Question 1 No one entity or public servant can do a job alone. Teamwork, collaboration, and coordination are key elements in public service. The local government is dependent on state agencies and or neighboring jurisdictions as well as funding from the national level. Conversely, federal authorities often rely on local and state entities to manage or maintain programs at the grassroots level. Discuss the central importance of coordination among public agencies (Chapter 4). What is it and why is it often important? What are some of the factors that might undermine or strengthen efforts to improve coordination? (As always, you can employ real-world examples to bring this concept to life.) Question 2 Based on the reading, outline the types of grants that may be available to state and local government. Research two specific grant programs that would be available to an emergency management organization at the state or local level from another level of government. Explain the uses of the grants and the specifications for utilizing the funding. Please provide references in APA format. Question 3 Your response to the question below should be at least one brief paragraph. Describe the main two models of bureaucracy and elements of each model. Provide an explanation as to which model you find is most effectively used in public administration. Question 4 Your response to each question below should be at least one brief paragraph. a.) Identify two theories of organizational behavior and provide the key differences. (At least one paragraph) b.) How is modern organizational theory different and provide rationale as to if it is better or worse in practice? (At least one paragraph) Question 5 Your response to each question below should be at least one brief paragraph. Communication and interagency coordination are crucial in emergency management. a.) Outline the components of communication and provide a real-world example of how communication worked effectively and ineffectively between different levels of government, departments, and agencies in a crisis situation. (At least one paragraph) b.) Provide at least one recommendation to improve communication. (At least one paragraph) Add ( 10 on this scince advanced 10 was paid) Response one pol-3 The relationship between the President of the United States and the American party system is one of great complexity. Unlike a Prime Minister or Parliament style government, the President is chosen from the electoral base; rather than their own political party (Wiesehomeier, 2009). This major difference can either be a good thing or a burden for a President, depending on how they lead and utilize tools at their disposal. For example, the art of flip flopping. Generally the term has a negative connotation and is used by the media to convey an unstable or lying leader. It is normal to have leaders change their positions on subjects depending on changing variables or additional information given to them af ...

1. Question 1
No one entity or public servant can do a job alone. Teamwork,
collaboration, and coordination are key elements in public
service. The local government is dependent on state agencies
and or neighboring jurisdictions as well as funding from the
national level. Conversely, federal authorities often rely on
local and state entities to manage or maintain programs at the
grassroots level.
Discuss the central importance of coordination among public
agencies (Chapter 4). What is it and why is it often important?
What are some of the factors that might undermine or strengthen
efforts to improve coordination? (As always, you can employ
real-world examples to bring this concept to life.)
Question 2
Based on the reading, outline the types of grants that may be
available to state and local government. Research two specific
grant programs that would be available to an emergency
management organization at the state or local level from another
level of government. Explain the uses of the grants and the
specifications for utilizing the funding. Please provide
references in APA format.
Question 3
Your response to the question below should be at least one brief
paragraph.
Describe the main two models of bureaucracy and elements of
each model. Provide an explanation as to which model you find
is most effectively used in public administration.
Question 4
Your response to each question below should be at least one
brief paragraph.
a.) Identify two theories of organizational behavior and provide

2. the key differences. (At least one paragraph)
b.) How is modern organizational theory different and provide
rationale as to if it is better or worse in practice? (At least one
paragraph)
Question 5
Your response to each question below should be at least one
brief paragraph.
Communication and interagency coordination are crucial in
emergency management.
a.) Outline the components of communication and provide a
real-world example of how communication worked effectively
and ineffectively between different levels of government,
departments, and agencies in a crisis situation. (At least one
paragraph)
b.) Provide at least one recommendation to improve
communication. (At least one paragraph)
Add ( 10 on this scince advanced 10 was paid)
Response one pol-3
The relationship between the President of the United States and
the American party system is one of great complexity. Unlike a
Prime Minister or Parliament style government, the President is
chosen from the electoral base; rather than their own political
party (Wiesehomeier, 2009). This major difference can either be
a good thing or a burden for a President, depending on how they
lead and utilize tools at their disposal. For example, the art of
flip flopping. Generally the term has a negative connotation and
is used by the media to convey an unstable or lying leader. It is
normal to have leaders change their positions on subjects
depending on changing variables or additional information
given to them after their initial stance. The difference between
being labeled a “flip flopper” is based on the frequency of
changes and the basis for the change (Ruane, 2008). If the
change in position was purely made to appease voters and gain
the popularity to win an election, the perception from the public

