The World of the Policy Analyst
Image from UnSplash
What I took away from the World of the Policy Analyst written by Heineman, Bluhm, Peterson, and Kearny was that as a policy analyst, you cannot escape politics. A policy analyst tries to be impartial, but it is hard to be completely unbiased which makes sense. The data is presented, but there are always different ways to look at the facts. Depending on your employer, you will provide the analysis to suit their agenda or needs. Objectivity and science do not easily converge with complex policy issues.
Despite the complexity of policy analysis, the field is important for providing orientation to a problem when a solution is not always present. Its an instrument for enlightenment and long term percolation of analysis. The analysis often adds rationality to the process and influences a programs success. Often though, the analysis is used to reinforce decisions already made instead of helping to influence the decision itself. It’s understandable though, politicians get numerous studies and have little time to read and properly utilize them all, leading to the dilution of studies. Interest groups often counter the study findings created by agency policy analysts.
The authors diverged to discuss the topic of equality. Egalitarian is the belief that all people are equal and serve equal rights and opportunities. Liberty and equality are cores of our culture. We prize the freedom to acquire property and solidified this in the development of the 30 year mortgage and mortgage tax credit. But liberty as a free enterprise does not equate to equality according to the authors. Equality is only social, not economic. This lead early on to two types of ethics: Kantian and Utilitarianism. Kantian focuses on equal rights while utilitarian is based on individual self-interest. Under the utilitarian method, social efficiency is derived from providing as much value as possible from scarce resources.
Returning to the politics of policy analysis the authors note that politics is a short term game, one we are all familiar with. Those in power are voting based on what they think will keep them in power longest, which leads to short term, rather than long term progress. This is why getting programs implemented that have a long term payback are so difficult. Public administration as a field is political and very partisan as a result. This inefficient government operation is also attributed to the breakdown of government. Most voters distrust centralized government because they want access to their decision makers. Special interest groups use this organization to block progress, inserting their influence at a higher level than the average voter. The rise in state power versus federal is increasing the role policy analysis is playing.
The authors wrap up by stating policy analysis is not optimal in decentralized and fragmented American polity. While this may be true in some situations, there are opportunities for analysts to make a difference in this environment. I have seen a lot of good policy being made at a local level that is reverberating nationwide like eliminating single family housing in Minneapolis or statewide in Oregon which helps with housing affordability. So while the role of the policy analyst may have changed over the years, it has not become obsolete.
