Measuring the Content of Presidential Policy Making: Applying Text Analysis to Executive Branch Directives

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron R. Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
Text Analysis ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Presidential Policy

Developing a Systematic Decision-Making Framework: Bureaucratic Politics in Perspective

1981 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerel A. Rosati
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Bureaucratic Politics ◽  
Theory Building ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Decision Context ◽  
Policy Application ◽  
Decision Making Framework ◽  
Decision Making Behavior

The bureaucratic politics model has achieved great popularity in the study of decision making. Yet too often the term “bureaucratic politics” is used by scholars and practitioners without clearly stating its policy application. The decision-making behavior that occurred during the Johnson and Nixon administrations for SALT I serves to illustrate many of the limits of the model. First, the decision-making structure posited by the bureaucratic politics model is not nearly as prevalent within the executive branch as is commonly assumed. Second, even where the bureaucratic politics structure is present, the decision-making process is not always one of bargaining, compromise, and consensus. Finally, the decision context and the decision participants are ignored in the model. To provide a clearer understanding of policy-making behavior, a more systematic decision-making framework is offered, which should contribute to the development of better model- and theory-building.

Policy analysis in state governments in Mexico

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan C. Olmeda
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Mexico City ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
State Level ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Mexican State ◽  
Policy Making Process ◽  
Mexican Politics

State governments have acquired a central role in Mexican politics and policy making during the last decades as a result of both democratization and decentralization. Nowadays state governments not only concentrate a significant portion of prerogatives and responsibilities in terms of service delivery but also control a substantial share of public spending. However, no systematic studies have been developed in order to understand how state governments function. This chapter provides an overview on how policies are crafted at the subnational (state) level in Mexico, the main actors taking place in the process and the way in which professional knowledge and advice influence policy makers. As it argues, the central role in the policy making process is played by the executive branch, being the governors the ones who have the final word in most important decisions. In addition, secretaries also concentrate power in particular policy areas. As a result of the lack of a professional civil service, however, a significant portion of policy analysis is performed by non-governmental actors (universities, NGOs and private firms). The chapter applies this framework to analyze a particular Mexican state, namely Mexico City.

Presidential Policy Making: An Analysis

1980 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 422
Author(s):  
Kevin V. Mulcahy ◽  
Steven A. Shull
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Presidential Policy

scholarly journals Learning McNamara's Lessons: How the War Powers Resolution Advances the Rule of Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Shane
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Military Policy ◽  
War Powers ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Military Engagement ◽  
Military Decision Making

This essay considers Robert S. McNamara’s 1995 memoir In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam. First, it explores McNamara’s Lessons to understand the dangers of military policy making conducted without genuine input from Congress. Further, it argues that the pathologies of Vietnam War decision making are not likely to be unique—that is, the realities of executive branch organization and its decision-making processes are likely to re-create those pathologies when Congress is only tenuously involved in resolving the most basic policy questions regarding any substantial military engagement. The essay asserts that the values of sound military decision-making are well served by preserving a state of ambiguity as to the allocation of military decision-making authority in all by the easiest cases. To the extent, the War Powers Resolution has helped Congress to exploit this ambiguity in leveraging its own military policy making role, it has performed a useful function.

scholarly journals The Use of Executive Orders and Proclamations to Create Immigration Policy: Trump in Historical Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Waslin
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Advocacy Organizations ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Immigration

Executive Summary This article examines presidential immigration policy making through executive orders (EOs) and proclamations. Donald Trump’s overall volume of EOs has been remarkably similar to that of other presidents, while his number of proclamations has been relatively high. His immigration-related EOs and proclamations, however, diverge from those of his predecessors in several ways. Of the 56 immigration-related EOs and 64 proclamations issued since 1945, Trump has issued 10 and nine, respectively. Overall, about 1 percent of all EOs and proclamations during this period have been immigration related, compared to 8 percent of Trump’s EOs and 2.4 percent of Trump’s proclamations. In a sharp departure from previous presidents, a greater share of his EOs and proclamations have been substantive policy-making documents intended to restrict admissions of legal immigrants and increase enforcement along the border and in the interior of the United States. This article explores Trump’s unorthodox use of executive tools to make immigration policy, circumventing Congress and even members of his own administration. It recommends that: Congress should hold oversight hearings and should consider revoking or modifying EOs and proclamations that have been issued pursuant to the authority provided to the president by Congress, as opposed to those based on the executive’s constitutional authority. Advocacy organizations should continue to challenge the president’s executive actions, the insufficient process and consultation leading to them, their statutory or constitutional justification, and their impact. Congress should take an inventory of the immigration authorities it has delegated, both explicitly and implicitly, to the executive branch and determine when this authority can and should be limited. Congress should pass legislation to update and reform the US immigration system, and thus clarify its intentions regarding US immigration law, policy, and executive authority in this area.

Policy-Making in the Federal Executive Branch

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 1683
Author(s):  
Robert S. Friedman ◽  
Randall B. Ripley ◽  
Grace A. Franklin
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Executive Branch

9. Domestic influences on foreign policy making

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Aronica ◽  
Inderjeet Parmar
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
Institutional Influences ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution

This chapter examines domestic factors that influence American foreign policy, focusing on the variety of ways in which pressure groups and elites determine and shape what the United States does in the international arena. It first considers how US foreign policy has evolved over time before discussing the US Constitution in terms of foreign policy making and implementation. It then explores institutional influences on foreign policy making, including Congress and the executive branch, as well as the role of ‘orthodox’ and ‘unorthodox’ actors involved in the making of foreign policy and how power is distributed among them. It also analyzes the Trump administration’s foreign policy, taking into account the ‘Trump Doctrine’ and the US strikes on Syria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document