The philosopher Santayana warned that those who do not know their own history are doomed to repeat it. That admonition is especially pertinent to discussions of social welfare in Indiana, where assistance programs reflect historic attitudes about poverty and service delivery is largely a product of the state?s political culture. In Indiana, as elsewhere, supporters of social welfare programs and the critics of those programs are still arguing about policies dating to 1349, when England enacted the Statute of Laborers, prohibiting alms, or charity, for those who had the ability to work–that is, to "sturdy beggars." This first attempt to deal with what we would later call welfare was not about providing assistance; it was about forcing people to work.
Continue reading “The Poor You Have Always With You”
Moral Opprobrium, Social Capital, and Funding for Mental Health Care:
We examine the effect of blame attribution and community cohesiveness (as proxied by community size) on public attitudes towards responsibility for mental health care. Data for this study were taken from the MacArthur Mental Health Module of the 1996 General Social Survey.
Continue reading “Moral Opprobrium, Social Capital, and Funding for Mental Health Care:”
Outsourcing Patriotism: Privatization Goes to War
Substituting new forms of collaboration and management for hierarchical, bureaucratic chains of command cannot and should not mean abandoning traditional commitments to the public values of liberty, equality, and fairness. Public actors have an obligation to meet the standards for government behavior that grow out of those values and are incorporated in public law. As Donald Kettl has observed, the government ?is not just another principal dealing with another agent.? Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than in the ongoing scandal over the abuse of prison inmates in Iraq.
Continue reading “Outsourcing Patriotism: Privatization Goes to War”
Public Ethics, Legal Accountability, and the New Governance
We take issue with the notion that the transfer of sovereignty to nongovernmental agents is merely a management problem, because legal restrictions on the use and reach of public authority are fundamental to the United States? political and constitutional order. Explicit legal standards of right and wrong are a defining feature of American government (Frederickson 1993, 248; see also Rohr 1998). Substituting new forms of collaboration and management for hierarchical, bureaucratic chains of command cannot and should not mean abandoning traditional commitments to the public values of liberty, equality, and fairness.
Continue reading “Public Ethics, Legal Accountability, and the New Governance”
Holding ‘Governance’ Accountable
Public administration scholars and schools of public affairs increasingly use the term ?governance? to describe the processes they study and teach. Governance?rather than the older word ?government??is thought to be a more accurate descriptor of the reality of contemporary state structures, where an ever-increasing percentage of the work of the state is outsourced to for-profit, non-profit and faith-based organizations. It is the intent of this article to suggest that before policymakers and public managers accept third-party government as a fait accompli, to be reconceptualized and relabeled accordingly, we be sure that we really understand the implications for public administration theory and practice.
Continue reading “Holding ‘Governance’ Accountable”