POLS 6312:
Survey of American Institutions and Public Policy
Mr.
Lineberry
Spring 2003
Th
Office: PGH 427
(743‑3901, 3‑3935 as a backup)
Office
Hours: TT 2:30-4
Email: SSQ@mail.uh.edu
TA: Claudia
Baba (claudiababa@hotmail.com)
Course
Description.
This course is designed for students
in the doctoral program in political science, although it may meet the needs of
other students. It serves as an introductory course in public policy and
policymaking. The policy approach to American government, in my opinion, is an
extraordinarily useful complement to the "behavioral" or the
"institutional" approach. The
course introduces you to American political institutions, the meaning of public
policy and economic and political science approaches to it, policy analysis,
and some case studies of policy issues ‑‑ schools, the endangered
species act, and crime, for example. And that's just breaking a sweat.
"Policy analysis" means
many things to many people, but we try to examine a little of it here, mostly
by case studies. Case studies are venerable in political science, public
administration and, of course, the
In addition to keeping up with the
readings, you will want to familiarize yourself with leading journals. In
mainline political science, of course, they are the APSR, the JOP and the AJPS.
SSQ is the leading interdisciplinary journal (he said modestly). Legislative Studies Quarterly is a venue for legislative specialists. Presidential Studies Quarterly is
sometimes a little quirky, but sometimes has good papers on the presidency. Law and Society is an interdisciplinary journal about crime, courts and legal issues.
JPAM is perhaps the best policy analysis journal going.
Here is how the classes go. We start
with the rapporteur, who will set the agenda for the class. I may make some
introductory comments, but we will basically go through the readings. I usually
ask these questions about the readings: (l) what is the theoretical perspective
or the hypotheses of the author? (2) what is the methodology here? (3) what are
the conclusions? and (4) what would be your critique of the reading?
Course
Requirements. In addition to regular attendance and participation, there
are four major requirements for the course.
A. Policy
case study, concept paper, data paper, and final papers. For 40% of
the grade, you should work on a paper along these lines:
Al. Policy case
study. You should prepare a 5‑6
page case study (plus a bibliography; do not include items in the bibliography
that are not in the paper) of some policy issue now being discussed in
A2. Concept paper. You should prepare a "Concept Paper and
Literature Review" on one of the topics listed at the end of this section
This should be 5‑6 pages long, double spaced, plus a bibliography (do not
include anything in the bibliography that you do not discuss in the text). This
is due February 28. Incorporate at
least two of the readings labeled “C” into your paper. This is worth 5 percent
of the course grade.
Here is the list of concepts you can use in the paper: institutions, policy experimentation,
implementation, privatization, agendas, target population, social construction,
rational choice, market approach, incrementalism, decision-making, issue network,
rule of law, policy innovation, regulation, federalism, policy evaluation, and
group theory.
A3. Data and methods paper. Third, you should prepare a "data
sources and methodology" paper about how to research your topic. What, if
any, sources of data are now available (say, through the ICPSR) on your topic?
Are there laws and regulations that are relevant? What are standard Census
sources, if any? Would your topic require interviewing and if so, who and how?
At this point, I am not so interested m methodology, in a statistical sense, as
I am interested simply in where you might go and what you might do to
investigate your emerging research question. Give me a 5‑6 page double
spaced paper by April 4 and this is
also worth 5 percent of the grade.
A4. Final paper. On the last day of class you should
present me with a synthesized version of these three papers and plan to present
it briefly in class. Suppose, for example, you selected gun control for your
case study and implementation for your concept; you are going to need some kind
of data from someplace. The synthetic paper, therefore, should be
"Implementing Gun Control Policies." If your concept paper was on
evaluation and your case study was on school choice, for example, then the
synthetic paper would be on "Evaluation and School Choice." Through
the miracle of word processors, it should be unnecessary to start from scratch
on this final paper, but you will need to integrate your previous papers into a
coherent whole and rethink them. It is
not assumed that you have any original data or secondary data for this paper;
it is assumed that you have thought about this, though, in A3. This is worth 25
percent of the course grade, and therefore all of assignment A is worth 40
percent of the course grade. Obviously, I will be more impressed by the final
grade of A4 than on any of the components of A1‑3.
B.
