Public Policy (Chapter 4)

Definition: "A has power over B to the extent that A can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do."
- This definition highlights the relational nature of power, emphasizing that it exists only in interactions.
- Power involves influence, not merely coercion.
- Power can be observed through behavioral outcomes, showing its effects in real-world situations.

Challenge: The key question is: How can power be studied systematically?
- Dahl’s Approach:
- Focus on observable behavior to gauge power dynamics.
- Identify who prevails in decision-making situations to understand power distribution.
- Assess changes in actions that result from different influences.
- Example: In a city council setup, analysis might consider which members’ proposals receive the most acceptance, indicating their influence.

Concept: Power is exercised through decisions.
- Key Idea: Those who frequently succeed in decision-making scenarios hold more power.
- Example: For instance, if a CEO consistently leads the board to approve their policies, it demonstrates their authoritative power within the organization.

Core Concept: Power is not limited to coercion; it also encompasses influence.
- Methods of Exercising Power:
- Persuasion: Convincing others to share a viewpoint or take action.
- Incentives: Offering rewards to encourage compliance with demands.
- Sanctions: Implementing penalties for failure to comply with directives.
- Example: A teacher motivating students to perform by using grades as rewards instead of punishment showcases the use of influence over force.

Limitations: Dahl’s view may be considered too narrow in scope.
- Major Critiques:
- It solely focuses on observable conflicts without addressing the unseen dynamics.
- It overlooks agenda-setting, which entails the power that prevents issues from being discussed.
- It neglects structural power, which refers to systemic advantages (e.g., economic inequality).
- Example: A media company's control over news topics illustrates this power dynamic in practice.

Bachrach & Baratz (Two Faces of Power): They argue that power includes the ability to set agendas and make decisions non-transparently.
Lukes (Three-Dimensional Power): His perspective posits that power can shape preferences and social norms.
- Example: Political elites who frame debates to crucially limit certain policies highlight how influential power dynamics operate.

Where It Works Well:
- It is effective for studying political decision-making in democratic frameworks.
- Useful for analyzing voting behaviors in legislative bodies, marking visible power dynamics.
Where It Falls Short:
- In understanding hidden power dynamics that influence outcomes without overt expression.
- Fails to capture long-term systemic inequalities affecting marginalized groups.
- Example: Examining voting records in Congress versus lobbying influences helps illustrate this distinction.

Main Argument: The one-dimensional view simplifies power to visible, overt decision-making conflicts.
Limitation: It disregards the methods through which power is utilized to prevent conflicts from arising initially.
- Example: Consider the Civil Rights Movement pre-1950s, where issues of racial discrimination were stifled from public discourse through legal barriers (e.g., voter suppression laws) and normative social pressures dissuading debate.

Definition: Power extends beyond decision-making to include the capability to prevent discussions on decisions.
- Key Components:
- Decision-Making Power: Identifying who wins in direct conflicts (traditional viewpoint).
- Agenda-Setting (Non-Decision-Making Power): Examining who determines the topics for public debate.
- Example: Corporate lobbying in environmental policy illustrates how corporations can inhibit specific environmental regulations from entering legislative discourse through financial influence, without visible conflict.

Functions:
- Suppressing potential political issues and grievances from gaining formal recognition.
- Controlling public debate by influencing media narratives and institutional discourse to avoid discussion.
Mechanisms Used:
- Bureaucratic obstacles, such as restrictive voting laws.
- Social norms and stigmatization that discourage debates (e.g., issues related to LGBTQ+ rights historically).
- Economic pressures where advertisers may withdraw support from media outlets that cover sensitive topics.
- Example: In the Women’s Suffrage Movement during the 19th century, women's rights were often dismissed as “not a political issue,” hindering their incorporation into legislative agendas.

Expanding Political Research: Scholars are encouraged to broaden their perspective to consider hidden mechanisms of power.
- Investigating Latent Conflicts: Studying why certain issues fail to find traction in political discussion.
Challenges in Measuring Hidden Power:
- It poses a question of how to identify power that operates to make conflicts invisible.
- Researchers need to develop methods to uncover suppressed political issues.
- Example: In the gig economy, workers often lack traditional labor protections, as their rights and grievances are systematically marginalized from significant policy discussions due to corporate interests.

Challenges to the Two-Dimensional View:
- A critical question arises on how to empirically demonstrate that an issue was intentionally suppressed.
- Not all omissions from the political agenda can be attributed to power; some might arise simply from apathy.
Further Research Questions:
- How does media ownership affect which political topics receive attention?
- In what ways do dominant ideologies influence perceptions regarding what is deemed "worthy" of debate?
- Example: The discussion around healthcare reform shows that certain models (e.g., universal healthcare) often remain outside of mainstream dialogue despite public support, largely due to the healthcare industry's lobbying efforts.