PO 141: INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC POLICY

PO 141: INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC POLICY Summer I (2015) Claire Leavitt Boston University

TABLE OF CONTENTS • Evaluating welfare • Pareto efficiency and deadweight loss • Methods of Democratic Representation • Arrow’s Theorem • The Legislative Process • Understanding Political Outcomes • Median-voter theorem • Voter mobilization, special interests, favor-trading • Alternatives to Legislative Action

EVALUATING POLICY  Policymakers want:  To make people better off  To be fair  To achieve their goal(s) as efficiently as possible  Based on these standards, how do we evaluate success?

EVALUATING POLICY  The value of indicators  Example: Problems with the Human Development Index?  Efficiency: the degree to which resources are used to generate the most productive outcome  Pareto efficiency/optimality  Deadweight loss  Pareto-optimal outcome versus Nashequilibrium

THE POLITICAL PROCESS  The effect of a policy is assessed according to three basic criteria:  Values  Empirical Indicators  Rules  How a democratic system is designed can have a huge effect on policy outcomes

THE POLITICAL PROCESS  The dangers of direct democracy  Factions and demagoguery  Tyranny of the majority  Irresponsible governance  The benefits of republican democracy  Social and institutional pluralism in the United States

REPRESENTATION  At-large elections  US Senate elections  Early US presidential elections  Single-member sub-unit (district) elections  US House of Representatives

ELECTORAL RULES  At-large plurality-take-all elections  At-large elections requiring a majority  Single-district elections (districts drawn according to population)  Single-district elections (gerrymandered districts)  Proportional representation

GERRYMANDERING  Is gerrymandering a cause of political polarization in the United States? Gerrymandering versus sorting  Are there normative benefits to gerrymandering?  Minority-interest representation  More competitive districts

NON-DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS  Certain institutions should not be subjected to short-term political fluctuations  Effectiveness is evaluated according to institutional resilience  Courts: More accountability?

ARROW’S THEOREM  Five conditions for fairly aggregating individual preferences into a group choice  Universal Domain  Transitivity  Pareto optimality  Non-dictatorship  Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives

ARROW’S THEOREM  Universal Domain: If each individual can clearly rank his/her preferences, then so should the group  The group should demonstrate a clear preference

ARROW’S THEOREM  Transitivity: The preferences of the group must be transitive  If A-B and B-C, then A-C  Pareto optimality: If every individual prefers A-B, then so must the group

ARROW’S THEOREM  Non-dictatorship: The group choice cannot reflect the preferences of just one individual at the expense of the others  Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives: If a group prefers A-B, the entrance of C should not affect this preference!

ARROW’S THEOREM  Arrow proves: No system of voting can satisfy all of these rules!  Democratic decision-making does not automatically solve the aggregation-of-preferences problem: Institutional design is significant in determining outcomes!

LEGISLATIVE SYSTEMS  Presidential Executive and legislature elected separately  United States (decentralized)  France (centralized, hybrid)  Parliamentary  No divided government

UNITED STATES: HOW A BILL BECOMES A LAW  Bill introduced; referred to committee  Committee hearings; markup  Then:  House: Rules Committee  full chamber  Senate: Full chamber  Approval by both Houses  Conference Committee (Re) approval by both Houses  Signed by the president

UNITED STATES: HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RULES/NORMS  435 members Populist chamber; majority rule  100 years of permitted minority obstruction Delay tactics  “Disappearing quorums”  Rules change in 1890; majority-rule since

UNITED STATES: SENATE RULES/NORMS  100 members  The deliberative, philosophical, “lofty” chamber Operates by unanimous consent Comity, tradition, respect very highly prized Senate rules (from 1806) allow for unlimited debate on any issue/bill

UNITED STATES: SENATE OBSTRUCTION  The Filibuster: Taking advantage of unlimited debate (talking as long as you possibly can in order to delay a bill)  Cloture (rule instituted in 1917) now able to limit debate if 3/5 of senators agree Filibusters now mostly happen behind the scenes

UNITED STATES: SENATE OBSTRUCTION  The Hold:  Anonymously delays debate on a bill  Not an official rule, but a tradition!  Why does this happen? Filibuster reform: Pros and Cons

UNDERSTANDING OUTCOMES  Median-Voter Theorem  Assumes single-peaked normal distribution  Assumes everybody votes  Assumes everyone is equally informed and makes decisions rationally

UNDERSTANDING OUTCOMES  Are policies made according to MVT?

UNDERSTANDING OUTCOMES  Mobilization, or “the winners sing louder than the losers cry”  Alaska’s “bridge to nowhere”  Ethanol subsidies  Coalition building/logrolling  Favor-trading to advance their own political goals  What are the goals of legislators?

UNDERSTANDING OUTCOMES  Rent-seeking Factions use the government to secure political/economic advantage (occupational licenses)

NON-LEGISLATIVE ACTION  Decision via referendum  Decision via executive order  Decision via courts’ and agencies’interpretation of laws

PO 141: INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC POLICY