Rapporteur assignment. Each student will serve as a rapporteur for one class
session. She or he should review in a 15 minute oral presentation (absolutely
no more, and I am a ruthless timekeeper) the major issues raised by the
literature, and share with the class a 4‑5 page written synopsis of the
presentation. Do not write the paper, though, simply as a summary of A, then B.
then C. Integrate them into a perspective. Each rapporteur should review the
presentation with the instructor during his regular office hours before the
class time. Three things you should include in your discussion are (1) a
leading Supreme Court case in this area; (2) one major federal regulation in
this area (this does not mean that you should just say "the federal
government has regulated dangerous toys." It means "Federal
regulations of this date said that…") and (3) a description of a major
statute by congress in this area (this needs to be specified ‑‑ not
just "Congress in 1988 decided to..." This should say "HR135 in
1988 did this...") Also include (4) a brief list of standard data sources
(census materials, NES codebook, court case data base, etc.) which will be
relevant here. Xerox the first page
each of a regulation, a court case, and a statute for your rapporteur
assignment. This is worth 20 percent of the course grade.
C. Final.
You may elect to take either an oral or a written final exam. The
written final will contain 3‑5 questions, and you will have some choice among
them. You may take it over a 24 hour period, using any materials you desire.
The oral exam will be about 30 minutes. These should be taken during the final
exam period at a mutually agreeable time, provided that you give me three
working days before grades are due. This is worth 30 percent of your grade.
D. American government:
the basics. We need to master the
basics of American government, too, for this class. You should read along each week with the
relevant topic in any standard American government text. As a part of the final, and we’ll discuss
this later, you’ll need to pass a basic American government test on the
constitution, federalism, and institutions.
This is worth 10% of the course grade.
Books to Buy. You should
procure a copy of each of these books:
Anne L. Schneider and Helen Ingram, Policy Design for
Democracy
Frank Baumgartner and Beth Leech, Basic Interests
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark S.
Bonchek, Analyzing Politics
Paul Sabatier, ed., Theories of the Policy Process
Arthur Okun, Equality and Efficiency
David Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection
George Edwards, et al., Government in
Roger Cobb and Marc Ross, Cultural Strategies of Agenda Denial
Morris Fiorina, Congress: Keystone of the
Many materials listed under "required" (except
these books) will be available in the library in our usual very imperfect way.
Note,
though, that virtually all articles in major journals in political science,
which are three years old or older are available through JSTOR; more recent
major journal articles are also typically in the library.
On the syllabus, APSR=American Political Science Review;
AJPS=American Journal of Political Science; Journal of Politics; SSQ=Social
Science Quarterly.
You should follow
along quite carefully in a standard American government book.
Internet
Resources. There are two important internet resources available for this
course at the course website. One is a
bibliography of books on public policy issues; the other is a collection of
police-oriented websites.
Overview of Weekly Topics
January 16 Introductory festivities
January 23 Political Institutions, Democracy and
Public Policy
February 6 Building a Policy agenda
February 13 Congress Makes Public Policy
February 20 The President
February 27 Budgets and Policy
March 6 SPRING BREAK NO CLASS
March 13 The Courts and Public Policy
March 20 Interest Groups and Bureaucracies
March 27 Policy Design and Implementation
April 3 Policy Distribution
April 10 Policy Evaluation
April 17 SOUTHWESTERN SOCIAL SCIENCE
ASSOCITION MEETING; NO CLASS
April 24 The New Political Economy Debate:
Markets vs. the Rule of Law
January 23.
Political Science, Institutions, and Public Policy
Rapporteur:_________________________
This week acquaints you with the concepts of institutions, public policy and policy analysis and raises some important issues about the use of knowledge in government. In this section are institutional approaches, rational choice approaches, policy approaches, systems approaches, “geological” approaches and social construction approaches. Enough for everybody.
Required:
Paul Sabatier, ed., Theories of the Policy Process
Federalist # 10
David Easton, "An Approach to the Analysis of Political
Systems," World Politics (1957):
383-400. (C).
Charles Lindblom, "The Science of Muddling Through,"
Public Administration Review, Spring,
1969: 79‑88. (C)
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 1, 2, 11.
Anne Schneider and Helen Ingram, Policy Design and
Democracy, ch. 1-3.
