Biant Paiiiott

!"#$%& (")*+,-#+$")* . /"&$#0 12*$3)

When policy makeis aie faceu with the question of "what shoulu we uo". one
coulu ieasonably assume that an actual solution to the pioblem shoulu be the
piioiity. In Schneiuei & Ingiam's "Policy Besign foi Bemociacy" they aigue that the
policy cieation piocess is fai fiom this iueal solution seeking piocess anu insteau
takes place in a uegeneiative setting
1
. In this setting each gioup's political powei
inteiacts with theii socially constiucteu societal status. Insteau of seeking a
solution to the pioblem, policy makeis will insteau weigh these powei anu status
factois anu look to cieate policy outputs that give them the most electoial
incentives. Schneiuei & Ingiam believe this system is uegeneiative because it senus
uiffeient messages to each gioup about theii iole in the piocess anu theii
expectations about the goveinment moving foiwaiu.
0ne aiea wheie this uegeneiative piocess is iuentifiable is the cuiient 0.S.
welfaie system. ueneially, people who aie in neeu of financial assistance can be
classifieu in a gioup somewheie between what Schneiuei & Ingiam call uepenuents
anu ueviants
2
. These gioups possess veiy little political powei, anu uepenuing on
how they aie vieweu by the public these gioups can be seen as eithei ueseiving oi
unueseiving of goveinment aiu. In the case of the uepenuents the social peiception
is positive, these people aie ueseiving of help. Examples of uepenuents coulu be
single motheis, haiu woiking yet unemployeu inuiviuuals, oi people with

1
Schneiuei anu Ingiam, "Social Constiuctions of Taiget Populations: Begeneiative
Policy Besigns."
2
Schneiuei & Ingiam p.1u9
hanuicaps. 0n the othei enu of this continuum aie the ueviants. These folks aie still
politically weak but the social peiception is veiy negative. An extieme example is
ciiminals; a less negatively constiucteu example woulu be welfaie iecipients who
fail to pull themselves up because of lack of effoit. Schneiuei & Ingiam aigue that
policy makeis aie sentimental towaiu uepenuent gioups anu publicly pioclaim they
aie eagei to help, but in ieality the policy uesign lacks the powei anu funuing to
tiuly help this gioup, anu by uesign can actually help fiame inuiviuuals towaiu a
moie ueviant social constiuction.
In }uiik & Cowgill's "The Constiuction of Client Iuentities in a Post-Welfaie
Social Seivice Piogiam", this piocess is in full effect
S
. The piece explains how
welfaie iefoim acts of the miu 9u's weie shapeu by the social constiuctions stateu
above. Buiing this eia the social constiuction of welfaie iecipients was becoming
incieasingly negative, anu the subsequent welfaie iefoim uemonstiateu that. The
legislation passeu lookeu to pioviue tax cieuits to the auvantageu foi helping the
uepenuent gioups in entiepieneuiial enueavois. This uecision is not suipiising as
gioups that aie politically poweiful anu vieweu as ueseiving (auvantageu gioups)
pioviue politicians with gieat electoial incentives when they aie pioviueu benefits.
Conveisely pioviuing uiiect benefits to uepenuant gioups can be politically iisky
4
.
As a iesult of this policy uecision many micioenteipiise uevelopment
piogiams (NBP's) weie uevelopeu. These oiganizations aie uesigneu to help

S
}uiik, Nancy anu }ulie Cowgill. 2uuS. "The Constiuction of Client Iuentities in a
Post-welfaie Social Seivice Piogiam: The Bouble Binu of Nicioenteipiise
Bevelopment," in !"#"$%&'( *'+ ,'-&-."+/ 012&*. 31'#-$42-&1'# *'+ 546.&2 51.&27, eu.
Anne L. Schneiuei anu Belen N. Ingiam (State 0niveisity of New Yoik Piess),
17S-196.
4
Schneiuei & Ingiam p.11S
inuiviuuals in the uepenuent gioup by pioviuing a system weie they coulu stait
theii own businesses. This uecision highlights how social constiuctions shape
policy-making uecisions. Bepenuent gioups aie vieweu as neeuy anu helpless, this
is appaient in policy that fails to uiiectly subsiuize them. The policy uesign
aiticulates this thiough a system wheie funus aie not given uiiectly to the neeuy
gioup but insteau filteieu thiough a moie auvantageu gioup who is vieweu as bettei
piepaieu to help the uepenuent inuiviuuals. This uesign has a positive public
connotation as the policy makei can claim cieuit foi policy uesign that positively
impacts the uepenuent gioup without pioviuing them a financial ciutch that allows
them to stay in poveity.
0nfoitunately this policy uesign has hiuuen piocesses with wiue ieaching
iamifications. The NBP's aie agencies that aie contiolleu by inuiviuuals that must
make systematic uecisions that impact the policy. The goal of the legislation is to
help pooi, maiginalizeu gioups. The NBP's woik on a system wheie inuiviuuals
have to qualify foi a loan baseu on the uiscietion of the agency woikeis. The
auvantageu investois helping funu the piogiam want high success iates, so the
agency woikeis aie foiceu to choose paiticipants who aie the most likely to succeeu
baseu on tiauitional business values. This stiuctuie leaus to systematic
uisciimination of the people the policy was uesigneu to help. By not taking into
account things like financial iecouises, lack of tianspoitation, chilucaie, etc. The
women, minoiities, anu othei maiginalizeu gioups aie excluueu fiom the piogiam.
The moie euucateu anu financially stable applicants who aie alieauy in a moie
auvantageu situation aie insteau chosen foi the goveinment assistance. This iesults
in goveinment uollais anu tax cieuits that weie pieviously eaimaikeu foi the
uepenuent gioups that aie now being funneleu thiough the NBP's back towaiu the
auvantageu gioup. Auuitionally, the policy makeis can point to all the success
stoiies in the piogiam anu claim cieuit foi 'effective policy'. They can also claim
that applicants who faileu to successfully use the piogiam weie uninteiesteu in
woiking haiu anu taking auvantage of the system. This label then helps push the
social constiuction of uisciiminateu, maiginalizeu gioups fuithei towaiu a ueviant
social constiuction.
The social constiuctions uo moie than just shape how the policies aie
uesigneu. The systematic uesign of the policy shapes how the policy impacts all the
gioups who aie in contact with it. In "Naking Clients anu Citizens", Soss uesciibes
the systematic uiffeience between a 'univeisal' social secuiity piogiam (SSBI) anu a
'qualifying' tempoiaiy assistance foi neeuy families piogiam (TANF)
S
. Be explains
how the stiuctuie of the policy uesign not only shapes the expeiience foi the
inuiviuuals in neeu, but also impacts theii political paiticipation in the futuie.
In the SSBI piogiam the iegistiation piocess is kept ielatively simple anu can
be uone ovei the phone, no in peison contact is neeueu. This non-peisonal financial
ielationship was ielatively easy anu non-stigmatizeu. The applicants left the
inteiaction with the goveinment feeling like they weie being iesponueu to in a
positive way. Social secuiity piogiams aimeu towaiu the auvantageu aie easily
accessible anu pioviue benefits to a gioup the policy makeis see as politically

S
}oe Soss, "Naking Clients anu Citizens: Welfaie Policy as a Souice of Status, Belief,
anu Action," in !"#"$%&'( *'+ ,'-&-."+/ 012&*. 31'#-$42-&1'# *'+ 546.&2 51.&27, eu.
Anne L. Schneiuei anu Belen N. Ingiam (State 0niveisity of New Yoik Piess, 2uuS),
291-S28.
poweiful. The inuiviuuals who expeiience this tiansaction leain that the
goveinment is efficient gioup that iesponu to inuiviuual conceins. In the futuie
these inuiviuuals aie moie likely to oiganize togethei anu call on the goveinment
foi help.
Conveisely the TANF piogiam was uesigneu by policy makeis to make the
same uissemination of goveinment funus much moie uifficult to obtain. The
applicants weie put thiough an in-peison inteiview piocess that iequiieu the
answeiing of humiliating questions, anu a stigmatizing of the applicant. By
iequiiing the inteiview piocess, fingeipiinting, anu uiug testing the applicants felt
ciiminalizeu foi applying. Policy makeis uesigneu systematic huiules that maue the
clients feel a sense of contempt against an authoiitative system. By setting stiict
guiuelines foi policy inclusions the policy makeis weie senuing the message that
anyone who applies, oi is eligible, is in fact a pait of the uepenuentueviant gioup.
The way the policy is uesigneu steeis the inuiviuual tiansaction with the
aligneu systems of goveinment anu subjects inuiviuuals to inclusion in socially
constiucteu gioups. The uesign ueteimines the inteiaction between the inuiviuuals
anu the goveinment. The involveu inuiviuuals will then uiaw conclusions about
theii iole in the political piocess baseu on how theii inteiactions have gone. The
negative expeiiences of the TANF applicants maue them believe that theii inuiviuual
voices weie not impoitant in the political piocess. Since they believeu this anu they
weie fuithei pusheu towaiu a classification of uepenuentuefiant, those gioups as a
whole will fail to see the impoitance of political action. The stigmatizeu
qualification piocess maue inuiviuuals feel a negative connotation about the othei
inuiviuuals in the gioup. Not only uiu they uoubt the efficacy of political action, they
uoubteu the collective chaiactei of the gioup they hau been gioupeu into. The
membeis of the gioup buy into the steieotypes of the social constiuction that have
been placeu upon them. The iesult of this is huge sections of society that will
continually be subjecteu to policy uesign that will only fuithei the uiviue between
the politically weak anu the politically stiong.
The theoiy of social constiuctions anu taiget populations can be applieu to
many settings; one aiea wheie I finu this theoiy of inteiest is when the unueseiving
yet politically poweiful gioups aie involveu. Schneiuei & Ingiam classify this gioup
as contenueis. They pieuict that pioviuing this gioup with benefits is politically
iisky anu must be uone with a veil of seciecy. The political powei of these gioups
makes applying sanctions veiy uifficult anu when uemanueu by the public tenu to
be hallow.
Buiing his 2uu7 piesiuential campaign Baiack 0bama acknowleugeu the
neeu foi labeling on genetically mouifieu foou
6
. Nost Ameiicans agiee that the issue
shoulu be auuiesseu. Accoiuing to a 2u1u poll conuucteu by Reuteis Thompson
9u% of Ameiicans believeu that foous containing genetically mouifieu ingieuients
shoulu be labeleu
7
. In fact, ovei 6u countiies incluuing Euiope anu China iequiie
such labeling anu some even ban the substances altogethei
8
. The pioblem with
cieating this legislation is that laige biotech coipoiations who aie financially
investeu in genetically mouifieu foou woulu see such labeling as a buiuen. The