3. is generally of one that is not positive(Ruane, 2008). If the
change of position is one that may be considered unpopular or
away from the “base”, it may be perceived as a change of heart
(Ruane, 2008). Another key component to consider is what
external factors may be going on in the Country or the world
that would welcome a changed mind. Meaning, if the Country is
going through hard times economically, things are stale or
stagnant, the public generally will welcome a change in policy
or direction, it signals efforts to improve the desperate times
(Ruane, 2008).
President Lincoln was known to change his mind on several
major subjects, most notably his position on slavery. Although
these changes President Lincoln made could easily be labeled as
“flip flopping”, that is not how history portrays them or how
President Lincoln thought of them; rather, they were changes
necessary to secure victories (Ruane, 2008). So again, the
common thread was that the changes were not for political
gains, but for the betterment of the people. At times, Presidents
try to convey to the American people that their stance is for the
betterment of the people and that is why they are breaking from
their political party, sometimes referred to as a “maverick”.
How this is perceived is based on the delivery that is given and
what external circumstances are going on in the Country.
Meaning, if the President’s stance and his/her party’s stance
was to cut taxes on the corporations and raise middle class
taxes, yet the economy is struggling, the President could “flip
flop” and leave is party’s views to appease the people. As
covered in our lesson this week, much of this subject boils
down to public opinion and how the President speaks to the
people (Grulke, 2018 ). I believe we are in a transition, much
like how Teddy Roosevelt and FDR pioneered new technology
for connecting to the people, social media is adding a whole
new dynamic to this already complex system.
References
Grulke, Eric, “Week 2: Models of Presidential Leadership,”
American Military University,

4. accessed January 8,
2018, https://edge.apus.edu/portal/site/366584/tool/ac046166-
37b2-492d-8e6e-b208146732e9.
Ruane, Janet M., and Karen A. Cerulo. "The Forum: Second
Thoughts on Presidential Politics."
Sociological Forum 23, no. 4 (2008): 852-60.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40210393.
Wiesehomeier, Nina, and Kenneth Benoit. "Presidents, Parties,
and Policy Competition." The Journal of
Politics 71, no. 4 (2009): 1435-447.
doi:10.1017/s0022381609990193.
Response two pol-03
The concept that the relationship of the president to the
American party system is difficult has been true since the
beginning of our country's history and is true today. The
juxtaposition of the ideas and agendas of the parties and the
president has been helpful in our democracy to keep checks and
balances on power, but it has also been problematic in getting
things accomplished.
No president has been immune to the fights with and against the
parties, and Calvin Coolidge was not an exception. Coolidge's
entrance into office came with tensions. As the Vice President
of the United States, Coolidge assumed the role of president at
the death of Harding and inherited the distrust and divisions,
even within his own Republican party, that the scandals of the
Harding era wrought. His road to amicable working relations
with the Congress was exceptionally difficult because he
decided to keep most of Harding's cabinet members (Shlaes
2013).
Coolidge saw the government as bloated and held a personal
position of minimizing the size of government and reducing
taxes as part of his tenure in office (Shogan 2006, 218). This
stance was not popular in the Progressive era among either of
the political parties, and Coolidge had to craft his own way in
working around the Congress to successfully implement his
agenda. To do this he positioned himself, as our required

