Flinchbaugh, Barry L.

English

Research Papers in Economics

PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION-A  MODEL
WITH EMPHASIS  ON  WHAT AND WHEN
B.  L. Flinchbaugh
Extension Economist, Public Affairs
Kansas State University
The objective of public policy education  is to increase the level
of understanding among the people  so that they acquire a broader,
factual base  from which to  make public  decisions.  To accomplish
this,  the  problem  must  be  clearly  stated  in  a  manageable  form.
Alternative  solutions  and  their  probable  consequences  should
be  discussed  in  clear,  concise  terms  easily  understood  by  local
leaders.  A decision-making  framework  should  be constructed.
Public policy education  is problem oriented.  This distinguishes
it from  a purely  informational  program designed  to explain  "how
it  is" to  the general  public.
DECISION MAKING  IN  THE PUBLIC  ARENA
Public decisions are compromises  among special interests.  The
final  decision  is  determined  by  the  people  at  the  ballot  box  or
through their  elected  representatives.  In our political  system  the
"right  answer"  to  a  public  question  is  the  one  agreed  upon  by
the majority of the people  within  the constitutional  constraints  of
minority  rights.
Public  decisions  are  based  on  facts,  misconceptions,  half-
truths,  myths,  and  values.  Facts  are just what  the  word  implies,
truth  which  can  be  verified.  Myths,  half-truths,  and  misconcep-
tions  are  what  people  think  are  facts  and  are  treated  the  same
as  facts.  Values  are  people's  concepts  of what  should  be,  that
is,  what  is  "right"  or  "wrong."  As  a  public  problem  emerges,
people  tend to apply their values to the facts, half-truths,  and mis-
conceptions  about  the problem  and  arrive  at their own particular
solution.  Many  special  interest  groups  within  society  will  pro-
pose  different  solutions,  and  therefore  a  compromise  must  be
"hammered out"  in the political arena.  After the decision  makers
talk over the problem and reach a palatable compromise,  the legis-
lative procedure is put in motion and what was once a compromise
becomes  a law or legal  solution.
How  does  public  policy education  fit  into  decision  making  in
the public  arena?  It assists the decision  makers.  It can  be  a valu-
33able  input  into  the decision-making  process  if it increases  under-
standing and renders  the problem  more  manageable.
WHAT  TO TEACH
The problem must be broadly recognized  as a problem,  at least
by  the  key  decision  makers  and  by  the  people  directly  affected.
If just the  professor  thinks  the problem  warrants  a  public  policy
education program, the program  is doomed to failure. The problem
must  be  recognized  as  a  controversial  issue  by  the  people  who
count.
If a problem is largely scientific,  it can be solved by the scientist
within  whose  discipline  it belongs.  If, however,  there  is no  scien-
tifically  correct solution to  the problem,  it must be  solved through
the  political  process.
Public  policy  problems  concern  a group,  not just  individuals.
Group  decision  making  is  the  key.  Kansas  State  recently
developed  an  informational  program  for  Kansas  farmers  on  the
current  supply  and  demand  situation  in  agriculture.  They  were
faced  with  a  new  and  unfamiliar  situation,  high  prices  brought
about by insufficient supplies to meet an expanding world demand.
A  public policy  approach  was  followed,  that  is,  the problem  was
defined,  alternative  solutions  and  their  probable  consequences
were discussed,  and needed information  was provided for farmers
to  make  an  individual  decision  prior  to  planting  wheat.  Since  a
group did not make the decision,  an educational  program designed
to  provide information  on the question,  "Should farmers  increase
production,"  would  not  be  considered  public  policy  education.
The educational  method employed may be similar but the decision-
making process  is different.
Let  us  look  at  some  examples  of what  to  teach  and  discuss
why  these topics  are  appropriate  for public  policy education  pro-
grams.  Four public policy questions  come  to  mind:
1. What  should the tax  mix  be  to  pay for state  and  local  gov-
ernment?
2.  How should local government  be organized  to  provide pub-
lic  services?
3.  Who'should  control our food  supply?
4.  How  should  the  tallgrass  prairie  of Kansas  be  preserved?
These four subjects have several things  in common.  First, they
are  highly controversial  issues  which have  a broad  interest  among
the  people.  They  are  under  discussion  and  something  is  going to
34be  done  about  them  in  the  future.  Second,  they  are  subject  to
scientific  analysis  but  not  subject  to  scientific  solution.  There  is
no "right"  or "wrong"  answer to these problems.  Third,  a group
decision  is required.  No one individual will decide. The final deci-
sion will be made  by the people  through  the political process.
How can we tell when a public problem is emerging?  Following
are  a few tips for success  in  problem  selection:
1. Keep  informed  daily.  Read the  popular press  including the
small town weeklies in your  area.
2.  Have  a  high  listening  I.Q.  Keep  your  ears  attuned  to  the
grass-roots beat.
3.  Become personally  acquainted with the decision  makers  on
the state and local level.  Have contacts dispersed geographi-
cally.
4.  Travel  extensively,  talk  with  the  local  people,  especially
