To understand the pattern of governmentdecision and actions to solve publicproblems, we need to understand:

• How does a community determine something is a problem that affects a public interest?

• How is the public interest (re)defined (aggregated, deliberated, or prescribed) in this process?

• What is good public policy?

We need to understand how a relationshipis drawn between

• a community,• a problematic situation,• an interest that deserves public attention, a

nd,• a sense of the need to act and the possibility tha

t action can be effective.

Framing public policy problems

Sense of a political community or publiccan be based on:

• shared history and institutions that provide a common framework for resolving disputes and a common status as citizens

• shared values and identity: groups• shared fate: interdependent interests Fis

hbanks• shared commitments to justice, democracy . . .

This demands public attention because itharms this interest in a way that:

• Violates legitimate commitments• Undercuts our common status as citizens• Violates the shared values that my/our communit

y is based on• Affects welfare in a way that can only be addres

sed through collective action• You would not accept if you were in my/our/t

heir position• Is not fair, just, or in the interest of all

How is this accomplished?

• “Normative-prescriptive story”

• Tells a story that says what the problem is and what should be done about it.

• Distinguishes what should pay attention to and what is noise.

• Ties facts and values together.

• Draws on established “truths.”

• Fits with “ideas in good currency.”

An example: Rachel Bratt – “The realstory on housing” Boston Globe 9/16/02

• “Decent, affordable housing must be available to all. This simple truth-this single housing story-needs to be recognized, embraced, and acted upon.”

What’s the problem?

• Market failure makes deserving families dependent on erratic public support to obtain a good essential to their welfare.

• Understanding and support is undercut by distortion in the media.

• The disadvantaged suffer.• The “viability” of the community is placed at ris

k as successful families leave.

Why should we care?What public interest is at stake?

• The people affected are deserving.

• The good in question has a special status.

• Those who suffer, did not cause the problem.

• Collective (political) action is the only way to address the problem.

• The long-term welfare of the community is at risk.

• How would you feel if you were in this situation?

But what can we do?

• Insulate funding from politics: The National Housing Trust Fund a “more reliable, apolitical basis than through the current appropriations process.” (Bratt, 2002)

• Generate political support• Use funds wisely: “new construction, rehabilitatio

n of existing subsidized and unsubsidized units, and safeguard existing subsidized housing for future generations of low-income residents.” (Bratt, 2002)

But what can we do?

• Set the record straight: media’s role• Reform the process: Appoint a commission to “ei

ther modify the current 40B statute or come up with a new solution.” (Bratt, 2002)

• Tie housing to other goals: “self sufficiency” among homeless and welfare recipients; retain “middle income wage earners, who are so critical to the health and viability of our economy.” (Bratt, 2002)

“The Congress declares that the general welfare and security of the Nation and the health and living standards of its people require housing production and related community development sufficiently to remedy the serious housing shortage, the elimination of substandard and other inadequate housing through the clearance of slums and blighted areas, and the realization as soon as feasible of the goal of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family, thus contributing to the development and redevelopment of communities and to the advancement of the growth, wealth, and security of the Nation.” U.S. Housing Act of 1949

Prosperity is to blame

• “The United States is the best housed it has ever been in its history . . . [but] clearly we have a serious affordability issues for some people which has been exacerbated by this prosperity.” N. Retsinas, Joint Center for Housing Studies, Harvard University, in Tanner (2003) p.84

• “In the midst of this remarkable prosperity, the homeownership gap between whites and minorities has hardly narrowed.” Joint Center for Housing, State of the Nation’s Housing, 2000 in Tanner (2003) p. 85

Prosperity is to blame

• “Gentrification has added to the affordability problem . . . As wealthier buyers have snapped up modestly priced homes in older neighborhoods . . . They have taken moderately priced housing out of the trickle down supply.” Tanner (2003) p. 85

• “You can go around the country and find gentrification of downtowns, and now it has gone into the suburbs. People are getting forced out.” (Robert Sheehan, housing economist, in Tanner (2003) p. 85)

Shared regional fate

• “It goes beyond the lowest income groups to the people who could afford more [upscale] housing but must move farther and farther from their jobs to get what they want” (Robert Sheehan, housing economist, in Tanner (2003) p. 81)

• ‘A public school teacher was among those heading off to work at a Bronx family shelter. “I’m just letting you know how discouraged I am. At 8:21 a.m., I have to be fresh for 61 New York City

Shared regional fate

• As more and more communities realize that affordable housing is where jobs critical to their local economies go to sleep at night, we will begin to see the kinds of more broadly based coalitions of public and private stakeholders that will be required to deal with the problem.” Michael A. Stegman, Director Center for Community Capitalism, in Tanner (2003) p.88

Shared regional fate

• With rents up so high, we are concerned that churches are seeing their members driven away and on profits and small businesses being forced out of the area.” Laura Stuchinsky, Silicon Valley Manufacturers Group, in Tanner (2003) p.97

Shared regional fate

• “From a NIMBY standpoint, it is easier to find support for homeownership than rentals. Some people think rentals aren’t like us, especially those getting assistance.” Conrad Eagan, Executive Director, Millennial Housing Commission, in Tanner (2003) p. 88

• ‘Some companies have begun sending out daily shuttle buses to pull in workings from outlying areas. ‘ “We see that as a decent adaptation. It doesn’t sound ideal, but it doesn’t mean it will continue forever.” Howard Husock, Kennedy School of Government, in Tanner (2003) p.83

What crisis?

• “Seattle has gone through boom and bust before . . . I can remember a time when you couldn’t give away housing in Seattle, but now it’s experience an unbelievable crunch. “ Barry Zigas, Senior VP, Fannie Mae, in Tanner (2003) p.82

• “People see an opportunity, and you get construction. Gradually the market catches up to demand.” John Weicher, Hudson Institute, in Tanner (2003) p. 83

What crisis?

• “If you have two incomes at not much more than minimum wage, there’s a good chance that you could afford a decent house . . . Can you find a place to live? I think the answer is largely, yes. Is it in the best school district/ No, but that a school problem. Is it close to work? No, but that’s a transportation problem.” Howard Husock, Kennedy School of Government, in

What crisis?

• There is no affordability crisis “if households have the opportunity to spend a small faction of their incomes on housing, but instead choose to spend a larger fraction.” Richard Green and Stephen Malpezzi, Univ. of Wisconsin, in Tanner (2003) p. 83

Other issues

• The power of agenda setting

• What roles does information play?

• Why is it difficult to get or sustain commitments on housing?

• Which comes first, problems or solutions?

• What counter tactics are proposals for action open to?

“Reactionary Rhetorics” (Albert Hirschman, 1991)

• “Jeopardy, futility, perversity”• “The more money you pour into the economy,

the more prices rise. If you are going to give that worker a raise and there’s no more productivity, you are going to have inflation. That would push housing costs out of reach if it were done on a large scale.” (Robert Sheehan, housing economist, Catholics for Housing, in Tanner (2003) p. 85)

• Bibliography:• Tanner, Jane (2003): “Affordable Housing” in Issues for Debate

in American Public Policy (Washington, DC; CQ Press) pp. 81- 89