week 10 environment

I believe we live in an ever pressing time in history where the environment is a key policy area which must be carefully developed. We have had several administrations that have caused awareness and have laid the foundation to further pursue environmental equity and efficiency, and safeguard global issues. What I find intriguing within environmental policy is the notion of the global approach and equitable reforms. I find it hard to believe that nation’s that do not have the resources that more developed nations will contribute to securing policy measures that support other nations. Basically because their concerns may not be of the same, nation a maybe directing its resources towards a policy area they feel is important, while nation B is trying to regulate air emissions. Both nations may need to regulate air emissions, but not necessarily share the same goals or responsibility. And of responsibility, how can nations reach accord and agreement on something like air quality, how they for certain tell who is responsible for what, even with advanced technology, there is still room for question within it? In this regard is where I feel it is definitely easy to see that environmental policy has a dynamic that makes a concept not as feasible as other policy concepts, it does not lend itself to easy comparative study, and or measure. Although we can develop theories through comparative measure, the environmental landscape and quality within each nation is different and unique with other issues of impact upon them, that create a complex issue, although it may be the same issue, be uniquely examined and solved.

Don't get me wrong, if we can reach compacts and treaties with other nations and create a feasible global landscape of policy that protects the environment I am all for it. In fact I really liked what Adolino & Blake state, "This phenomenon...known as globalization of the environment...This awareness has resulted in the development of a substantial number of international agreements," (Adolino & Blake, 2010, pp. 372). I believe we point to a general systemic agenda overall for the protection of resources worldwide, but it will take the efforts of the more developed countries to aid the total effort because less developed nations have more pressing issues on their plate, not that the environment is not of major importance, but some nations are on the more essential levels of necessities. Thus, fiscal resources and policy development may in fact continue on an incremental path, also due to the fact that technology development is needed in a lot of phases of environmental policy, and be positioned by the influence of the developed nations across the global stage.

References:

Adolino, Jessica R. & Blake, Charles H. (2010). Comparing Public Policies: Issues and Choices in Industrialized Countries. Washington D.C.: CQ Press

week 9 education

Education in the United Sates is quite an interesting operation. It is intriguing on one end as to the curriculum practiced, and the policies developed to promote such policy and factoring in as well is the policy to provide access and opportunity to education. At the very root of U.S. education policy, if there is such a platform, rests upon the Constitution, as Adolino & Blake state, "education is a state responsibility," (Adolino & Blake, 2010, pp. 322). Fiscal responsibility rests upon property tax primarily, and some federal mandates to create level opportunity throughout (pp. 322). This approach seems destined to be a haves and have not type scenario, that is because more affluent sectors of the population will invest in their children's education, while lower income sectors cannot; creating un-equal opportunity. Although there exist federal money to aid schools, it is not enough because there are still clear scenarios where access, curriculum, and stakeholders will be biased on varying levels. I would argue that the main difference that affects U.S. education policy as opposed to other developed countries would the decentralization of power; there is no direct authority that dictates where resources should be and what policy to fully integrate. I would also argue that the U.S. focuses more so on k-12 because these grades based education years are seen as a basic need provided, a high school diploma, or GED IS the benchmark or basic measure most people use to assure themselves of basic life necessities like a job to provide for themselves and or family. Higher education is a selection and excellence measure (pp. 327). In other words the strife to reach higher education in the U.S. by many is seen as either a hurdle that cannot be accomplished, or a criteria that most be possessed in order to have access. This differs from other perspectives where higher education, as stated by Adolino & Blake state, "Education policy is a domain in which countries are very protective of their national sovereignty and in which a high degree of policy flexibility and independence is maintained," (pp. 329).
Being a teacher in our society is a quality career choice, but most see it as being relatively low paid. The policy choices that impact teachers are a direct impact to the way can be successful in educating. Teachers have small room for error when it comes to delivery of education goals, they must follow state policy and achieve goals to help further fund their respective districts and institutions, so the pressure is steep. Coincidentally students also feel the pressure because the quality of education they receive rests upon performance of their fellows, district, and selves to charter a course to keep funding their efforts. Policy is centered steeply on fiscal concepts, instead of necessity and future value of educated innovators changing and creating better societies. The future sees little change within this policy topic, and like most other policy will only change incrementally. My main reason would be that the system of education is too large to be overhauled, so much is vested in public schooling, and the daily routine of life revolves around what we are accustomed to that any major changes would seem to be more of a disrupt than as improvement. So if it is to be reformed it would have to do so over time, incrementally, and with attention to other policy areas it will affect.

