DOC PREVIEW
TAMU POLS 207 - Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1
Type Lecture Note
Pages 3

This preview shows page 1 out of 3 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Lecture 11 POLS 207Outline of Last Lecture: Welfare Reform as a Counter-example to CentralizationI. Welfare reform starting in 1996A. Expanding caseloadsB. Work disincentivesC. Social dependencyD. Dysfunctional family effectsOutline of Current Lecture:Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1I. Increased federal gvt. role in educationA. ESEA (1965)B. NCLB (2001) II. Northwest Ordinance of 1787III. “Incrementalism”Current Lecture:Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States – the capacity to design, manage, and finance quality public programs  One of the sources of modern “centralization” – the national government has deeper pocketsand therefore more power than the states. Remember, centralization varies by policy area. Public education is a very important policy area!State/local and national governments division of responsibility Increase of federal role in public education  Esp. D&M chapter 16:537 - 42, 545-48, 554 - 57BUT, see Key Terms for chapter 16 on “The Politics of Education” and Halter chapter 11:241-44* (*deals with school finance)**Two landmark pieces of legislation that strengthened federal power over education**- ESEA - Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) – Before this the Fed had a relatively minor and limited role in K – 12 education- NCLB - No Child Left Behind – Technically an Amendment to ESEA (2001)o See D&M page 539 o Fundamentally changed (increased) the role the national government plays in education. Local and state governments still play the biggest role, but the Fed hascertainly gotten way more involved since 1965.o Raised several policy issues  See D&M chapter 16:537-38 for elaboration on the old, yet limited federal role in education (Northwest Ordinance of 1787 – ESEA of 1965), summarized below:Northwest Ordinance (1787), Morrill Land Grant (1862), Smith-Hughes Act (1917), School Lunch & Milk (1946), Federal Impacted Areas (1950), National Defense Education (1958), ESEA (1965)Northwest Ordinance of 1787 – Enacted by Articles of Confederation Congress (the Congress that was created during the Revolutionary War) on July 13, 1787 Though the Northwest Ordinance is typically cited as an example of America’s first commitment to public education, “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government….” is the only phrase in Northwest ordinance that deals with education. Actually, most of the document is laying out territorial policy.1647: Massachusetts – first colonial legislature to require local towns provide public funding of children’s education. Irony – at this same time period (1787), in Philadelphia the Constitutional Convention is meeting and wrestling with the issue of slavery. But at the same time the Confederation Congress in New York went ahead and settled the issue with the northwest states in the Northwest Ordinance.Prior to ESEA (1965)…- Federal aid money for education was very small no matter how you counted it- Targeted to specific matters (ag and vocational education, school milk and lunch, federal impact, science, math and foreign language)o “Incrementalism” (meaning that public policy develops in small steps rather thanthrough sweeping, fundamental change) is typical of American government’s policymaking (in many areas – education, welfare, health care, taxes, etc.) Defense of incrementalism (“policy develops gradually”):- Accurate description of how policymaking works- Not only accurate, but desirable way to make policy (partly because it does not require “perfect” information)- Political benefits Some counter-examples to Incrementalism:- 1935 – Social Security Act- 1965 – ESEA- 1986 – Federal “tax reform”- 1996 – “Welfare reform” (TANF)- 2001 – No Child Left Behind (NCLB)- 2010 – Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”)There is no scholarly consensus as to what distinguishes “incremental” from “non-incremental” change. This makes it hard to measure


View Full Document

TAMU POLS 207 - Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1

Type: Lecture Note
Pages: 3
Download Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Fiscal and Policy Capacity of the States Part 1 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?