5. reading suggests, toward the median of the parties.
In simple Downsian terms, presidents therefore face strategic
incentives to position themselves closer to the national median
voter in order to garner the necessary votes. Accountable to
the electorate and not to a party as in parliamentary systems,
and capable of formulating and advancing an independent policy
agenda, presidents may feel that the exigencies of leadership
compel them to adopt a "Burkean posture" of ignoring partisan
mandates for the "good of the nation ( Wiesehomeier 2009,
1436).
One primary focus of Coolidge's presidency was his support of
the Mellon Tax Reform Act, economic reform and the reduction
of the income surtaxes to 25%, but this idea saw no real
opportunity for passing. "The Insurgent Republicans held the
balance of power in both houses of Congress and formed an
alliance with Democrats over income tax rates" (Murnane 2004,
835). So, Coolidge used technology and public opinion to
navigate the difficulties with the American party system. He
deliberately bypassed "the political machine by cultivating his
own personal popularity with the American people . . . Coolidge
continued to reinforce his ideological message with 520 press
conferences and 16 radio addresses" (Shogan 2006, 217). At
one of Coolidge's speeches before Congress in 1923, the gallery
even broke out in loud cheers for the Mellon Plan (Murnane
2009, 833). The trend of spoken popular presidential
communication that was precipitated by Coolidge is one that has
been pervasive in all of the twentieth and twenty-first century
technological advances and in the modern presidential political
machine (Pluta 2014, 339).
Coolidge recognized Mellon's initial concepts and passion for
tax reform, and allowed him, in good faith, as the Secretary of
the Treasury to spearhead the battle plan for passing legislation.
Therefore, Coolidge delegated many of the details for marketing
of the plan to Mellon who used written media of all sorts,
promoted through both corporate and public avenues, to keep
the idea of tax reform in the forefront of the minds of the

6. average American. He ran headlines in the New York
Times touting the benefits of the Mellon Plan, had menus in the
Pennsylvania Railroad system's dining cars endorse it, and had
"Vaudeville theaters set up lobby telegraph booths so that
messages could be sent to patrons' congressmen in support of
the Mellon Plan" (Murnane 2004, 833-843). One of Coolidge's
staunchest allies the, Saturday Evening Post, along with
the Literary Digest, helped propel the support of the Mellon
plan among its readers. One survey indicated that 1,479,470 out
of the 2,134,000 readers of the Digest favored it (Murnane
2004, 836).
Ultimately, the plan passed, and Coolidge's scheme for working
with difficulties in Congress and his strategic competence as a
president earned him a political victory in his favor.
Murnane, M. Susan (2004). "Selling Scientific Taxation: The
Treasury Department's Campaign for Tax Reform in the
1920s." Law & Social Inquiry, Volume: 29 Issue: 4 Page: 819-
856. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4469.2004.tb01077.x
Pluta, A. C. (2014). “Presidential Politics on Tour: George
Washington to Woodrow Wilson.” Congress & the Presidency,
41(3), 335-361.
http://ezproxy.apus.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/d
ocview/1628901256?accountid=8289
Shlaes, Amity (2013). "Q & A with Amity Shlaes" (video). C-
SPAN. Accessed January 18, 2018. https://www.c-
span.org/video/transcript/?id=8367
Shogan, Colleen J. (2006). "Coolidge and Reagan: The
Rhetorical Influence of Silent Cal on the Great
Communicator". Rhetoric & Public Affairs. Volume: 9 Issue: 2
Page: 215-234. DOI: 10.1353/rap.2006.0059
Wiesehomeier, Nina and Kenneth Benoit (2009). “Presidents,
Parties, and Policy Competition” The Journal of Politics Vol.
71, No. 4 (Oct., 2009), pp. 1435-1447
http://ezproxy.apus.edu/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1

