The readings this week explore the various models involved in the decision making process. Howlett and Ramesh in Chapter 6 of ‘Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems, maintain “that choosing a solution to a public problem or fulfilling a societal need does not even remotely resemble the orderly process proposed by some analyst”. Lindbolhm (1959) in ‘The Science of Muddling Through’ distinguishes between ‘root and branch’ approaches to policy formulation while Foster (1984) in ‘Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling Through’ provides a discussion of the comprehensive and the bounded rational approaches to public decision-making. In this short paper I provide a brief discussion of the various approaches to the public administration and apply it to US immigration policy.
Lindbolhm (1959) and Foster (1984), both examine the policy making process in terms of two separate alternatives. Lindbolhm describes the ‘root’ or rational comprehensive approach in five points: clarification of objectives, isolate the ends then seek the means, effective policy then is based on the selection of the best means, every important relevant factor is taken into account, and heavy reliance on theory. This he contrasts with the ‘branch’ or what Foster (1984) calls the bounded rational approach also summarized in five points: selection of value goals that are closely related, very limited means-end analysis, good policy is typically agreed upon, limited analysis which ignores alternative outcomes, policies and goals, and reduced reliance on theory. ‘Muddling’ through policy making then involves the implementation of strategies appropriate to the specific context and dependent on the contextual complexity of the decision making process. Both authors seem to agree that ‘Muddling Through’ is the most practical approach to policy making as it gives administrators the flexibility of adjusting strategies based on need.
The design of Immigration policy here in the US has been an extremely controversial subject, and as the first African American president enters his second term it seems an issue that will be focused on intensely in the coming year (2013). In a country of immigrants it is not difficult for one to understand why immigration policy is a highly controversial subject. With politicians often violently disagreeing on this issue, by-partisan consensus is indeed a welcomed occurrence. Perhaps illustrative of the “muddling through” involved in public policy formulation, the history of immigration policy in the US has been characterized by persistent reform as policy makers continuously seek to find better ways to deal with this policy issue. The latest round of debate involves the provision of a path to citizenship for the 11 million unskilled workers who currently reside illegally in the US. As well as the ‘softening’ of immigrations laws to allow skilled workers who have acquired advance training in the US to stay. Then there is the issue of the right of American citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their same sex partners which policy specialist believe will garner very little popular support but is definitely part of the President’s reform plan.
The current President is perhaps one of the most progressive liberal democratic leaders of the US in decades and has already passed the ‘Dream Act’ which provided a path for citizenship for millions of young people who were currently in the US illegally because they were brought here as children but had acquired high school education. As one examines the evolutions of the US Immigration policy a pattern emerges that can not be described as rational comprehensive or originating from some ‘root’ source. Rather this pattern involves successive restructuring of policies to cater to the specific context and complexity of the situation. For example the Immigration Reform and Control Act was in-acted in 1986 primarily to deal with the problem of the large number of illegal immigrants who had resided in US since 1982. A few years later the Immigration Act of 1990 was passed but while this law did not focus on illegal immigrants its main concern was to clearly define categories for legal immigration and expand the annual numbers of legal immigrants into the US. Coincidently this reform occurred at a time when demand for highly skilled workers was on the rise. The same can be said for the recent STEM act that provides incentive for students who have obtained Science, Technology, Engineering and Math degrees. Or the amendments that provided Visas for increased numbers of teachers and health professionals.
Indeed immigration policy here in the US can surely be described ‘muddled’ which seems to be the best direction for policy makers as they navigate this environment. I believe that this trend will continue as it is impossible to outline long-term objectives for immigration as well as the means for achieving these ends. It is simply an issue that continues to evolve and therefore the challenge for policy makers is find the best option to apply given the current cultural, political, social and economic environment.
Submitted by Deon Gibson
References
Howlett and Ramesh, Chapter 6: “Public Policy Decision-Making.”
Lindblohm, Charles E., “The Science of ‘Muddling Through’,” Public Administration Review, 19(2), 1959
Forester, John, “Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling Through,” Public Administration Review, 44(1), 1984.
Lindbolhm (1959) and Foster (1984), both examine the policy making process in terms of two separate alternatives. Lindbolhm describes the ‘root’ or rational comprehensive approach in five points: clarification of objectives, isolate the ends then seek the means, effective policy then is based on the selection of the best means, every important relevant factor is taken into account, and heavy reliance on theory. This he contrasts with the ‘branch’ or what Foster (1984) calls the bounded rational approach also summarized in five points: selection of value goals that are closely related, very limited means-end analysis, good policy is typically agreed upon, limited analysis which ignores alternative outcomes, policies and goals, and reduced reliance on theory. ‘Muddling’ through policy making then involves the implementation of strategies appropriate to the specific context and dependent on the contextual complexity of the decision making process. Both authors seem to agree that ‘Muddling Through’ is the most practical approach to policy making as it gives administrators the flexibility of adjusting strategies based on need.
The design of Immigration policy here in the US has been an extremely controversial subject, and as the first African American president enters his second term it seems an issue that will be focused on intensely in the coming year (2013). In a country of immigrants it is not difficult for one to understand why immigration policy is a highly controversial subject. With politicians often violently disagreeing on this issue, by-partisan consensus is indeed a welcomed occurrence. Perhaps illustrative of the “muddling through” involved in public policy formulation, the history of immigration policy in the US has been characterized by persistent reform as policy makers continuously seek to find better ways to deal with this policy issue. The latest round of debate involves the provision of a path to citizenship for the 11 million unskilled workers who currently reside illegally in the US. As well as the ‘softening’ of immigrations laws to allow skilled workers who have acquired advance training in the US to stay. Then there is the issue of the right of American citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their same sex partners which policy specialist believe will garner very little popular support but is definitely part of the President’s reform plan.
The current President is perhaps one of the most progressive liberal democratic leaders of the US in decades and has already passed the ‘Dream Act’ which provided a path for citizenship for millions of young people who were currently in the US illegally because they were brought here as children but had acquired high school education. As one examines the evolutions of the US Immigration policy a pattern emerges that can not be described as rational comprehensive or originating from some ‘root’ source. Rather this pattern involves successive restructuring of policies to cater to the specific context and complexity of the situation. For example the Immigration Reform and Control Act was in-acted in 1986 primarily to deal with the problem of the large number of illegal immigrants who had resided in US since 1982. A few years later the Immigration Act of 1990 was passed but while this law did not focus on illegal immigrants its main concern was to clearly define categories for legal immigration and expand the annual numbers of legal immigrants into the US. Coincidently this reform occurred at a time when demand for highly skilled workers was on the rise. The same can be said for the recent STEM act that provides incentive for students who have obtained Science, Technology, Engineering and Math degrees. Or the amendments that provided Visas for increased numbers of teachers and health professionals.
Indeed immigration policy here in the US can surely be described ‘muddled’ which seems to be the best direction for policy makers as they navigate this environment. I believe that this trend will continue as it is impossible to outline long-term objectives for immigration as well as the means for achieving these ends. It is simply an issue that continues to evolve and therefore the challenge for policy makers is find the best option to apply given the current cultural, political, social and economic environment.
Submitted by Deon Gibson
References
Howlett and Ramesh, Chapter 6: “Public Policy Decision-Making.”
Lindblohm, Charles E., “The Science of ‘Muddling Through’,” Public Administration Review, 19(2), 1959
Forester, John, “Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling Through,” Public Administration Review, 44(1), 1984.
RSS Feed