Public policy is simply an attempt by the government to address a public issue. How these issues are made aware to the government are up for debate. Many people feel that the political world is made up of cooperation’s buying politicians off or that the policy decisions are not the result of what most of the voters want; this coming from the elitist model. To contrast public choice model looks to the motivations of individuals. They are both concepts of who influences policy, although they differ greatly. Public policy goals are implemented though the public choice model more so than an elitist model. On the surface it is easy to assume that the elitist model is prevalent. If examined closely one can see how the public choice theory makes more sense in reference to how policy is implemented.
According to Leighninger and Popple ( 2008) in the public choice perspective the vast variety of political participants such as voters, candidates, legislators, interest groups, parties, campaigners and bureaucracies all are seeking to their own goals of interest. Sometimes these policies conflict or connect with one another. They go on to explain that the interests of politicians and bureaucrats are to win elections however, the interests of voters and interest groups are to know what policies affect them and their lives. This seems to create an intricate dance at play. In order for the politicians and bureaucrats to gain their rewards is to win the support of the voters and interest groups for example. Policy silences are viewed as being created from certain policy ideas not gaining popularity or support from voters, legislators and other participants. ( Fiornia, Johnson, Peterson & Mayer, 2009) Policy silences are problems for a certain society or population that are not being met.
Leighninger and Popple (2008) explain, that the elitist model to be the opposite. Proponents of this view believe that the goals of policy are at the hands of a small group of people. These people are represented as the wealthy citizens of the nation,corporations, and the military. They view a kind of pyramid of power rather than the web of competing groups debating policy. ( Leighninger & Popple, 2008) This is a bleak view of society being in a dictatorship and a totalitarian environment. The view is that policy silences are created from an imbalance of power. (Fiornia et al., 2009)
It only seems as if the elite are in power however. There is a lack in citizen participation, and those that mostly do participate, fit into certain stereotypical demographics. (Fiornia et al., 2009) These are age, income, education and race. According to Fiornai et al.,(2009) the middle to upper middle aged vote at a higher percentage than their younger age groups. More educated, higher income people also vote more than the less educated or low income groups. White males vote more, than other ethnicity, although this is changing more than the rest. (Fiornia et al., 2009) This sounds like the stereotyped elite group, but they are the ones who are participating the most. Unfortunately, most people are not active in their government. With their busy lives most people, especially the low income, and low educated are just trying to survive, and they may not know how to get involved or may not have the energy or resources to do it. They do not have the motivation or self interest to do it. Many may have the resources but have jobs and children and may be simply overwhelmed with their lives as it is. Whatever the case, citizen participation is the cause for the policies that are in place. It is under the assumption of many government officials that the policies exist because the people want them that way. I can only dream where all the people became more active. Imagine the changes that could be implemented then, if more people were even to get involved in their local government.
There are also reasons that reinforce people to vote. This fits in line with public choice theory where people behave according to the interests or motivations that they may have. These rewards include; being rewarded for participating. Some events provide free food or simply give away tee shirts. If there is a close race, people tend to participate more. If one thinks that the person they are interested in has a good chance then that can motivate them, or if they think they will have no chance then that could deter them. Another factor is if one perceives there are significant differences in the candidates, then more likely to vote. If people think “Those politicians are all the same.” They may not see much point in participating. And the politician having knowledge of the issues that are important to the voting participants is a factor in if they will participate or not. This clearly shows that motivation plays a role in participation and policy decisions. (Fiornia et al., 2009)
It is this participation though, that makes our system thrive and drive. People who are regular voters, participants in the parties, legislators, campaigners, interest groups, and advocates; all act on their self interest. This self interest does not necessarily mean a selfish one. It could be the self interest of a group or person to fight for the betterment of others such as Greenpeace, Disabled American Veterans or The American Civil Liberties Union. People advocate for what they feel is best form their perspective. In our capitalist country it seems as if public choice theory fits the description on who motivates policy. Perhaps if one looks at policy as motivated by the self interest of different people then that may give one more perspective on why things are. If one looks at government though the lens of the public choice theory one may imagine what its like to “wear someone else’s shoes.” One may not look at politicians as superheroes or villains and look at things through the strategy of motivation.
By Lydia Long
Fiornia, Morris P., Paul E. Peterson, Bertram Johnson, and William G. Mayer. America's New Democracy. 5th ed. New York: Person Education Inc, 2009. 153-63. Print.
Popple, P. R., & Leighninger, L. (2008). The Policy Based Profession (4th ed., pp. 122-123). Boston: Person Education Inc.