DQ4-1

Responses

1.

Politics affects nearly every aspect of society. We elect officials based on our own personal beliefs and agendas, and cast our votes for the candidate we feel best falls in line with our beliefs. Imagine what it takes to get our agendas heard. We meet with these officials to bring our concerns to their attention. The “separate but equal” doctrine that offered validity to racial segregation. How so? It did so by ignoring the separate facilities for whites and blacks. If there had been zero political pressure, some situations might deteriorate, but would never be identified as public problems, never making it on policymakers’ agenda, and our government would never be required to decide what, if anything, to do about them. Influential people and ordinary citizens, interest groups, policy planning organizations, political candidates, and officeholders all use agenda setting, typically gaining momentum through the use of mass media to advertise the issue (Policy pdf).

Preventing some societal situations from becoming policy issues is also an important political tactic. Non-decision making is a way in which demands for change in the existing distribution of community benefits and privileges can be suffocated before they gain access to the relevant decision-making process. Conservatives defend the status quo. The more inflexible conservative normally opposes nearly all government economic regulation. Liberals believe in more government action to meet individual need, and often wanting the government to do more to promote distributive justice, economic and social. Conservatives feel the government has already done too much in this regard, destroying individual enterprise and promoting economic and other social problems. Libertarians believe governments should have very limited powers, primarily police and military protection. They strongly support free market capitalism, believing government has no place in making laws about personal behavior; reproduction, homosexuality, and drug use unless others are threatened in the process. Special interest groups are a primary part of the political landscape, doing their best to influence politics. Special interest groups represent people based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, income, profession, or other factors. Many special interest groups are organized as nonprofit organizations, limiting their ability to lobby or support political candidates, but they can educate themselves on issues concerning them (Policy pdf).

Over the past few decades, Congress has passed laws trying to control the influence of special interests with regard to campaign finance contributions such as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. In January 2010, in the Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission case, the

U.S. Supreme Court shocked many when it mentioned the First Amendment in ruling that corporations and unions can spend as much as they want on political ads to support or oppose political candidates. The ruling does not affect the laws barring direct donations to candidates by corporations and unions. In 1974, Congress restricted funds people and PACs could give to national party committees and candidates running for national offices. Some politicians refuse to accept PAC money, but these contributions remain an important part of election campaigns. There is the fear that elected officials are beholden to these special interests and this affects public policy. For this reason, many individuals concerned about political ethics advocate campaign finance reform (Policy pdf).

Public administrators can overcome some of the political obstacles by involving the citizens more in the process. There are four distinct levels of citizen engagement: information – one-way relationship between government and citizens, typically government provides citizens with information, and now with development of social media citizens can send information to prompt government involvement. Consultation – two-way dialogue between public organizations and citizens whereby citizens are given a voice on issues. Without guarantees, citizens are listened to, in hopes that decision-makers will implement what the majority wants. Participation in public decision-making – involves a more powerful interaction between public organizations and citizens where each party has a role in decision-making and influences on final decisions. Co-production of public services and outcomes – involves the most thorough form of meeting, where citizens and professionals connect each other’s resources and capabilities to take actions which advance public services or reach publicly desired outcomes (Bovaird and Loeffler, 2015, p. 303).

Any of these four methods of engagement could lessen any political obstacles, by increasing dialogue among different groups of citizens, working together, understanding the plight of one another and stressing to the decision-makers the importance of achieving a common goal, for the greater good of all parties involved.

References: