PPD 225 NOTES WEEK 2
PPD 225 NOTES WEEK 2 PPD 225
Popular in Public Policy and Management
Popular in PPD
This 8 page Class Notes was uploaded by Isaac Lemus on Monday September 5, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PPD 225 at University of Southern California taught by Yan Tang in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 19 views. For similar materials see Public Policy and Management in PPD at University of Southern California.
Reviews for PPD 225 NOTES WEEK 2
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/05/16
PPD 225 Lecture Notes: 8/30 ● Review of last night’s reading ○ When you think about public policy, the actual delivery of achieving goals means you have to involve the business, social, and nonprofit sector. ○ There are three different levels to public policy. ■ Policy Choices: Setting goals. The government discusses what laws and regulations to create ■ Policy Outputs: This is basically like critical tasks. These are the exact and unique steps that need to be taken in order to complete a task ■ Policy Impacts. This is the effects the above levels how on the people's lives ○ Distinction of normal curve and the power law curve ■ Normal: how much money you spend on each individual by how much people receive the money. Bell curve. Some people receive more or less but the majority of the population receive a medium amount ■ Power Law curve: Again, How much money you spend on each individual by how much people receive the money. The majority receive a low amount of money while some receive a lot ● Sample test. Not for a grade, just a see what you know type of questionnaire. ● No actual Discussion today ● Pennies from Heaven 1. It depends on your ethical principles. Is it ethical from a legal standpoint? ● Henry’s actions are illegal in the sense that he isn’t following policy that is clearly defined, this situation isn’t ambiguous. He knows the policy and he knows it is not allowed. Is it ethical from a moral/practical standpoint? ● Yes, because the woman benefits. And he is ok with it, so according to his ethics it is fine. BUT professional ethics trump personal ethics in the workplace. 2. No he should not be encouraging others to go against the law. Ethically fine if it is by his standards, don’t impose this course of action on others. 3. If he doesn’t take the job, no. You do not have the right to enforce a policy you have no control over. Only once you assume the authoritative role should you be authorized to do so. Don’t enforce a rule x post facto…. This is the wrong term, but essentially you should not be able to enforce something that was not in your control at the time of occurrence? 4. Administrators should not have discretion. Where do you draw the line? Policy makers, however, might not know the intricacies of the decisions that are being made. Utilitarian “rightness or wrongness should be judged by the consequences”, then the decision is correct, because she benefits. But the greatest good for the greatest number of people is difficult because who is not receiving benefits that should because this woman is? Kant your duty is to follow the policy in this case. Ask for forgiveness not for permission in a bureaucracy of this size. If everyone got permission for every judgment call like this, you have a huge, unmanaged bureaucracy. Please note entire group said they would just let her keep the money. ● Independent reading: The Federalist Papers, Number 10 & 51 ● Independent reading: Chapter 1 of American Public Policy: Promise and Performance by B. Guy Peters Lecture Notes 9/1: ● Review of last night’s reading ○ This chapter focuses on the structure of the government. The original founders had an intense fear of tyranny and therefore fragmented the government so that power was not given to a single position. ■ Advantages: little errors ■ Disadvantage: lack of coherence and coordination=gridlock ○ The goal is to regulate and control the interests of people: Keep interest groups alive but don’t let them overwhelm other groups. Chose to regulate through a republic. Why is republic better? ■ Smaller group of experienced individuals make decisions for the majority. ■ Madison’s layer cake model of federalism= federal and state have separate and distinct tasks. ● Federal government= Currency and defensive ● State government= Everything else ■ Marble cake= the roles of the federal government and the state government are all mixed. Not everything is clear cut and tidy. ■ Picket fence cake ● There is not only a separation between each layer but there is also be a divide vertically. ● Ex: certain parts of fed, states, and local governments are dedicated to agriculture. ○ Not only do we have layers but we also have three branches within the federal government. Executive, legislative, and judicial. But there are good and bad consequences to this ■ Difficult to initiate any policy ■ Change is easily prevented ■ Much easier to make a gradual change because of compromise ● Four main points ○ Federalism: Layers of government. Federalists were concerned with how to prevent the tyranny of the majority. Tried to find a happy combination of centralized and decentralized government. Formulated a compound government ○ Separation of Power: on each level there are different branches. Checks and balances. Ambition cancels ambitions. This causes gridlock. ○ Sub goverment: Iron Triangles (interest groups, corresponding administrative agency, congress committees). Policy network, Interest groups now play an active role in affecting the government. ○ Public and Private: both the private and public sector can play a role in affecting the government. Ex: Homelessness. Public sector has a much harder time implementing than private sectors
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'