Week 10. They Paved Paradise and Put Up a Parking Lot

As more countries join the global race to the top, researchers are noticing the effects rapid growth is having on the environment. Although governments rely on industry to support growing economies and provide for the well-being of its citizens it comes at the cost of polluting the air and depleting the ozone (A&B). A study by Lo, Sheu and Hu (2005) demonstrates the delicate nature of this relationship as fast-developing Asian countries are faced with pressure from outside forces to reform industry practices that would reduce rising CO2 emissions. Conflict arises when environmental considerations such as these lead to an increase in production costs or hinder economic expansion. Governments face major opposition from business leaders and industry representatives who only see declining profit margins as a result of the cap and trade system or requiring the installation of new technologies that reduce environmental impacts. Unfortunately, corporate big wigs are not the only players that need convincing. Oftentimes, the political party in power has a different agenda (i.e. the Bush administration) that slows progress toward a global solution (A&B). Bush’s decision not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2005 illustrates the lack of political cohesion that often defines this policy area (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8422343/). Even when there is consensus among a decision-making body formulating a policy is still the ultimate challenge. For example, nations are still struggling to finalize a Global Climate Pact and many fear it will not happen until late next year (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69B0GV20101013).

In some cases it is simply a matter of logistics as we saw in the article by Jiricka and Probstl (2007). Although the governments of the member states being examined were on board with the SEA they encountered problems during the implementation process. This is one of the main problems facing the EU.
Although it has become the leader in environmental policy, not all of its policy goals can be attained by every member state (A&B).

One of the difficulties of environmental policy is that it often places restrictions in other areas. Vivero and Mateos (2010) explore this concept using the geopolitical realities of BRIC countries. These countries must find a way to integrate technological-environmental policy without sacrificing potential economic-commercial and political power. The push and pull factors are tremendous when you consider the repercussions of losing political bargaining chips like maritime resources and territory.

Ultimately, governments cannot approach environmental policy the same way they approach other policy areas because it relies on a belief system that not everybody agrees with. One would be hard pressed to find someone who disagrees with the importance of education or the value of fiscal responsibility, however supporting an agenda under the pretense of a “what if” scenario takes more convincing. While we have made great strides in protecting the environment there is still much more to do.

Week 9. We Don’t Need No Education

The tendency of US education reform to focus on K-12 education is the consequence of having no comprehensive national education policy and inconsistent funding, both of which are not main issues in the other countries discussed in A&B. Governments in Germany and the UK have made core curriculum standards and policies for primary and secondary education that reflect a national agenda that emphasizes areas like math, science and English (A&B). Japan has also created a rigorous curriculum that focuses on high achievement in K-12 education (A&B). What lacks in these countries however is postsecondary education policies that increase global competitiveness. It is in this respect that the US is leaps and bounds above most industrialized nations and why more international students pursue higher education opportunities at US universities than anywhere else (Fischer, 2009, http://chronicle.com/article/Number-of-Foreign-Students-in/49142/).

In the US, huge discrepancies exist amongst school districts and even schools within each district because financing relies heavily on taxes that a large majority of the population feels could be better spent elsewhere despite complaints about an ineffective education system. Attempts by the national government to reform education has come in the form of legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act, which caused frustration for educators who did not receive adequate funding to carry out given objectives and failed to meet restrictive timetables (A&B). As a result, the US has fallen behind other industrialized nations and consistently ranks lower in areas like science and math. The societal effects of these inadequacies will most likely lead to highly skilled jobs being outsourced or filled by foreign students from countries like India and China who are flocking to US universities in the thousands and pursuing degrees in fields like engineering and healthcare (Fischer, 2009). Just going to your local family care clinic or pharmacy makes you realize the impact of the US' failure to implement effective education reform and the lack of US students pursuing educations in these highly skilled areas.

Despite the complaints of US employers, other industrialized nations face the same challenges as the demand for skilled workers is not being supplied by people within the respective countries. Perhaps, we need to have a more comprehensive effort toward universal standards for education that address the global needs of an ever expanding global market since domestic needs are not even being met despite successes in certain areas of education reform.

Week 8. Immigration

Governor Brewer,

 

As a concerned member of the Arizona community and a hesitant voter in the upcoming elections, I would like to discuss the issue of immigration policy. I truly enjoy the freedoms afforded to me because I am a citizen of this great country and I feel that those freedoms should be available to others as well. That is why I pose this question: Should Arizona hinder or help immigration policy in the United States?

Although your SB 1070 bill has been scrutinized by the Supreme Court, the President, and high ranking officials across the country there is no denying that it has forced the issue of immigration back on the systemic agenda. However, the provisions of your bill seem to only hurt the progress of this great nation instead of advancing it. And it blatantly goes against the current efforts of Senators Menendez and Leahy's Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2010, which seeks a more equitable solution to immigration than Arizona's propagation of racial profiling. While the bill proposed by Senators Menendez and Leahy is not perfect, it offers a different perspective on the issue.