7. 0.1017/s0022381609990193
Response three pol-03
Throughout history political parties have had a major impact on
the presidency, both negative and positive. They can help to
elevate a president or act as major barriers to political
legislation. “The party system, its growth, democratization and
nationalization, acted as an important exogenous force on the
presidency” (Pluta 2014, 337). This close relationship between
the president and political parties has been both industrious and
volatile. Acting as head of his national political party, the
president must be able to juggle a personal agenda along with
the demands of Congress and numerous other outside variables.
The president has to generate popular support for different
reforms and policies by using political ingenuity, using policy
positioning and media to influence the actions of political
groups.
Policy positioning is key to the success of the
presidency, “the presidential tendency to position himself closer
to the median party suggests a built-in tendency for coalition
building in presidential systems” (Wiesenhomeier and Benoit
2009, 1446). The president must try and place himself in a
position between two or more parties that regularly disagree on
nearly every important political decision. Presidents nearly
always require the voting power of the contending party in
order to achieve the goals of their agenda. There have been
various instances when the president’s associated party and the
majority of Congress were not one in the same, “the policy
position of the median party may therefore turn into a focal
point to accomplish the presidential agenda” (Wiesenhomeier
and Benoit 2009, 1436). Policy positioning is very important,
yet presidents that try and meet the demands of differing parties

8. can find that switching back and forth, or “flip-flopping”,
between matters of political relevance can have a negative
effect on popular support. When George H. W. Bush changed
his position from not implementing taxes to asking Congress for
tax revenue increases, he had made a major a decision which
many believe led to him losing the 1992 election (Ruane and
Cerulo 2008, 853).
The president may equally find in difficult when the
parties themselves change political positions. Historically, the
Democratic and Republican parties have changed ideologies on
very important political matters: foreign policy, domestic
economic policy, and national security. The 2012 Republican
nominee, Mitt Romney, promoted an interventionist stance on
foreign policy; yet the 2016 Republican nominee, Donald
Trump, promoted isolationism and proposed to first deal with
domestic issues over foreign ones (Lewis 2017, 57).
One of the most important factors that impacts the
relationship between the presidency and political parties is
media. The use of media has evolved from newspapers to radio,
to television, and finally the internet. The media has given
presidents an outlet to present their positions on important
political issues to the whole of the American public. During the
earlier years of our nation, President Monroe and President John
Tyler used the newspaper to increase their coverage and gain
nationwide attention (Pluta 2014, 338). Franklin Delano
Roosevelt used the radio to enter the homes of millions of
Americans, presenting himself as a personable and well-
articulated leader. During 1960 in a closely contested election,
John F. Kennedy was a part of the very first television
presentation of a presidential debate against Richard Nixon, he
was poised and presented himself as a calm and collected
candidate for the presidency. Donald Trump has created media
uproar by presenting himself and his position through the use of
the internet, much of which we are experiencing on a day to day
basis. The use of media can help to bridge the gap between the
president and political parties, swaying popular opinion and

9. reforming political party’s positions. Media can have both
positive and negative impacts, none of them more obvious than
in the case of President Clinton. During the earlier years of his
presidency, Bill Clinton used television entertainment, such as
the Arsenio Hall Show, to project himself as a president that
could relate a younger audience, while also increasing
popularity for his political agenda. By the end of his presidency
the media clearly turned against him, presenting him as a liar
during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The use of media can help
presidents gain popularity and press opposing parties to sway
political positions, or it can be used as ammunition by these
parties to create barriers for new legislation and reform
policies.
The difficulties between the president and the
American party system stretch back to the birth of our nation, it
is very clear that in order for presidents to achieve their
political agenda they must build a bridge to create a positive
relationship between multiple parties.
Works Cited
Lewis, Verlan. “The President and the Parties’ Ideologies: Party
Ideas about Foreign Policy since 1900”. Presidential Studies
Quarterly 47, no. 1 (2017): 27-61. Accessed January 15,
2018. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doi/10.1
111/psq.12345/epdf.
Pluta, Anne C. “Presidential Politics on Tour: George
Washington to Woodrow Wilson”. Congress and the Presidency
41, no.3 (2014): 335-361. Accessed January 17,
2018. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1628901256?accountid=8289.
Ruane, Janet M., and Karen A. Cerulo. "The Forum: Second
Thoughts on Presidential Politics." Sociological Forum 23, no.
4 (2008): 852-60. Accessed January 17,
2018. www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/stable/40210393.
Wiesehomeier, Nina and Kenneth Benoit. “Presidents, Parties,
and Policy Competition.” The Journal of Politics 71, no. 4