References:

Adolino, Jessica R. & Blake, Charles H. (2010). Comparing Public Policies: Issues and Choices in Industrialized Countries. Washington D.C.: CQ Press

Week 8 assignment 7

At the heart of this immigration debate is a real chance to develop policy that can impact, positively, domestically and nationally. Immigration is an issue which has no simple resolve, in particular becasue it is an issue that is intermestic (Rose, 2007, pp. 4). Rose states, "While politicians remain responsible to a national electorate for economic conditions, these conditions are increasingly influenced by the movement of goods, services, and money across national borders," (pp. 4). The Arizona legislature passed Senate Bill 1070, and recently there was its limited, by judicial review, implementation. Although Arizona has stepped up and created action, in my opinion did so hastily. More importantly,and at the center of the debate, the legislation was drafted without careful thought to the delivery, meaning, and implementation of its core initiatives. No one debates that immigration policy needs to be reformed, but it most be done so from a careful and studious policy directive inclusive of impacting factors. What I feel hurt this legislation the most was the application of knowledge (pp. 5). A faction of Arizona legislation, and Governor Brewer's administration marched forth quickly and with no regard to the people who this legislation would impact. The target, well described, by many dergrees of demographics, but this violates civil rights, not to mention human rights. No argument, illegal is illegal, but the legislation does not have any stipulation as to the families, children, and in general the socio-economic factors that exist within our society for these people. Lives and families would crumble at every turn, and how would we deal with that as it is happening? Thus this policy fails to take into account important policy criteria to make it succesful and deliver a true impact that does not de-stabilize civil and societal norms in the communities in Arizona.

What seems key to this issue is the demand for cheap labor, and its availability. The economic conditions in Mexico force the decison to make the sacrifice to illegally come to the U.S. Yet, we may only be speculating and seeing a singula rperspective. What needs to remedied is a decison across a National policy as to what immigration policy is defined as. Ther in the policy action that can be taken to enforce its purpose. This would be the first step needed before state's could develop their own policy stipulations. What would be key is to undertand what our current population of immigration needs and can we provide it to them by legal measures, and help them create legal opportunities domestically. From then we need to collaborate with forieng governments and design joint policy that enables and alleviates problems that create illegal immigration to and fro. Can we reform the process by which to apply for entry? what problems currently exist that do not address the purveyors and people who choose to immigrate illegally? Then we must consider case by case what circumstances exist to those already here, can we help, or are they creating additional problems? Then we can really develop an overly encompassing policy. It must be multi-faceted not all cases are equal or of similar circumstances, so our policy must be able to create flexibility.

Along with some of this recommendaton I would urge Gov. Brewer to keep pressuring the Federal legislature for immigration reform. At the same adopt a coalition of stateS that support reform to keep pressuring and jointly discuss develop, research, and draft alternatives to the current system. Develop smilar relationship with Mexico and foreign nations who have support to reform, or have an interest in the issue. The more alternatives that can be drafted, the more possibility of creating one that does addres the issue whole-heartedly. Although this issue is long standing, if we remember we must be prpeared for incremental changes over periods of time. This too Brewer did not take into account, a complete overhaul to immigration and a sweep of its violators can not work, it disrupts the status quo to abruptly and chaotically for legal and illegals. Minor changes, and analytical attention to those changes and helping improve the agenda, from a Federal mandate, will be key.

My final point and alternative would be to consider our different forms of immigration policy, in particular humanitarian. AIt has been suggested that illegal immigration limits citizenry access to our very own resources such as work and welfare. Well, we know that there illegal immigrants and we know where they are, why not instead of wasting financial and political resources on eliminating the problem, we use them to reform the problem, and create better relationships. We could develop policy that has postentry controls (Adolino & Blake. 2010, pp. 104). Seems less time consuming, and would lessen the burden on revamping an entire society to new socio-economic trends. why not reward the immigrants who are working towards a better life, seems that that is their goal. We could view their economic hardships in their home country as type of asylum or refugee clause, it is not imminently life threatening to them, but in the long term it could be if conditions do not improve, which it seems don't.


References:

Adolino, Jessica R. & Blake, Charles H. (2010). Comparing Public Policies: Issues and Choices in Industrialized Countries. Washington D.C.: CQ Press

Rose, R. (2007). Learning from Comparative Public Policy: A Practical Guide. New York:Routledge