One thing that this country was founded on is diversity. So why should we not look at a diverse set of policies to address the issue of immigration. I propose that we look to our European neighbors to inform our ideas on immigration reform and perhaps, learn a thing or two. Arizona could lead the way towards an innovative and effective immigration policy that sets the standard for other governments in the years to come.

One nation in particular is the United Kingdom. They have long dealt with immigration in a fair and just manner. Strict policies have reflected changes in their labor demands, population characteristics, and the increasing global competition for skilled workers (Adolino and Blake). The government remains aligned with the public's opinion and this relationship has lead them to a more peaceable solution. If the US acted more as a cohesive decision-making body rather than pursuing bills that will simply win them seats in the legislature we could find a policy that the majority of people can agree on.

We can also look to the European Union as an example of ineffective policy when decision-making is fragmented and no clear objective is administered. The EU suffers from member states clinging to their sovereignty on immigration reform in spite of existing national laws being weak (Adolino and Blake). The importance of decision-makers working together is apparent when we look at the potential impact of a unified force on this issue.

I hope that you will consider what Arizona can learn from nations that have been successful and take a lesson from those that have not. Let us work together to improve this country and enrich its people.

Sincerely,

Lindsey Stickles

Week 7. Challenges in Comparing Public Policy Across National Lines

We face several challenges when comparing public policy across national lines. Each set of policy approaches is driven by a vast array of cultural, societal, economic, and political motivations that heavily influence what types of policies make it onto the systemic and institutional agendas of different governments. In addition, the dynamics of these various factors constantly shape and redefine policy priorities as changes in leadership, the economy, and societal norms impact public opinion and bring new issues to light. Many of the policy decisions that get made cannot be compared on a one-to-one basis. This is most evident in our discussion of social policy.

Each country discussed in Adolino and Blake (as well as those from the additional readings) has developed its own unique interpretation of the "welfare state". These definitions are contingent on a culmination of factors that do not easily translate from one country to another. For example, historical contexts played a huge role in countries like Germany and France where the implementation of universal benefits was a reaction to declining birth rates following WWII. These governments expanded child allowances and policies that encouraged families to have multiple children (Adolino & Blake).

In contrast, countries like the US and UK have chosen not to include universal benefits as part of their systemic agendas and tend to use economic indicators to drive policy expansion/reduction such as tax deductions for low-income families and welfare-to-work programs. Differences in social policy can also be attributed to cultural factors. These countries belong to the Anglo-American family of nations discussed in chapter 1 which tends to hold an individualistic approach to the types of benefits afforded to low-income families versus more collectivist cultures like Japan and the Asian Tigers (Wagstaff, 2006). In this comparison it is difficult to assess successes and failures because the asian countries are less industrialized and have yet to fully develop strong social policies.

Many barriers stand in the way of ultimately determining which policies are "better" than others because they all exist in very different circumstances. In addition, Adolino and Blake make a good point that what defines success can greatly differ as well. They use the example of poverty and discuss the "lack of agreement on a common standard makes meaningful cross-national comparison of absolute poverty statistics difficult" (p. 317). Ultimately, comparing policies requires a global perspective and should include as many interpretations of policy approaches as possible.

Week 6. The Numbers Don't Lie

Despite reports that claim economies are on the rebound the statistics that we compiled reveal an alarming trend that affects almost every country regardless of economic classification. Budget deficits are on the rise across the board. These widening gaps will only worsen as the effects of population, government expenditures, and lack of economic growth are felt. Politicians from the highly industrialized countries discussed in Adolino and Blake face a unique dilemma as the 65 and older population far outnumbers those 15 and below. Although the birth and death rates are not as extreme as those found in less industrialized countries, more economic strain is placed on public programs that cater to the demands of an aging population.

Quite the opposite is true in the most recent countries added to the spreadsheet. Here, societal factors such as life expectancy and birth/death rates illustrate the problems facing the governments of some of the most populated places in the world. However, the staggering figures for these characteristics point to a need for public programs that address low life expectancies and high death rates despite adult literacy rates being 99%. These figures tell us that although 90% of the population (in most cases) lives above the poverty line and most adults posses the skills to work and or learn trades there are other factors striking these people down at far too young an age.

The high death rates in India, China, South Africa and Indonesia tell us that basic needs are not being met by government monies. In India, it has been an issue of priorities that has led to their depleted food supply and unstable market prices (Antipoverty Programs, http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-6060.html). In China, rapid urban development has waged a war against citizens in the countryside who see less and less government handouts. In South Africa the influence of lobby groups has swayed policy decisions toward business endeavors rather than the people (Cohen, http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=121830). Ultimately, these governments struggle to catch up to the rest of the industrialized world and become players in the world market so they can afford to provide their citizens with the services they deserve. Unfortunately, that comes at the price of spending less money on things like government subsidies and lower food prices in order to fund large urban development projects that will lure foreign investors. What is a politician to do? Is it the faults of industrialized countries or simply a matter of mismanaging funds and bad policies? When it is well known that corruption runs rampant in governments like South Africa or that historically neglectful governments tightly regulate policy like in China, it is tough to make the argument that the industrialized world is to blame. Perhaps these are policy issues that we will never understand.

