Reddit Reddit reviews Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It's Amazing that Federal Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga ... Morals on a Foundation (Oakland Project)

We found 5 Reddit comments about Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It's Amazing that Federal Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga ... Morals on a Foundation (Oakland Project). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Economic Policy & Development
Economics
Business & Money
Books
Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It's Amazing that Federal Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga ... Morals on a Foundation (Oakland Project)
University of California Press
Check price on Amazon

5 Reddit comments about Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It's Amazing that Federal Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga ... Morals on a Foundation (Oakland Project):

u/omaolligain · 11 pointsr/AskSocialScience

>... should be considered?

This is a normative question. In normative questions the values of some actor(s) determines the answer.

In the case of public policy this means that all manners of people values could have an impact on the policies goals. For example, policymakers (such as legislators) all often have competing visions about what the goal of a policy should be. Bureaucrats often have their own opinions about what the goals should be. Constituents might have all sorts of other competing opinions. The target population may have other opinions. What this means is that in order for policy to pass it usually has to have a certain amount of ambiguity baked in, so as to satisfy the competing values of all the different groups/actors.

Deborah Stone's book Policy Paradox is principally about the role of ambiguity in public policy and in establishing policy goals. Policy Paradox is mandatory reading for any student of Public Policy. She demonstrates how vague (ambiguous) goals are often necessary in order to achieve the votes of all the possible veto actors (committee chairs, speakers, majority leaders, median voters, Presidents, etc...). In short, many actors make it difficult to reconcile what the policy should do. And, often times not all goals can be achieved simultaneously ; Some goals are mutually exclusive to a point. This can make it difficult to determine whether a policy is actually a success or a failure.

Policy Paradox builds on some of the decision making work of Cohen, March, and Olsen who described how ambiguity of goals plays a role in decision making in "organization anarchies" such as governments and universities. Cohen and March also developed the theory of bounded-rationality and discussed the importance of ambiguity in individual decision making as well.

Implementation by Pressman and Wildavsky additionally touches how important it is that the goals of a policy have "buy in" amongst the bureaucrats responsible for implementing the policy. Essentially, if the goals are to outside the organizational culture of the bureaucracy responsible for running the program, the bureaucrats may just not implement the policy fully (or at all).

Anecdotally, I've spoken, in the course of researching legislative oversight, with policy makers who have been personally (and professionally) frustrated when they voted into creation a new policy program and appropriated money to a bureaucracy to implement that program. And then had the bureaucracy simply not implement the program in the slightest because it was simply to far afield from the goals/mission of the bureaucrats.

This is much less of a problem outside of public policy. In "Design Thinking" the only person whose values matter to the "designer" is the clients. The designer merely designs to the clients singular values. This is why "design thinking" approaches are not generally a good approach for policy analysts or policy makers.

If you're looking for a guide on how to perform a policy analysis, I suggest you read Bardach's Eightfold Path to Policy Analysis. It's essentially the standard.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/obama

Couple points

  • As for the "most support progressivism", I don't doubt they do, but at the same time, I think they support conservatism, in that I'm sure a poll could be made to say "lower taxes, less wasteful government, etc etc". I'm a bit cynical of the polls.

  • As far as the left's support of socialism and communism, I sort of meant the intellectual elite of the 60's.

  • I agree socialism is often used as a boogie man word, in the same way fascism is used as a boogie man everytime the police fuck up.

    >Out of the New Deal and the G.I. Bill came a robust middle class

    I thought that the world was bombed out, and our having so much industrial technology from the war was what made us "great". And I support a stronger GI bill, 100%.

    >Has it occurred to you that allowing the "smarter" people control the distribution of wealth really is the best way to go?

    Ok, this is, and I say this without hyperbole or exaggeration or lying, communism. Supporting programs or creating barriers is one thing, but a smart cabal controlling the wealth scares me.

    I would also ask, if you get mad at the Republicans for using government to enrich themselves, why do you wish to give the government more power over wealth?

    I'm a libertarian, but unlike many, I'll support common sense, workable programs that benefit all. I just am not sure that letting a central group in Washington call a bunch of shots is good. here's an example

    And what about "stagflation" of the 70's, wasn't that a result of too much social spending not enough growth?
u/amnsisc · 1 pointr/boston

At the VA, the fiscal year and the bidding process overlap such that almost always, three months of spending are lost. Furthermore, unable to buy in bulk, as they must clear each purchase, they end up expending costs on that paperwork AND lose bulk discounts.

It's been shown the PMCs cost more than not private:
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2012/11/dod-contractors-cost-nearly-3-times-more-than-dod-civilians.html

Contracting is not a panacea for efficiency:
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/11/5_biggest_myths_about_federal_contractors/

In fact, 'waste' is itself almost entirely determined by local institutional factors & competing interest groups:
https://www.amazon.com/Bureaucracy-Government-Agencies-Basic-Classics/dp/0465007856

https://www.amazon.com/Implementation-Expectations-Washington-Programs-Foundation/dp/0520053311/ref=pd_sim_14_57?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0520053311&pd_rd_r=A295HS12WJQ12NHY8YVX&pd_rd_w=ro3GA&pd_rd_wg=fTj0o&psc=1&refRID=A295HS12WJQ12NHY8YVX

Finally, I have issues with the particular costs incurred (contracting to a Tech company).

u/spacks · 1 pointr/PoliticalScience

Implementation. literally. You'll run into politics for days when talking about implementation.

Here's a great book on the subject: https://www.amazon.com/Implementation-Expectations-Washington-Programs-Foundation/dp/0520053311

u/trusso · 1 pointr/politics

Aside from your (incorrect) presumption about my voting habits (as though information about me could correctly tell you about the whole system) I'm replying to suggest you get a copy of Implementation by Pressman and Wildavsky