Non-Rational Approach to Policy-Making

Answer

Non-Rational Approach to Policy-Making

Policymaking has been described as both a rational and political process. The reason for the depiction is because depends on the influence of political actors as well as the use of rationality in deciding the value of the policy (Clemons, 2017). In evaluating a rational model of policy analysis, regard should be paid to the genesis of the plan, its history, and evolution, as well as the reaction it has received after implementation. However, Carley (2013) provides that rational approach involves the separation of politics from administrative actions in what has come to be termed as politics/administration dichotomy. Some of the government decisions are so complex such that they cannot be left in the hands of politicians but instead assigned to expert bureaucracies who can make not only informed but also sound public policies (Schober, 2017). Kay (2011) defines a Non-rational approach to policymaking as making decisions based on the influences of the irrationalities of politics as opposed to the application of competent, rational, and scientific analysis. This paper examines the political approach used in the case study titled “The Pocatello Prison Siting Story: A Case of Politics.”

The Key Issues

The issues in the case of Pocatello Prison are pegged on the non-rational approach which was used by The State Board of Corrections to get an area where the new prison would be located. One of the critical issues is the application of political considerations in the making of administrative decisions. The political process of policy formation is well illustrated whereby many interest groups had their influence on where the prison was to be located. For instance, the various interest groups had a significant interest to the prison being found in their areas as they would have reaped big from the concerted benefits of the prison (Clemons, 2017). Specifically, the prison would have resulted in community’s financial, construction, as well as the real estate sectors. As such, the first issue is that the support that the proposed prison attained at first was based on the benefits that will accrue to the interest groups in Pocatello City. The decision to award the siting of the proposed prison to the city of Pocatello was just but a result of the influence of powerful elites of an interest group who had their political interests in mind. All the political actors stood to gain as the Mayor, and the citizens praised the Pocatello City Council for his decision. Additionally, the Governor of the City became very popular while the Mayor was even elected as a governor. As such, the issue is the making of policy decisions based on the influence of powerful political elites as opposed to rationality.

The Likely Root Causes of the Issues or Problems

The likely causes of the non-rational approach of the Mayor in decision making are multiple. One of them is that he failed to understand that decision making in policy formulation should not be made based on irrationality but rather on the opinion of experts as well as bureaucrats (Clemons, 2017). Additionally, pluralism and elitism play a key role in causing the problem. In this regard, the Mayor was more concerned about his political future as opposed to the making of the right decision. Specifically, he was worried that he might lose votes from the populous Pocatello residents and would not, therefore, make a decision which was opposite to their interests. The other cause is the influence of powerful political elites in frustrating any efforts which would be unfavorable to them. According to Clemons (2017), each of the groups had their interests and their support was depended on whether their personal interests were catered for by the siting of the proposed prison. Additionally, the government through the State Board of Corrections failed to deploy the opinion and services of the experts and bureaucrats. Such rational people would have based their decision about the location of the proposed prison on the cost and benefits as well as the values of the same. Additionally, they would have ensured that they are neutral and make decisions which are in the best interests of the people.

The Viable Solutions to Address or Resolve the Issues

To address the issues which have discussed, the viable solution would be to apply the rational model of decision making. This approach would ensure that any sloppy and uninformed decision making is eliminated. Additionally, Clemons (2017) argues that such a strategy would ensure that facts are separated from values. Specifically, through rational decision making, Idaho would have to scan the environment where the proposed prison will be located and develop alternatives based on the options available. Additionally, the Council would choose the most appropriate choice based on the cost-benefit analysis. Making decisions which are free of pollution from politics as well as culture is critical to ensuring that it is beneficial to the masses. The deployment of a rational model in decision making makes it devoid of emotion and corruption which are the tools of politics. Indeed, according to Clemons (2017), such a solution would be devoid of partisanship and exploitation. As such, Idaho should contact experts and bureaucrats who have knowledge on the issue and use their decisions which are impartial and neutral from political interference. Making such a decision which is so complicated require the opinion of experts who make informed not only decisions but also policies which are sound and unbiased. Such solutions will ensure issues of influence by dominant political elites is eliminated.

The Likely Ramifications of All Suggested Solutions

The solutions discussed in the above paragraph will have various ramifications. One of those is that the separation of facts from values is only a matter of perception. Specifically, according to sophists, facts are just what people are persuaded of and not necessarily what is factual (Carley, 2013). Additionally, there is a likelihood that such use of rational approach will result in a wrong decision. Not all decisions require the inputs of bureaucrats and experts. Some need a political strategy which includes considerations of popular opinions (Clemons, 2017). As such, there will be likely opposition from parties who do not agree with the decisions of the experts. As such, they will act as obstacles to the implementation of the decisions which have been provided. Sometimes, democracy must be used in decision making. In this regard, democracy is about the decentralization of decision making as well as the empowerment of the people. However, Carley (2013) proposes that such ramifications can be mitigated by using a politics/administration dichotomy which states that whereas legislation will follow public will, administration involves the execution of such legislation by bureaucrats and experts.

Final Recommendations

Based on the proposed solutions and the ramifications which will arise out of such solutions, various definitive recommendations can be made. One of the recommendations is that Idaho should combine administrative decisions with the opinions of experts. Notably, the essence of public policy is actually more political than it is rational. However, this is not to mean that rationality, as well as positivism, are not necessary. Additionally, according to Clemons (2017), using non-rational approaches alone is terrible as political decisions are subject to impartiality, corruption, and non-neutrality. As such, it is recommended that the Council uses a cocktail of the two approaches by ensuring that the inputs of both the political actors as well as experts and bureaucrats are put into an account before the final decision about the location of the proposed prison is made (Schober, 2017). However, the Council should not allow itself to be controlled by the forces of powerful political elites who are only concerned with their own personal interests as opposed to those of the community.

In conclusion, some decisions by the government are so complex such that they cannot be left in the hands of partial, irrational, and non-neutral political actors. In the current case study, the problem is that of finding the most appropriate siting area for the proposed prison. The problem has been occasioned by the acts of Idaho City Council to allow powerful political elites to guide their decision making. Specifically, making decisions based on irrational, corrupt, and partisan opinions of interest groups made it difficult to reach the most appropriate decision. However, the proposed solution is the application of a politics/administration dichotomy which ensures that rationality approach is used through the opinions of experts and bureaucrats while he views of politicians are also taken into account.