professional statement must be in Times New Roman 12 point
font, double-spaced, with one-inch margins. Memo headings should be single-spaced.
2
1. Professional Statement (5%): you will prepare a 200-300 word personal career statement explaining
your interests, goals, and action steps you will take to reach them. Your statements will help me tailor
the seminars to fit your needs. They are also intended to give you a chance to begin thinking about what
you want to do after graduation and what you can do now to get there. The first (but not rough!) draft of
this statement is due to me via email by September 2. Please paste the essay into the body of the email.
The second draft is due December 2 also via email. I expect the content of this statement to change over
the course of the semester. These statements will be graded on a credit/ no credit basis. In your
statement, you should discuss:
 The policy issues, areas, or sectors that interest you most.
 Your background, especially academic or professional experience with public policy
 One or more career goals. The level of specificity is up to you. Perhaps you want to
stay in Chicago, work in transportation policy, and have a communications-focused
position. Perhaps you are aiming for a leadership or management role, but are open as
to sector and policy area. Perhaps you know you want to focus on improving the lives
of disadvantaged children, but are not sure how you might go about it. Use this
assignment as an opportunity to do some strategic planning, but don’t feel obligated to
write as though you have your career path all figured out. These goals can change in
the second draft.
 One or more professionally relevant area in which you’d like to improve during
graduate school. (For example, you may want to work on your writing skills, your
knowledge of a particular policy area, your professional network, your anxiety about
statistics, or personal organization.)
 One or more action steps you will take this year to move toward your goals and work
on your weaknesses.
2. Response Memo (10%): you will write a brief response memo (no longer than two pages)
responding to a specific question about one week’s readings. These memos will not require any research
outside of the assigned readings, but it may be helpful to draw upon your knowledge of current events
or a substantive policy area. Memo topics will be posted on Sakai. A sample topic is attached to the end
of this syllabus. Memos are due at the beginning of class. Memos should be professional in appearance
and content. An excellent overview of effective memo writing can be found at the Purdue Writing
Center. I strongly recommend you read it. One purpose of this assignment is to give me a chance to
provide feedback on your writing prior to the larger assignments, so all memos are due before the
midterm. You will sign up for your week in the first class.
3. Midterm Project (25%): You will write a 4-page memo due in class October 21 on a policy problem
of your choosing. You will pick a policy area (e.g. state child welfare policy), explain a specific
problem or dilemma (e.g. poor employment or educational outcomes for kids who age out of the foster
system), outline two or three possible policy solutions, and make a recommendation. We will discuss
this assignment in greater detail as the course progresses. In addition to your essay, you must write and
submit a 200-300 word op-ed piece, due October 17 via email to the entire class, in which you make the
same argument. Your editorial should be sharply argued, persuasive, and professional. Don’t forget the
catchy title. For excellent examples of this genre of writing, see the short editorials in any national
newspaper, especially the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. You should feel free to discuss
outlines and early drafts of both pieces of writing with me. Excellent Op-ed pieces will be written with a
specific news outlet in mind and may be submitted for publication. You will present your project in
class, using no more than four PowerPoint slides.
3
4. Team Project (20%): in teams of four or five you will prepare a simulated briefing for a high-level
policy maker. You will prepare a 4-page memo, talking points, and a presentation on an assigned topic.
Assignment details will be distributed and discussed in class on October 14. Projects are due in class on
November 25. The note on short writing assignments applies especially to the midterm and team
project. Successful students typically gather enough data and outside research to write much longer
papers, and they spend significant time and effort selecting the most compelling evidence and editing
their prose so it is short and to the point.
5. Take Home Exam (30%): there will be a final, take-home, comprehensive exam at the end of the
course. You are responsible for material from class and readings. There will be two in-class review
sessions (see course calendar). I encourage you to come meet with me to discuss concepts and content
as the course progresses. The final will be issued on December 5 (to give you a few days after the last
class to ask additional questions and review). It is due, via email, December 9, by the end of the official
scheduled exam period.
6. Active Participation (10%): the quality of the course will be determined, in large part, by your
active participation. As a policy professional, you will often need to summarize key arguments and
make recommendations on the spot. I will frequently call on students during class, so be prepared to
answer questions by doing the readings in advance. On the weeks you write memos I may ask you for a
“pop briefing” in class – asking you to summarize and defend the argument you made in your memo.
You should also push yourself to challenge arguments made in readings and discussion, speak up when
you disagree, jump in when you have a question, and draw connections between topics of discussion
and your own substantive policy interests.
Preparing to Participate: To prepare for class, read each selection and try to answer each of the
following questions in a sentence or two: (1) What is the main argument? (2) What is the evidence? (3)
Does the evidence support the propositions of the argument? (4) Does this tell us anything important
about the policy process? (5) Can you challenge the argument or come up with an alternative argument?
In some cases, to save time, we do not actually read the part of a book or article with the empirical
evidence. In those cases, of course, omit questions two and three. There are also simple framing questions
for each week on the reading schedule. Think about them as you prepare, and try to write down your
responses to them in a few sentences. If you can do these things, you are very well prepared for class (and
off to a great start for the exam and other assignments).
Additional Information
1. Late work will not be accepted except in the case of an emergency.
2. Regrades: students requesting regrades must make these requests within one week of receiving the
graded material. I may regrade the entire assignment or exam.
3. Accommodations: every effort will be made to accommodate students with exceptional learning
needs. Please come talk to me right away if you require accommodations for assignments or the exam.
4. Academic Integrity: all students are expected to know and abide by Loyola’s statement on academic
integrity.
4
Detailed Reading Schedule
I. INTRODUCTION
WEEK 1: Power
What is it? Who should have it? Why should we study it if we care about policy?
(1) Robert A. Dahl. 1998. On Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 35-80.
(2) C. Wright Mills. 1957. “The Structure of Power in American Society” in P. Nivola and D.H.
Rosenbloom eds. Classic Readings in American Politics, 3rd Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/
Thompson Learning. 97-107.
(3) John Gaventa. 1980. Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 3-32.
(4) Deborah Stone. 1997. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York, NY: W.W.
Norton. 1-13.
(5) Optional: George Orwell. “Politics and the English Language.”
CASE STUDY: Babcock Place
II. INSTITUTIONS AND ACTORS
WEEK 2: Institutions
What are they? Why do they matter?
(1) Philip G. Zimbardo. 2004. “A Situationist Perspective on the Psychology of Evil: Understanding How
Good People Are Transformed into Perpetrators.” In Arthur Miller, ed. The Social Psychology of Good
and Evil: Understanding our Capacity for Kindness and Cruelty. NewYork: Guilford. 21-50.
(4) James G. March and Johan P. Olsen. 2004. “The Logic of Appropriateness” ARENA Working Papers.
9(9): 1-28.
(3) Elinor Ostrom. 2007. “Institutional Rational Choice: An Assessment of the Institutional Analysis and
Development Framework.” (TPP)
CASE STUDY: Michael N. Barnett. 1997. “The UN Security Council, Indifference, and Genocide in
Rwanda.” Cultural Anthropology, 12(4): 551-71. Pages 551- 562 are required, the rest is optional.
WEEK 3: Congress
Who are the actors in Congress? How do they make decisions? How much power does Congress have?
(1) Stella Z. Theodoulou and Chris Kofinis. 2004. The Art of the Game: Understanding American Public
Policy Making. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. 55-60.
(2) Douglas Arnold. 1990. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Chapters 1 and 6. 3-16, 119-146.
(3) Shipan, Charles R. 2005. “Congress and the Bureaucracy,” in The Legislative Branch, New York:
Oxford University Press, Inc. 432-458.
(4) Mathew D. McCubbins and Thomas Schwartz. “Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols
vs. Fire Alarms.” American Journal of Political Science. 28(1): 165-179.
(5) Optional: The Politics of Legislative Drafting
In addition, please familiarize yourself with these websites:
National Conference of State Legislatures, especially links to/ information about IL
5
Thomas (The Library of Congress)
U.S. House of Representatives, especially House Committees that deal with your substantive interests
U.S. Senate especially Senate Committees that deal with your substantive interests
WEEK 4: The Executive Branch
Who are the actors in the executive branch? How do they make decisions? How much power does the
executive branch have?
(1) Stella Z. Theodoulou and Chris Kofinis. 2004. The Art of the Game: Understanding American Public
Policy Making. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. 60-69.
(2) Andrew Rudalevige. 2005. “The Executive Branch and the Legislative Process,” in The Executive
Branch, New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 419-451.
(3) Terry M. Moe. 1989. “The Politics of Bureaucratic Structure” in J. Chubb and P. Peterson, eds. Can
the Government Govern? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. 267-330
(4) James Q. Wilson. 1967. “The Bureaucracy Problem.” National Affairs. 6: 3-9.
(5) Donald P. Moynihan. 2010. “The Promises and Paradoxes of Performance-based Bureaucracy” in The
Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 278-302.
(5) Jacob Hacker. “Our Unbalanced Democracy.” The New York Times. July 31, 2011.
CASE STUDY: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
In addition, choose a few federal, state, or local agencies that interest you most. Familiarize yourself with
their websites. Lists can be found here:
Federal Agencies and Departments
Illinois Agencies and Departments
City of Chicago Departments
WEEK 5: Institutions Outside of Government
What role do interest groups, civic associations, and other groups play?
(1) Stella Z. Theodoulou and Chris Kofinis. 2004. The Art of the Game: Understanding American Public
Policy Making. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. 69-74.
(2) Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson. 2010. “Winner Take All Politics.” Politics and Society.
(3) Theda Skocpol. 2002. “Associations Without Members.” The American Prospect. November 30.
(4) Carpenter, Daniel P. 2004. “The Political Economy of FDA Drug Review: Processing, Politics, and
Lessons for Policy.” Health Affairs 23(1): 52-63.
Case Study: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (continued)
In addition, choose one or two non-governmental groups that interest you most. Familiarize yourself with
their websites. Lists can be found here:
Project Vote Smart: Searchable List of Issue Organizations (You can search nationally or locally.)
Chicago Area Non-Profits
WEEK 6: Citizens
How do citizens affect policy? How does policy affect them?
(1) Louis Menand. 2004. “The Unpolitical Animal: How Political Science Understands Voters.” The New
Yorker. August 30.
(2) Michael Schudson. 2000. “America’s Ignorant Voters.” The Wilson Quarterly. 24(2): 16-22.
6
(3) Paul Burstein. 2003. “The impact of public opinion on public policy: a review and an agenda.”
Political Research Quarterly 56(1): 29-40.
(4) Suzanne Mettler and Joe Soss, “The Consequences of Public Policy for Democratic Citizenship:
Bridging Policy Studies and Mass Politics,” Perspectives on Politics 2 (1): 54-73.
CASE STUDY: Flouridation in Skagit County
III. THE POLICY PROCESS
WEEK 7: Seeing the Whole Process
Every policy trajectory seems complex and unique; can theories and models help us make sense of it
all?
(1) Stella Z. Theodoulou and Chris Kofinis. 2004. The Art of the Game: Understanding American Public
Policy Making. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. 80-95.
(2) Paul Sabatier, "The Need for Better Theories," and “Fostering the Development of Policy Theory,”
(TPP) 3-17, 321-336.
(3) Paul Sabatier and Christopher Weible, “The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Innovations and
Clarifications.” (TPP) 189-220.
CASE STUDY: Regenstein, Elliot. 2011. “Illinois: The New Leader in Education Reform?” Prepared for
the Center for American Progress event “Illinois: The New Leader in Education Reform?” July 13, 2011.
WEEK 8: Mid-semester Project Presentations and Review
No readings this week.
WEEK 9: Agenda Setting and Framing
How does a situation become a public problem and get on the policy agenda? How do public issues get
defined?
(1) Nikolaos Zahariadis. 2007. “The Multiple Streams Network: Structure Limitations and Prospects.”
(TPP) 65-92.
(2) John W. Kingdon. 2002. “The Policy Window, and Joining the Streams.” Agendas, Alternatives and
Public Policies. 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley. 165-95.
(3) Deborah A. Stone. 1989. "Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas," Political Science
Quarterly 104 (Summer): 281-300.
(4) Matt Bai. 2005. “The Framing Wars.” The New York Times Magazine. July 17.
(5) Matt Bai. 2012. “Still Waiting for the Narrator in Chief.” The New York Times Magazine. October 30.
CASE STUDY: Nebraska Appleseed Center
WEEK 10: Discourse and Ideas
How do stories, symbols, and constructions affect decisions about policy?
(1) Anne Schneider, Helen Ingram, and Peter DeLeon. 2007. "Social Construction and Policy Design,"
(TPP) 93-126.
(2) Michael J. Graetz and Ian Shapiro. 2005. Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Fight over Taxing Inherited
Wealth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 3-11, 221-38.
(3) Ange-Marie Hancock, 2003. “Contemporary Welfare Reform and the Public Identity of the ‘Welfare
Queen’" Race, Gender & Class 10(1): 31-59.
7
(4) Paul Campos et al. 2006. “The Epidemiology of Overweight and Obesity: Public Health Crisis or
Moral Panic?” International Journal of Epidemiology. 35: 55-60.
CASE STUDY: San Jose State’s Blood Drive Ban
WEEK 11: Analysis and Evaluation
What should be done? What were the results?
(1) David Weimer and Aidan Vining. 2003. Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall. 1-22.
(2) Barbara Schneider et al., Estimating Causal Effects: Using Experimental and Observational
Designs. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association. 1-37.
CASE STUDY: Welfare, Work, and American Indians
Please return to the websites of the agencies you looked at in Week Four and the groups you looked at
in Week Five. What data and research do they provide? Also, please familiarize yourself with the
following website:
U.S. Census
WEEK 12: Adoption and Implementation
We’ve decided what to do…now how does it actually happen?
(1) Sabatier, Paul and Daniel Mazamanian. 2005. "A Conceptual Framework of Implementation" Policy
Studies Journal 8(4): 538-560.
(2) Lipsky, Michael. 2010. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service.
New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Chapters 1 and 2, pp. 1-26.
(3) deLeon, Peter, and Linda deLeon. 2002. “What Ever Happened to Policy Implementation? An
Alternative Approach.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 12: 476-492.
CASE STUDY: Drug and Alcohol treatment in Sacramento
WEEK 13: In-Class Presentations
WEEK 14: Policy Dynamics
How much does policy really change? What explains stability and change?
(1) James True, Bryan Jones, and Frank Baumgartner. 2007. “Punctuated-Equilibrium Theory: Explaining
Stability and Change in American Policymaking,” (TPP) 155-187.
(2) Paul Pierson. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American
Political Science Review 94: 251-267.
(3) Jacob S. Hacker. 2004. “Privatizing Risk Without Privatizing the Welfare State: The Hidden Politics
of Policy Retrenchment in the United States.” American Political Science Review 98(2): 243-60.
(4) Robert C. Lieberman. Shaping Race Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1-26.
(5) Paul Pierson. “Policy, Politics, and the Rise of Inequality.” In J. Soss, J.S. Hacker, and S. Mettler, eds.
Remaking America: Public Policy and Democracy in an Age of Inequality. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation. 3-24.
Final Exam Review
8
Course Calendar
WEEK
Finals Week
DATE
TOPIC
Power
DUE DATES
AND
NOTES
Memo Sign
Up
Statement
Due
1
26-Aug
2
2-Sep
3
9-Sep
Congress
4
16-Sep
Executive
Branch
5
23-Sep
Institutions
Outside
Government
6
30-Sep
Citizens
Break
7-Oct
7
14-Oct
Process: Models
and Theories
Team
Projects
Assigned
8
21-Oct
Mid-semester
Presentations
and Review
Midterm
Due
9
28-Oct
Agenda Setting
and Framing
10
4-Nov
11
11-Nov
Analysis and
Evaluation
12
18-Nov
Adoption and
Implementation
13
25-Nov
In-Class
Presentations
Team
Project Due
14
2-Dec
Policy
Dynamics, Final
Exam Review
Statement
Due
4-Dec
Final Exam
Issued
9-Dec
Final Due
Institutions
Discourse and
Ideas
Final Due
9
Sample Memo Assignment (From Previous Year)
It is 2009, and you are a policy advisor for First Lady Michelle Obama. Mrs. Obama is interested in
solving the problem of juvenile obesity, specifically for economically disadvantaged children. You have
been working on the early stages of the Let’s Move campaign, and your team is pleased with all of the
publicity and attention the campaign has generated so far. Now your team needs to decide whether to
continue working on publicizing childhood obesity and raising awareness, or to begin pushing for specific
national policy changes. Policy changes in which you are interested include:






Major funding for community-based health and obesity-intervention programs
Funding primary, preventative care for all children
Improved nutrition labeling in fast food restaurants
Increased funding for public health campaigns
Making soft drink and fast food marketing to children illegal
Increased federal funding for healthy school lunch programs
Mrs. Obama wants to use the resources of the campaign as efficiently as possible, so your team needs to
determine whether effective policy change is a realistic and worthy goal at present, and if so, what policy
proposals seem politically feasible. Tina Tchen, Mrs. Obama’s chief of staff and your supervisor, has
asked you to write a memo analyzing the political prospects for reform, given the target population. Your
memo should:



Analyze the target population of policy in this area.
Given the target population, explain the prospects for policy reform
Given your analysis, explain how the efforts of the First Lady’s staff should be directed over the
coming year.
A few notes:
This memo can and should rely on your knowledge of the week’s readings, but you should also feel free
to integrate theory from other weeks. You may choose not to integrate all of this week’s readings into
your memo. Keep in mind that your memo will be evaluated based on the quality of your writing and the
degree to which you demonstrate understanding of the concepts in the readings. Make sure you have a
single, clear thesis statement supported with evidence and a succinct summary paragraph. Take the time
to go through each step of the writing process: (1) brainstorm, (2) outline and plan, (3) write, (4) revise
your argument and organization, and then (5) edit the language. Consider having another person read
through your draft before you revise and edit. Please take a look at the Purdue writing center page linked
to the syllabus before writing. Format your memo as follows:
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Executive Summary: (Short paragraph summarizing the argument and key points here.)
(Body of memo here, headings and bullet points are acceptable, but should be used sparingly.)
10