Cohen, T. (August 23, 2010). Politics of blandness makes space for odd ideas. Retrieved from http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=121830

India. (September 1995). Antipoverty Programs. Retrieved from http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-6060.html

Week 5. US vs France: Battle of the blue hairs

In recent news, France's lower parliament passed a bill raising the retirement age to 62 despite over one million French workers taking to the streets to protest the proposal (Fraser, 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11317138). Government officials claim the country will save 70 billion euros which will be used to close widening deficits. Labor unions oppose this decision stating it is "unfair", "unjust", and not sustainable. The US faces a similar dilemma with social security. Officials forecast that by 2037 the government will only be able to cover 75% of promised benefits (Meckler, 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704476104575439792287255372.html?KEYWORDS=US+social+security). While minimal effort has gone into addressing this crisis both parties have stated their expected platforms during midterm elections. Not surprisingly, Republicans propose benefit cuts while Democrats advocate tax increases.

The solutions proposed by the US and France greatly reflect the cultural dynamics that are constantly shaping the policy decisions of these two governments. We can see from the background section provided by Adolino and Blake that France has been undergoing major tax reforms due to the changes in government leadership over the past ten years. Coalition governments, like the one in France, "find it more difficult to work out a shared vision of sweeping tax reform" (Adolino and Blake, 2010, p. 205). However, the recent election of Nicolas Sarkozy resulted in deep tax cuts that many citizens opposed and now blame for the economic woes befallen the country. Conversely, the current tax structure relies heavily on individual contributions to fund pensions and favors indirect taxing versus direct taxes like those collected from sales. Citizen's expectations of government greatly hinder its ability to look to alternative methods like private pensions or increasing direct taxes to bolster funds. A rationale is "[t]here has always been more trust in the state than in financial markets, and that is even more the case after the recent crisis. To Frenchmen the state is supposed to be the fair distributor of wealth. When they tamper with that, people get upset, which perhaps explains the scale of the recent demonstrations" (Fraser, 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11293187).

In the US partisan politics is to blame for the inaction on this issue. Over the last 15 years partisan control of the government has directly affected the course of social security policy. Adolino and Blake state "the effect of partisanship will be greatest when a single party controls the executive and legislative branches" (p. 205). Evidence of this relationship is apparent in the Bush administration tax cuts of 2002 where Republicans held a majority in the House and passed new tax cuts rather than focusing on consumer spending (Adolino and Blake, 2010). It's evident that the future of social security will most likely fall in the hands of Democrats but we can expect Republicans to thwart any chances of real reform.

Week 4. Multi-member districts and proportional voting

We have always been a country that preaches fairness, inclusion, equal representation, and so on, yet the major political system running this country does not align with these same beliefs and values. The current SMDP system is wrought with flaws. Two dominating parties dictate policies that marginalize others and disenfranchise those who cannot participate in politics because the electoral process does not support them. Adolino and Blake discuss the "prospects for such parties are so poor, support for small parties generally declines over time or never emerges in countries using SMDP systems" (pp. 59-60). Is it right that the views of voters are, over time, being edged out simply because legislators favor a two-party system?

A recent NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/us/politics/08legislature.html?_r=1&emc=eta1) discusses the potentially game changing effects that this year's redistricting may have on the 2012 elections. Nowhere does it mention the wants or desires of voters, in fact, it claims that state officials will essentially be telling voters who to vote for based simply on their geographic location. Who wants to waste a vote if the rest of the neighborhood is going to elect the other guy? That mentality is why we should adopt proportional voting. Adolino and Blake state "PR systems results in their being rated as more equitable and representative than SMDP systems…a wider array of ideological positions [will be] represented in the legislature…[r]ather than excluding smaller interests from political institutions, PR systems are designed to ensure their inclusion" (p. 61). Are these not the tenants that this country was founded on?

By allowing everyone an equal chance to participate in government we would alleviate many of the conflicts and corruption that arises out of our political process. While one of the criticisms of PR is the possibility of multi-party coalitions forming to obstruct the policy-making process the lack of radical and extreme groups in our political system makes this threat impractical. The two dominant parties now tend to make moderate policy decisions and, in fact, agree on many issues. I do not see the problems facing Italy's government being the same in the US. Potentially, PR could result in political stalemates on issues that attract a wide range of views like the environment and healthcare. Bringing more marginalized groups into the mix, however politically refreshing, introduce a different set of priorities to the political and institutional agendas. Despite the problems that PR might bring, it would also empower citizens to take back their government.