Types of Public Policy Regulatory PolicyRegulatory policy is designed to limit the actions of persons or groups so as to protect the general public or a substantial portion of the public. For example, people are prohibited from selling certain drugs, polluting the air and water, and engaging in monopolistic business practices. One form of regulation simply focuses on illegal criminal activity; it is a crime to do certain things. State and local governments have special responsibilities in this area, and certain federal agencies, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, are active here as well. Another form of regulation focuses on American business and seeks to ensure fair and competitive practices. Indeed, the first major regulatory effort in this country came in 1887, when the federal government created the Interstate Commerce Commission to regulate the railroads. Similar regulatory agencies today monitor securities (Securities and Exchange Commission), commodity exchanges (Commodity Futures Trading Commission), and labor relations (National Labor Relations Board), among others. A modern regulatory area is concerned with access to certain goods available to the public generally, such as the airwaves (regulated by the Federal Communications Commission) or clean air and water (regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency). Other regulatory bodies focus on protecting health and safety in such areas as consumer protection (Consumer Product Safety Commission), air travel (Federal Aviation Administration), food (Food and Drug Administration), and workplace safety (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration). Although federal regulation of economic activities has seen several waves of growth through the past century (Ripley & Franklin, 1987), the last two decades have seen somewhat of a movement in the opposite direction. Late in the Carter administration and extending through the Reagan administration, there were several efforts to deregulate certain industries. The Civil Aviation Board was disbanded in 1984, and over the following decade significant areas of transportation, telecommunications, and banking were deregulated. Moreover, regulations were eliminated or enforcement slowed down in areas such as workplace, auto, and consumer products safety. During the 1990s, however, as many federal agencies relaxed their regulatory grip, a few attempted to expand their authority. The Environmental Protection Agency sought to set standards for pesticide and cancer risk, while the Occupational Safety and Health Administration created guidelines for reducing violent crime in retail locations open at night (Niskanen, 2001). The Food and Drug Administration attempted to expand its jurisdiction to the tobacco industry by establishing nicotine as a drug, which would have given federal regulators the power to control tobacco products. This move, however, was challenged by the tobacco companies, and in 2000 the Supreme Court ruled against the fed ...

1. Types of Public Policy
Regulatory PolicyRegulatory policy is designed to limit the
actions of persons or groups so as to protect the general public
or a substantial portion of the public. For example, people are
prohibited from selling certain drugs, polluting the air and
water, and engaging in monopolistic business practices. One
form of regulation simply focuses on illegal criminal activity; it
is a crime to do certain things. State and local governments
have special responsibilities in this area, and certain federal
agencies, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, are
active here as well. Another form of regulation focuses on
American business and seeks to ensure fair and competitive
practices. Indeed, the first major regulatory effort in this
country came in 1887, when the federal government created the
Interstate Commerce Commission to regulate the railroads.
Similar regulatory agencies today monitor securities (Securities
and Exchange Commission), commodity exchanges (Commodity
Futures Trading Commission), and labor relations (National
Labor Relations Board), among others.
A modern regulatory area is concerned with access to certain
goods available to the public generally, such as the airwaves
(regulated by the Federal Communications Commission) or
clean air and water (regulated by the Environmental Protection
Agency). Other regulatory bodies focus on protecting health and
safety in such areas as consumer protection (Consumer Product
Safety Commission), air travel (Federal Aviation
Administration), food (Food and Drug Administration), and
workplace safety (the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration).
Although federal regulation of economic activities has seen
several waves of growth through the past century (Ripley &
Franklin, 1987), the last two decades have seen somewhat of a
movement in the opposite direction. Late in the Carter
administration and extending through the Reagan

2. administration, there were several efforts to deregulate certain
industries. The Civil Aviation Board was disbanded in 1984,
and over the following decade significant areas of
transportation, telecommunications, and banking were
deregulated. Moreover, regulations were eliminated or
enforcement slowed down in areas such as workplace, auto, and
consumer products safety.
During the 1990s, however, as many federal agencies relaxed
their regulatory grip, a few attempted to expand their authority.
The Environmental Protection Agency sought to set standards
for pesticide and cancer risk, while the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration created guidelines for reducing violent
crime in retail locations open at night (Niskanen, 2001). The
Food and Drug Administration attempted to expand its
jurisdiction to the tobacco industry by establishing nicotine as a
drug, which would have given federal regulators the power to
control tobacco products. This move, however, was challenged
by the tobacco companies, and in 2000 the Supreme Court ruled
against the federal government, calling the FDA's attempt to
assert jurisdiction in this area “impermissible” (Kessler, 2001,
p. 384). These actions took place during the Clinton
administration, which focused its efforts on regulatory changes
in several areas, including the environment, corporate tax
shelters, civil rights, trade, transportation, the securities market,
banking, food, drugs, and health-care insurance. The
administration used its National Performance Review to
eliminate or rework a number of federal regulations.
Many of the regulatory activities undertaken by the George W.
Bush administration were in response to crises, resulting in
rules related to financial institutions, homeland security
procedures, corporate governance, and energy. Two other Bush
initiatives—No Child Left Behind and the addition of a drug
benefit to Medicare—also involved new regulatory programs
(DeMuth, 2011). The Bush administration also established two
sets of guidelines: one for scientific peer review and the other
related to conducting regulatory analysis, which imposed