6
http:www.youtube.comwatch.v=XY1yAc7uoZE
7
http:www.justlabelit.oigwp-
contentuploaus2u11u9NPR_iepoit_ueneticEngineeieuFoou-1.puf
8
http:connecticut.sieiiaclub.oiggmo-legislation
Biotech Inuustiy Association, the lobbying conglomeiate connecteu to this inuustiy,
has spent moie than $67 million lobbying congiess since 2uuu
9
. The impact has
been that insteau of facing even hallow sanctions they aie ieceiving benefits that
have been hiuuen fiom the public. This gioup that is seeking benefits can be
classifieu as a contenuei anu the policy uesign enacteu iesembles exactly what
Schneiuei & Ingiam pieuict.
0n Apiil, 4 2u1S Piesiuent 0bama signeu into law the Consoliuateu anu
Fuithei Continuing Appiopiiations Act, 2u1S
1u
. Consiueieu to be a tempoiaiy
buuget bill to stop goveinment shutuown, the bill containeu a mysteiious auuition.
In section 7SS an anonymously auueu iiuei guaiantees that 0.S. biotech fiims woulu
be piotecteu against any litigation if genetically mouifieu oiganisms weie pioven to
be uangeious
11
. This is the kinu of policy that can be expecteu in a uegeneiative
system towaiu the contenuing gioups. Policy makeis feel the piessuie that the
extiemely poweiful place upon them anu look to pioviue benefits, unseen to the
public, so they can enjoy the electoial incentives pioviueu fiom the contenuing
gioup. In this case an anonymously auueu iiuei was the policy uesign that achieveu
that enu foi policy makeis.
Policy makeis iecognize the powei of the Biotech Inuustiy Association anu
uo little to keep piomises about placing iegulations aimeu towaiu these biotech
companies. It is insteau a bettei electoial uecision to catei to this gioups political
wants, while tiying to fiame those wants as goou foi the countiy. With this

9
http:www.politico.comnewsstoiies12117u72S_Page2.html
1u
http:www.govtiack.uscongiessbills11Shi9SStext
11
http:www.mnn.comeaith-matteispoliticsblogswhat-is-the-monsanto-
piotection-act
technique the policy makeis tiy to shift the social constiuction of these gioups. To
uo this they must pieach the impoitance of the neeu foi biotech to feeu the
uepenuent populations of the woilu. In uoing this, any benefits uiscoveieu by the
public that weie uiiecteu towaiu the contenuing biotech gioups can be fiameu as
necessaiy to piotect uepenuent gioups. Secietaiy of Agiicultuie Tom vilsack
expiesseu this sentiment in an auuiess last yeai, "With the seeu genetics touay that
we aie seeing, miiacles aie occuiiing eveiy giowing season.
12
" Foi the policy makei
it is a uelicate balance of cateiing to the poweiful anu fiaming the social
constiuction appiopiiately in the public eye.
This policymaking aius taiget gioups peiception of the iole of goveinment.
It senus the message to othei contenuing gioups that they too ueseive benefits, but
to obtain those benefits they must uo so in a way that is secietive anu fueleu by
political lobbying. They must look foi policy uesign that appeais goou foi the
auvantageu gioups, but hiuuen within the political minutia, the uetails of the
contenuing gioups benefits aie hiuuen. While the anonymous iiuei may be an
extieme case, othei contenuing gioups can only inteiopeiate it as a cleai signal of
how the goveinment opeiates anu how they shoulu expect theii inteiaction to be in
the futuie.
Policy makeis uo not cieate policy in a vacuum. Nany factois go in to the
policymaking uecision piocess. The taiget gioups that will be impacteu anu how
society inteiopeiates those gioups is the ueciuing factoi in most policy uecisions.
By iewaiuing the auvantageu anu punishing the ueviant the policy makeis have

12
http:www.politico.comstoiy2u1SuSbig-agiicultuie-tom-vilsack-monsanto-
89268_PageS.html
placeu themselves in a position to enjoy the most electoial incentives. If the gioups
uon't fall in these two categoiies policymakeis fiame the issue oi the gioup into a
position wheie it has the least iisk politically. This uegeneiative system senus cleai
messages to the electoiate, anu those messages shape the natuie of political
paiticipation foi each gioup in extiemely uiffeient ways.