those  who  are  well  aware  of controversial  problems  and
issues.
5.  Check  with  the  legitimizers  before  launching  on  a  maiden
voyage. They will let you know if you have selected a problem
that is  controversial  and  timely.
WHEN TO  TEACH
Timeliness  is  extremely  important  along  with  problem  selec-
tion.  If the  "wrong"  problem  is  discussed  at the  "wrong"  time,
the program  is  bound to  fail.  The  problem  must  be  controversial
enough  to generate  interest  but  not so  controversial  that rational
discussion  is impossible.  When the trenches  are  dug and the guns
are  in position,  the time for war,  not education,  has arrived.  Let
us examine the four policy questions which were  previously men-
tioned in terms of the most effective time to conduct an educational
program.
What  should the tax mix be  to pay for  state and  local govern-
ment?  When  is  the  proper  time to  discuss  this  issue?  Obviously
right in the middle of a political campaign is the wrong time. Politi-
cal  campaigns  are  not  really  a  part  of the  educational  process.
During the  heat  of a political  campaign  the issue  has reached  an
emotional  stage,  positions  have  been  taken,  and  the  public  has
chosen  sides.
During the  1972 Kansas gubernatorial  and legislative campaign,
the tax problem was rapidly approaching the decision-making  stage
and  obviously  would  be  the  number  one  public  issue  before  the
35legislature  when  it convened  in January.  The most effective  time,
therefore,  to conduct a public  policy education program was  after
the  political  campaign,  during  the  period  before  the  legislature
would convene.  Since  the  issue  was  already  before  the  public  at
the time,  the situation was  "ripe"  for an educational input.
How  should  local  government  be  organized  to provide  public
services?  This question  is  now  approaching  the  decision-making
stage. Several years ago it would have been almost suicide to men-
tion consolidating counties or transferring functions from one local
unit  of government  to  another.  Now  this  topic  is  beginning  to
attract  some attention.
Recently  I met privately  with  the county  commissioners  and
a  few  select  influential  people  of a  western  Kansas  county.  The
purpose of the  "behind  the scenes"  meeting  was to  discuss parti-
tioning of the county among the neighboring  counties.  Why now?
Very  simply,  the courthouse  has been  condemned.  The county's
population  has declined  25  percent in the last decade.  The  young
people  are leaving.  The county seat has lost its only filling  station
and grocery  store.
Perhaps  a  year or two from now,  the time  will be  about right
to discuss  local government organization  in a public policy educa-
tion  forum.
Who  should  control  our  food  supply?  Six  months  or  a  year
ago  people  were  discussing  this  issue.  It  was  an  issue  that  was
slowly  developing.  Now,  however,  with  record  price  levels  and
shortages  around  the world,  the  problem  has  become  more  con-
troversial,  more  pertinent,  and  more  timely.  This fall  and winter
will  be  an  ideal  time  to  bring  this  problem  before  the  decision
makers  in  a public policy education framework.
How  should  the  tallgrass  prairie  of Kansas  be  preserved?  A
decade  ago a Prairie National Park in the tallgrass  area of Kansas
was proposed.  The cattlemen threatened to form a posse and stand
guard  if necessary.  At  issue  is  not whether the  prairie  should  be
preserved,  but how.  The  cattlemen  contend  their track  record  is
excellent; however, the conservationists  wish to place 60,000 acres
in the public domain. The problem is now approaching  a decision-
making  stage.  Various  special  interest groups  have  made  propos-
als.  A  bill has been  introduced  in Congress.  The extremists  have
mellowed.  This  fall  would  be  an  excellent  time  to  conduct  an
educational  program  especially  in  the immediate  area  which  will
be affected.
36HOW TO TEACH
Many methods are used in public policy education with varying
degrees  of success.  In Kansas  we  have  elected  to use the alterna-
tive  and  consequence  approach.  Why?  First,  its  track  record  is
second to none.  Second, our objective  is to equip people  to make
their own decisions.  We attempt  to do what  our vocation implies,
that  is,  educate  rather  than  advocate  a  particular  solution  or
espouse  a  cause.  Simply  put,  we  strive  for  objectivity.  No  one
is  perfectly  objective,  but  if an  educator  strives  for  objectivity,
his  clientele  will  more  likely  trust  him  and  consequently  a  more
conducive  atmosphere  for learning  will develop.
Using any approach to  public policy education  requires  an ini-
tial logistic decision.  Should  the mass  media-newspapers,  radio,
television,  and  extension  bulletins-be  used,  or should  informal
seminars and public meetings  be conducted?  Public policy educa-
tion  is  problem  oriented.  It seeks  to  establish  a decision-making
framework.  This  requires  the  "eyeball"  method,  wherein  a
dialogue  is  developed  between  the educator  and the  participants
and among  the participants  themselves.
Theory,  abstract  concepts,  and  mathematical  models  are  in-
cluded  among  the  tools  of a  public  policy  educator.  They  are
used  behind  the  scenes  in  preparation  for the  program,  but  they
would be misused  if exposed  directly  to the  decision  makers.  An
effective  public  policy  education  program  must  be  conducted  in