Joel Best, “Victimization and the Victim Industry,” Society, 1997:9-17.
Peter Hall and Rosemary C. R.
Taylor, “Political Science and the Three Institutionalisms,” Political Studies
44(1996): 936-57.
Recommended:
Two good books for approaches to institutions, policy and
other political science issues are Robert Goodin, New Handbook of Political Science and Ada Finifter, ed. Political Science: State of the Discipline
II.
Yehezkel Dror, Public
Policymaking Reexamined.
Harold D. Lasswell, A Preview
of the Policy Sciences (C).
Richard Nelson, The Moon
and the Ghetto.
Aaron Wildavsky, Speaking
Truth to Power.
Bo Rothstein, “Political Institutions: An Overview,” in Robert
E. Goodin, ed. A New Handbook of
Political Science.
Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons.
February 6.
Building a Policy Agenda
Rapporteur:
_______________________
There must be something of an agenda in American
politics—someone must have it. Who does? How would we explain it—even describe
it? Kingdon is certainly a classic book in the agenda area. Stimson and company
have a more empirical view of our agenda setting process and, behold, it is
democratic to a tee. You need to understand the classic Bachrach and Baratz
article in terms of the famous "community power structure" debate,
but their question is: why are some very important things not on the agenda in
the first place?
Required:
Bachrach and Baratz, "The Two Faces of Power" APSR,
on reserve [C].
Roger Cobb and Marc Ross, eds., Cultural Strategies of Agenda Denial, chps. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7,
10.
James Stimson, Michael
B. MacKuen and Robert S. Erikson, "Dynamic Representation," APSR, September, 1995 [c]
Anthony Downs, “Up and Down with Ecology – The Issue Attention
Cycle,” The Public Interest. 1972 (c).
Recommended:
Frank Baumgartner and Bryan D. Jones, Agendas and Instability in American Politics.
Roger Cobb and Charles Elder, Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of
Paul Light, The
President's Agenda.
Bob Woodward, The Agenda
(this is an easy, quick read – on
February 13.
Congress and Public Policy
Rapporteur:_______________________
Congress, of course, has whole courses in most political
science departments, and we can capture only some of the issues here. We'll do
our best. We take both an institutional approach (see Polsby, Martin and
Shepsle) and a representational approach (see Miller and Stokes).
Required:
David Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection [C]
Warren Miller and Donald E. Stokes, "Constituency Influence in Congress," APSR (1963): 45‑56. (C) Maybe not very sophisticated today, but one of the most brilliant articles in political science.
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 12.
Nelson W. Polsby, "The Institutionalization of the US
House of Representatives," in Lee Benson, et al, eds., American Political Behavior (originally
in APSR). (C)
Morris Fiorina, Congress:
Keystone of the
Andrew D. Martin, “Congressional
Decision Making and the Separation of Powers,” APSR 95(June, 2001):361-78.
Recommended:
Aage Clausen, How
Congressmen Decide.
Gary Jacobson, The
Electoral Origins of Divided Government.[C]
John W. Kingdon, Congressmen's Voting Decisions.
David Mayhew, Divided We Govern. (C)
Charles O. Jones,
Separate But Equal Branches.
February 20.
Presidents and Public Policy.
Rapporteur:_________________________
I would have a hard time connecting anything I know about the policy literature to the literature on the presidency ‑‑ but it sure is an interesting literature. Neustadt is a classic, par excellence. Skowronek's is probably the most important recent book on the presidency. Would that someone would write a book called the "policies that presidents make."
Required:
Samuel Kernell, Going
Richard Neustadt, Presidential
Power, selection on reserve. (C)
Duane M. Oldfield and Aaron Wildavsky, "Reconsidering the
Two Presidencies" On
Reserve.
Richard Rose, The Post
Modern President, 2nd ed., 1991, ch. 1.
US v. Nixon (1974).
Stephen Skowronek, The
Politics Presidents Make (1993), pp. 3‑32. [C]
Gary Alan Fine, "Reputational Entrepreneurs and He Memory
of Incompetence: Melting
Supporters, Partisan Warriors, and Images of President
Harding," American Journal of
Sociology, 101(1996):
1159‑93. He was our worst American president—as political scientists
and historians agree. Here a sociologist says "not so
fast."
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 14.
George Edwards and B. Dan Wood. (1999).
“Who Influences Whom? The President and the Public Agenda.” American
Political Science Review. 93(2): 327-344.
Recommended:
Charles Jones, The
Presidency in a Separated System.
Gary King and Lyn Ragsdale, The Elusive Executive: Discovering Statistical Patterns in
the
Presidency. Storehouse of quantitative data on presidents.
James Pfiffner, The Strategic Presidency.
George C. Edwards, Presidential
Approval. The standard book on
presidential popularity.
Richard Neustadt, Presidential
Power and the Modem Presidency (the new version of his classic Presidential Power)(C)
Paul Light, The
President's Agenda.
Forrest McDonald, The
American Presidency: An Intellectual History.
February 27:
Budgets
Rapporteur:________________________
The last time I did this course (spring 2000), I began this
section with the following introduction: “Now we have a balanced budget, even
one in surplus.” Silly me. This section introduces the budget process,
describes how we spend a nearly a third of our GDP, and focuses on a case study
of social security.
Required
(general):
Aaron Wildavsky and Naomi Caiden, The New Politics of the Budgetary Process. (C), 4th ed. ch. 1 and 8.
William Jacoby, “Issue Framing and
Public Opinion on Government Spending,” AJPS, 44(October 2000):750-67.
Arthur Sanders, "Rationality, Self‑Interest, and
Public Attitudes on Public Spending," SSQ,
1988, pp. 311‑324.
OMB, “A Citizen’s Guide to the Federal Budget,” available at OMB website (2002 version).
David Stockman, The
Triumph of Politics, ch. 12.
Theda Skocpol, "
Required (case study): Reforming Social Security
Lyle Gramlich, “Different Approaches for Dealing with Social
Security,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(Summer 1996):55-66.
President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security, “Strengthening
Social Security and Creating Personal Wealth for Americans,” final report,
Shylvester J. Schieber and John B. Shoven, The Real Deal:
The History and Future of Social Security, pp. 3-25.
Peter Orszag and Robert Greenstein, “Voluntary Individual
Accounts for Social Security: What Are
the Costs?” Council on Budget and Policy Priorities, www.cbpp.org.
Recommended:
Robert Eisner, How Real
is the Federal Deficit? Not very, Eisner says.
Alan Schick, The
Capacity to Budget, 1990.
Martha Derthick, Uncontrollable
Spending for Social Programs, 1975.
This is the book which introduced the concept of uncontrollable
spending.
Michael J. Graetz, The
Jeffrey Birnbaum and Alan S. Murray, Showdown at Gucci Gulch: Lawmakers, Lobbyists and the Unlikely Triumph
of Tax Reform, 1987. Easy read book
on tax reform in the Reagan administration.
March 6.
Courts and Policy
Rapporteur:___________________
Everyone concedes that American courts are more powerful than
any in the world. Some think they have been more powerfu1 than ever in American
politics (though it would be hard to
match Marbury v.
Required:
Marbury v.
Robert A. Dahl, "The Supreme Court as National Policy
Maker," (c) APSR on reserve.
Tracy E. George and Lee Epstein, "On the Nature of
Supreme Court Decision-Making,'' APSR, 86(1992):323‑337.
Donald Horowitz, The
Courts and Social Policy, pp. 255‑84.
Gregory Caldeira and John R Wright, "Organized Interests
and Agenda Setting in the
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 15.
Philip K. Howard, The
Death of Common Sense: How Law is Suffocating
(1974), pp. 3‑29.
Darrell Steffensmeier and
Recommended:
Henry Abraham, Justices
and Presidents.
Jeffrey Segal and
Harold J. Spaeth, “The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of
March 20.
Bureaucracies and Interest Groups
Rapporteur:____________________________
This is such an amalgam of research that I am inclined to call
it just “research about the Beltway."
The idea here is that policymaking is not just about presidents and congress,
but about a complex interaction of elected officials, plus bureaucracies (who
may have their own logic) and interest groups.
Journalists—William Greider, Kevin Phillips, Thomas Edsall ‑‑
and many others write regularly and seriously about it. Today, it's more, much
more, than the classic study of Weberian bureaucracies. Here is where we read a
bit on regulatory policy, too.
Required:
Max Weber “On Bureaucracy.” (C)
M. Lipsky “Street Level
Bureaucracies” (C)
Kenneth J. Meier, “Bureaucracy and Democracy: The Case for
More Bureaucracy and Less Democracy,” Public Administration Review,
57(May-June, 1997):193-99.
Frank Baumgartner and Beth L. Leech, Basic Interests: The
Importance of Groups in Politics and
Political Science.
Hugh Heclo, "Issue Networks and the Executive
Establishment," in Anthony King, ed.
The New American Political System,
1978. (C)
Jack L. Walker, "The Origin and Maintenance of Interest
Groups in
June 1983. (C)
Susan and Martin Tolchin, Dismantling
Kip Viscusi "Economic Foundations of the Current
Regulatory Reforms," Journal of
Economic
Perspectives, Summer, 1996: 119‑34.
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 13.
McCubbins, Matthew D., and Thomas Schwartz. “Congress Oversight Overlooked: Police
Patrols versus Fire Alarms.” American
Journal of Political Science.
29(1984):165-179.
Recommended:
Leonard W. Weiss and Michael W. Klass, eds., Regulatory Reform.
James Q. Wilson, Regulation.
Theodore Lowi, Interest Group Liberalism.
March
27. Policy Design and Implementation
Rapporteur:________________________
The idea that policy should be "designed" seems a
pretty good one. There are “Designer jeans" and “Designer genes." In
a society which spends more money marketing Moulin
Rouge than in investigating what a policy should do and be like, this seems
a sensible idea. Design, if there is any, presumably happens before a policy
gets enacted. Implementation happens after. The Pressman‑Wildavsky volume
single‑handedly created the field of policy implementation. The case
study here is the spotted owl and, by implication, the environmental policy
system. I'm going to make the argument that the endangered species act was the
worst public policy in the history of the
Required
(general):
Jeffrey Pressman and Aaron Wildavsky, Implementation, pp. xi‑xv, 1‑ó, ch. 5. (C)
Anne L. Schneider and Helen Ingram, Policy Design and
Democracy, ch. 3-7.
Richard E. Matland, "Synthesizing the Implementation
Literature: The Ambiguity‑Conflict Model of Policy Implementation" Journal of Public Administration Research
and Theory, 5(1995):145‑174.
Required (case Study): The Spotted Owl Problem
Richard Tobin, The
Expendable Future (1990), pp. 15-47.
Charles C. Mann and Mark L. Plummer, "The Butterfly
Problem,"
New York Times, "Owls,
Trees and People."
Andrew Metrick and Martin L. Weitzman. “Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity
Preservation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12 (Summer 1998): 21-34.
William R. Freudenberg, Lisa J. Wilson, and Daniel J. O’Leary,
“Forty Years of Spotted Owls: A Longitudinal Analysis of Logging Industry Job Losses,”
Sociological Perspectives 91(1998):1-26.
Bjorn Lomborg, The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring
the
Recommended:
Daniel Mazmanian and Paul Sabatier, Implementation and Public Policy.
Paul Sabatier, "Top Down and Bottom Up Approaches to
Implementation Research," Journal of
Public Policy, 6:21‑48. A
classic on implementation research and thinking.
Malcolm Goggin, et al., Implementation
Theory and Practice: Toward a Third Generation, 1990.
Martha Feldman, Order
without Design.
Stephen H. Linder and B. Guy Peters, "Perspectives on the
Design of Public Policy," in Dennis Palumbo and Donald J. Colister, eds., Implementation and the Policy Process.
April 3.
Policy Distribution.
Rapporteur:______________________
Anthony Downs, William Riker, and the average person on the
street believe that politicians reward their supporters and punish their
opponents by distributing benefits or burdens of public policy. Or do they?
Machiavelli actually advised against this strategy. How do benefits and burdens
in the political system get distributed? Does "them that has gets"?
When you control a third of the GDP and have an sorts of regulations and laws,
you get to have a big say in "who gets what when how" - Lasswell's
classic definition of "politics."
Part of the point here is that government makes all sorts of decisions
which distribute and redistribute – almost entirely without our having those
questions explicitly on the policy agenda.
Required
(general):
Bruce Ray, “Congressional Promotion of District
Interests," in Barry Rundquist, ed., Political
Benefits.
Mark Rank and
Thomas Hirschl, “Rags or Riches: Estimating the Probabilities of Poverty and
Affluence across the Adult Life Span,” SSQ 82(December 2001): 651-69.
Steven Rhodes, “How
Much Should We Spend to Save a Life?" The
Public Interest, Spring, 1978.
Benjamin Page and James R. Simmons, What Government can Do:
Dealing with Poverty and Inequality, pp. 125-55.
Robert Blank, Rationing
Medicine, chapter 3.
Kenneth J. Meier, Joseph Stewart and Robert England, "The
Politics of Bureaucratic Discretion: Educational Access as an Urban
Service," AJPS, 35(1991):155‑77.
Kenneth N. Bickers and Robert M. Stein, "The Electoral
Dynamics of the Federal Pork Barrel" AJPS, November, 1996: 1300‑26.
Required (case study): Welfare Reform (TBA)
April 10.
Policy Analysis and Evaluation.
Rapporteur:_________________
Wouldn't it be loverly if we could spend as much deciding
whether a policy would work or accomplish its goals as we spend test marketing
a new potato chip brand? What policy
evaluation tries to do – post hoc – is assess the performance of a policy. Policy evaluation can become quite cranky –
often finding that policies do not work as their proponents had hoped or their
opponents had feared. The centerpiece here, though, is the classic Don Campbell
article on "Reforms as Experiments.”
Required
(general):
Donald T. Campbell, "Reforms as Experiments," American Psychologist. (C)
Richard Nathan, Social Science in Government: The Role of Policy
Researchers, pp. 3-33.
Charles Lindblom, Inquiry and Change,
ch. 9.
Evan J. Ringquist, "Does Regulation Matter? Evaluating
the Effects of State Air Pollution Control Programs," JOP (1993).
David Weimer and Aiden Vining, Policy Analysis, read
ch. 1, skim ch. 8.
David Greenberg, et al., “The Social Experiment Market,” Journal of Economic Perspectives,
13(Summer 1999): 157-172.
Harry Holzer and David Neumark, “Assessing Affirmative
Action,” Journal of Economic Literature, 38(September 2000):483-568,
skim this.
Required (case study): Controlling Crime
Kevin B. Smith, "Explaining Variation in State‑Level
Homicide Rates: Does Crime Policy Pay?" JOP (1997).
Langbein article on guns - SSQ
Tony Pate, et al, The
Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment (on reserve)
April 24.
The New Political Economy Debate: Markets vs. the Rule of Law.
Rapporteur:
Here is one of the key issues – if not the key issue - of both real world politics and the social sciences today. How much should we rely on the market as conservatives would want versus how much should we use “rule of law" mechanisms, or what Schultze calls command and control policies? Maybe we should privatize everything in sight, including the schools. Almost nothing splits conservatives and liberals more than this issue in this country and abroad. Hirshman and Okun are short but powerful books, which anyone who wants to understand politics and economics from a policy perspective will find essential.
Required
(general):
Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Bonchek, Analyzing Politics, ch. 10, skim 8-9.
Albert O. Hirshman, Exit,
Voice, and Loyalty (C)
Arthur Okun, Equality
and Efficiency. (C)
Charles Lindblom, Politics
and Markets, 65‑89. (C)
Max Neiman, "The Virtue of Heavy‑Handedness in
Government," Law and Policy
Quarterly, 1980, pp. 11‑14.
E. S. Savas, Privatization,
introduction. Savas is something of
a “godfather” of the privatization movement.
Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, pp. 7-37. (c)
Required (case study): School Choice
John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe, "Politics, Markets and
the Organization of Schools," APSR (1988).
Gregory Weiher and Kent
L. Tedin, “Does Choice Lead to Racially Distinctive Schools?
Selection from Witte on
Richard Arum, “Do Private Schools Force Public Schools to
Compete?” American Sociological Review 61(1996:29-46.
Recommended:
John Chubb and Terry Moe, Politics, Market’s and
Jeffrey Henig. Rethinking School Choice.
Max Neiman, Defending Government.
Charles Schultze, The Public Use of Private Interest.
Martin and Susan Tolchin.
Dismantling