10. (2009): 1435-1447. Accessed January 18,
2018. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/stable/10.1017/s0
022381609990193.
< Previous ConversationNext Conversation >
Response four-pol-03
I thought that a discussion of the Two-Party System would be a
good place to start with this week’s discussion.
Did you know that as of 2004 that only fifteen nations have a
two-party system? For the years 1888 through 2000 the
Democrats have won thirteen presidential elections and the
Republicans sixteen. Let us now look at state level politics.
For many years the uppermost New England, North Dakota and
South Dakota were heavily Republican, while the South was
heavily Democratic.[1]
Elections at every level of government are structured as
pluralities, meaning that the winner who receives the most votes
is the winner. So, let us talk about the electoral college. In
every state but Maine and Nebraska, the candidate who wins the
most popular votes in a state wins all (bold and underline
added) of the state’s electoral votes. To have the ability to win
in the presidential election, you must appeal to a broad base of
people. So, as Wilson points out, this means that to win the
presidency, you need to be part of one party or another, else a

11. minority party (not to be confused with race or gender) in other
words, a third political party has no chance to win. Ross Perot
proved that. He divided the Republican vote and gave Bill
Clinton the needed avenue to win.[2] The process we have of
electing our officials is one reason that supports a two-party
system.[3] The other reason Wilson thinks we have a two-party
system is that voters will cast votes for those running for office
based on a particular issue and how they think that candidate
will handle it.[4]
The framers set up a system with the office of president as non-
partisan, so that different factions would not tear at the core of
government.[5] Eventually, the office of president developed
into partisan politics early on in the nineteenth century. This
was because this office was held to a standard by local and state
politics and then finally to Congress and not beholden to party
politics. The parties, however, worked locally and there was
seemingly a balance between state and local governments with
the federal government. Then comes the progressive movement
who thought that the way to run the government was with
administrators who were “trained” (my word) to run the
government. After that, FDR was able to get passed the
Executive Reorganization Act of 1939, which expanded
presidential power of the executive branch. What this did was
to enlarge the administrative part of the executive branch while
diminishing how political parties interacted with presidents and
agencies that were now run by professional administrators.
Milkis further posits that when these professional administrators
enlarge their importance, and entitlements are promoted as
“rights”, party politics suffers.[6]
How does party politics play out in real life during a
presidential campaign? I will use myself as an example of the
American party system. How do you whittle down a group of
seventeen candidates running for president to one? The
following comments are my own opinion: Carly Fiorina was the
best on budget, but could not win, so she was out for me. I
settled on Ben Carson once he threw his hat in the ring. The

12. unfortunate thing was that he was so mild, a true gentleman and
statesman, and that is what eventually took him out. Once Mr.
Carson was out, the next most conservative was Ted Cruz. He
blew himself out with some of his actions. That left Trump for
me. I speak for so many who are tired of working hard for
someone to get elected that will represent our views and that we
think is not part of the “party elite” (my words). Once they get
to Washington, they do the opposite of what they campaigned
on. Let me give you an example: I met Marco Rubio early on,
in person, when he was not known. I thought to myself, he is a
young JFK…articulate and well spoken. He ran as a
conservative and what did he do when he got into office? He
voted like a liberal, a big government Republican or an elite.
This happe4ned over and over and the grassroots was just plain
tired of it. That is where the Tea Party came from.
Over the years, the RNC, many times, has refused to help
conservative candidates, ignored them, or would not even give
them money to run a campaign. So, when Trump came along
and stood up to the RNC and the party elites, that lit a fire
under all of us in the grassroots to support a candidate who was
not afraid to speak up to them. That is party politics in a
nutshell and that is why the American Party system has been
difficult.
Trish
Bibliography:
Milkis, Sidney M., and Rhodes, Jesse H., “George W. Bush, the
Republican Party, and the “New” American Party System,”
(Speech delivered at the American Politics Workshop,
University of Virginia, September 30, 2005).
Wilson, James Q. and Dilulio, John J. Jr., “American
Government, Institutions and Policies”, Ninth Ed., Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 2004, 171 - 172.