3. additional obligations for regulatory agencies but at the
same time “reinvigorated the regulatory review process,
exhibiting a willingness to
Distributive PolicyDistributive policy, perhaps the most
common form of government policy, uses general tax revenues
to provide benefits to individuals or groups, often by means of
grants or subsidies. If the country faces a large agricultural
surplus, for example, the federal government may provide
incentive payments to farmers to not produce crops that would
add to the surplus. Similarly, the federal government provides
direct grants to state and local governments for a variety of
purposes. Finally, governments often create “public goods” that
all citizens can enjoy. In some cases, such as national defense,
the good is provided for all; in others, such as city, state, or
national parks, it is anticipated that some citizens will use the
benefit and others will not. (In Chapter 3, we will examine the
growing trend toward employing user fees for certain of these
traditionally public goods.) Unlike regulatory agencies, which
are often at odds with the clientele group they are seeking to
regulate, agencies that carry out distributive policies often
develop close relationships with their constituencies and, in
turn, with interested members of Congress. The growth of
veterans' benefits over the past several decades is an almost
classic example of the operation of such a subgovernment. The
Department of Veterans Affairs is now one of the largest federal
agencies and provides a broad range of health benefits,
educational assistance, pensions, and insurance for veterans.
Such a development would not have been possible without its
close relationship with veterans' groups (such as the American
Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars) and with the
veterans' committees in Congress.
Redistributive PolicyRedistributive policies take taxes from
certain groups and give them to another group. On rare
occasions, redistribution is from the less-well-off to the better-
off; many charge that capital gains proposals are of this type.

4. Redistribution is, however, generally thought of as benefiting
less advantaged groups at the perceived expense of the
advantaged. Among major redistributive policies are those that
deal with (1) income stabilization, helping to support those who
are unemployed or retired; (2) social welfare, providing either
direct payments to individuals or supporting state and local
efforts for the indigent; and (3) health-care programs, such as
Medicaid and Medicare. Most federal agencies active in the
redistributive area are located in the Department of Health and
Human Services, which claims its mission to be “the United
States government's principal agency for protecting the health
of all Americans and providing essential human services,
especially for those who are least able to help themselves”
(http://www.hhs.gov/about/).
Since redistributive policies are often (though sometimes
incorrectly) viewed in win-lose terms—that is, if one group
benefits, another will surely lose—they generate perhaps more
intense discussion than any other area of public policy. Despite
this controversy, every American president since Roosevelt and
prior to Reagan has supported some major redistributive effort.
Presidents Reagan and George H. W. Bush, however, took the
opposite position, seeking to limit and even reduce
redistributive programs. The reform agenda also influenced
President Clinton, whose pledge to “end welfare as we know it”
resulted in legislation placing a five-year cap on public
assistance and tying welfare benefits to a work requirement.
President George W. Bush continued this trend by advancing a
$1.3 trillion tax cut and encouraging Congress to trim federal
spending. In addition, President Bush implemented a faith-based
initiative designed to employ private and nonprofit
organizations in the delivery of social services, under which
federal, state, and local governments sought to recruit, train,
and assist religious groups to provide a broad array of social
services. The Obama administration did an about-face, taking on
the issue of economic inequality through its efforts to pass the
health-care bill—the first major social legislation in decades—

5. and a push for increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans.
These moves signaled the Obama administration's commitment
to moving the country away from the “hands-off” legacy of the
Reagan years (Leonhardt, 2010). Clearly President Obama's tax
plan for rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest
Americans will continue this trend.
Constituent PolicyConstituent policies (Lowi, 1972, p. 300) are
intended to benefit the public generally or to serve the
government. Foreign and defense policies are good examples of
the first set of constituent policies, as well as good examples of
the operations of a significant subgovernment. The Air Force
had lobbied since the 1960s to build the B-1 bomber as a
mainstay of our air defense. In 1978, President Carter was able
to “kill” the B-1; however, only three years later, a combination
of Department of Defense officials, representatives from the
defense industry (especially contractors), and congressional
supporters of increased military capabilities helped President
Reagan resurrect the B-1. Incidentally, although more than a
hundred B-1 bombers were built and were in service at one
time, even today the B-1 remains controversial, with some
proposals to retire the final sixty-six bombers facing opposition
from military analysts and politicians, especially those with
bombers based in their home states
(http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2000020,00.ht
ml).
The other set of constituent policies are those directed toward
the agencies of government itself. Legislation affecting the
structure and function of government agencies, as well as
policies governing their operations, falls in this area. President
Carter was especially interested in policies impacting
government agencies and was instrumental in such changes as a
reorganization of the federal personnel system and a reemphasis
on affirmative action in hiring practices. Presidents Reagan and
George H. W. Bush were more interested in matters of technical
efficiency and problems of waste in government. President

6. Clinton, early in his term, expressed an interest in managerial
issues, pledging to implement some version of Total Quality
Management in the federal government, as he had done in
Arkansas, and later developed the National Performance Review
to make government work better and cost less (a topic we will
examine in detail later). More recently, President George W.
Bush placed an emphasis on developing more efficient,
businesslike practices of government through a top-down
performance system tied to the budget. President Obama has
engaged in what has been called a “stealth revolution” in the
way government works, quietly emphasizing new technology,
the use of White House czars for different policy areas, and new
levels of openness and transparency (Kettl, 2011).