the  "language"  of the  clientele.
WHOM  TO TEACH
Extension  programs by law must be available without discrimi-
nation  on  the  basis  of  race,  national  origin,  sex,  or  religion.
However,  we  have  limited  resources  and  cannot  reach  all  the
people  that  we are  charged  with  serving.  With  limited  resources,
we  can best meet our objective  by working with decision  makers.
They  have  the ability  to  put  into  effect  the  knowledge  imparted.
They  can change  the course  of events.  An  effective  public policy
education program will reach the decision makers without discrimi-
nation on the  basis of race,  national  origin,  sex,  or religion.
THE  KANSAS EXTENSION  PROGRAM  ON  FINANCING
STATE  AND LOCAL  GOVERNMENT
We have now completed  the second year of a successful  public
policy education  program  on financing  state and local  government
in  Kansas.  Why taxes  instead of,  for instance,  welfare,  pollution,
37or traditional  agricultural  policy  problems?  Taxes  dominated  the
1971  and  1972  political  campaigns  in  Kansas.  The  heated  con-
troversy over  financing state and local  government began brewing
almost  immediately  after  the  last  major  revision  in  the  Kansas
tax  mix  in  1965.  The  Governor's  office  issued  position  papers,
interim  legislature committees studied the problem,  and numerous
special  interest  groups  offered  proposals.  Concerned  citizens
formed the Kansas  Federation of Taxpayers.
Political,  agricultural,  business,  and  labor  leaders  throughout
the state urged the university to get with it, to provide some educa-
tional  input.  Scared,  and  with  little  on-campus  support,  we
embarked.  We  succeeded  because  we  chose  the  right  problem,
at the right time, worked with the right people,  and used the correct
method.  Our subject was a controversial  group problem with many
alternative  solutions.  Something  was about  to happen.  A decision
was  imminent.  We  worked  with  the  decision  makers,  and  we
remained  objective.
The  1973  session  of the  Kansas  legislature  will  go  down  in
history  as  a  "tax  revision"  session.  The  decision  makers  have
publicly  and  privately acknowledged  our  input and  have  given  us
credit  for making their task  easier.
What did we teach? First, we defined the problem clearly.  What
should  the  tax  mix  be  to  finance  state  and  local  government  in
Kansas?  Second,  we  presented  a historical  analysis of nationwide
developments  in  social  and  economic  conditions  and  their  effect
on  state  and  local  government  expenditures  and  tax  patterns.
Third,  a  comparative  analysis  of the  current  situation  in  Kansas
and neighboring  states was developed.  Fourth,  possible alternative
tax mixes  at both state and  local levels and their effects on various
interest  groups,  business,  labor,  and  agriculture  were  examined.
Throughout  the  discussion  we  destroyed  many  popular  myths,
such  as  loopholes  are  bad,  exemptions  are  good,  a  progressive
income  tax  is equitable,  farmers pay  the  bulk of the  property  tax,
etc.
When  did  we  teach?  Primarily  during  the  fall  and  winter  of
1972  and  1973.  We  took  a  recess  during  the  political  campaigns
and intensified  our effort  immediately  prior to and during  the  first
month of the  legislative  session.
How  did  we  teach?  We  used the  alternative  and consequence
approach.  We  talked in the  language  of our audience.  A decision-
making framework  was developed.  The participants  were encour-
aged to participate.  Each  was given  a personal copy of the booklet
38entitled  "Financing  State  and  Local  Government  in Kansas."  It
was loaded with up-to-date relevant facts and figures on the Kansas
tax  system.  It contained  numerous  sample  tax  mixes  such  as  a
10 percent  reduction  in the property tax  statewide  and the corre-
sponding increase in the sales and income tax that would be needed
statewide  if  we  were  to  continue  to  finance  government  at  the
current  level. Sample  mixes  were also provided for the local level.
The last hour of the seminar was designed to provide the partic-
ipants  with  an  actual  experience  in  developing  a  tax  mix.  They
were arbitrarily divided into cross-sectional groups and challenged
to  develop  a  tax mix  which  the  group  as  a  whole  was  willing to
defend.
Whom  did  we  teach?  First,  the  county  extension  personnel.
Without  their support it is impossible  for a state specialist to func-
tion  in  Kansas.  They  were taught  both  methodology  and  subject
matter.  Considerable  time  was  spent  assisting them  in identifying
the local  decision makers.  However,  an ulterior  motive was  agent
acceptance  of  a program  on  the  "hottest"  subject  most  of them
had ever handled.
Our  primary  clientele,  of course,  was  a  cross-section  of state
and local  leaders,  the decision makers.
SUMMARY
There  are  five  necessary  steps  to  the public  policy  education
model:
1. Select a timely and controversial public problem that requires
a group  decision.
2.  Identify  and work with the decision  makers.
3. Define  the problem concisely.
4.  Discuss the  alternative  courses of action and  their probable
consequences.
5.  Leave  the  selection  of the  best  alternative  to  the  decision
makers.
It will work.  Our experience  in Kansas  is living proof.
39

PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION - A MODEL WITH EMPHASIS ON WHAT AND WHEN

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics