Venue Shopping, Policy Feedback, and American Preschool Education

Important public policy decisions are made in a variety of institutional settings in the United States, and this decentralization gives policy advocates an incentive to focus on the venue in which they are most likely to be successful. The phenomenon of venue shopping has long been recognized as a crucial element of the policymaking process, but less attention has been paid to its long-term consequences.¹ Recent scholarship on policy feedback, however, suggests that successful venue shopping may alter the terrain on which subsequent decisions are made. Advocates' ability to achieve their objectives in a particular setting may affect temporally distant developments by creating constituencies with a stake in existing arrangements, in terms both of the government officials who are granted jurisdiction over policy decisions and of the program beneficiaries with a stake in the choices these officials make.

This article assesses the long-term consequences of venue shopping by tracing the evolution of American preschool education. In December 1971, President Richard Nixon vetoed a bill that would have dramatically ex panded the role of the national government in this policy area. Preschool advocates shift ed gears, experiencing greater success at the state level and expanding the reach of less comprehensive national programs. The entrenchment of these programs influenced subsequent congressional debates over preschool education, as the officials who ran the programs and the constituencies who benefited from them appeared before Congress to defend the status quo. Thus the evolution of American preschool education suggests that successful venue shopping can affect the future possibilities for policy change.

Venue Shopping and Policy Feedback

Scholars oft en describe the United States as a "laggard" where social policies developed later, grew more slowly, and are less generous than corresponding programs in the advanced industrial democracies of Europe. Some attribute the distinctive shape of American social policy to the degree to which American political institutions diffuse power.² The United States is a "federal state that divides authority and gives legislatures and courts pivotal policymaking roles."³ This decentralized structure impedes the adoption of social policies because it gives opponents of policy initiatives multiple opportunities to block them. Opponents can thwart an initiative by succeeding at a single veto point, but its supporters must clear every hurdle placed before them. ⁴

In considering the institutional hypothesis, it is important to recognize that decentralization is a double-edged sword. The dispersal of political authority provides multiple veto points for opponents of a reform, but each of these settings is also a point of access for supporters. Frustrated in one venue, reformers can try to achieve their goals in another setting. Aft er losing a congressional battle, for example, advocates can turn to the executive branch or to the state or federal courts. Those who object to a court ruling can turn to the legislative process. Policy issues may be assigned to any of a variety of institutions, and "there are no immutable rules that spell out which institutions in society must be charged with making which decisions." ⁵ Decentralization can therefore lead to venue shopping, in which advocates focus on the institutional setting in which they feel they are most likely to experience success.

What are the long-term consequences of venue shopping? If reformers achieve their objectives in a given institutional setting, does their success affect what is possible in other venues? To answer these questions, it is necessary to adopt a developmental perspective that is attentive to how political processes play out over considerable periods of time.⁶ This perspective suggests that public policies function both as the outcomes of political processes and as something that shapes those processes. The existing policy repertoire has a dynamic impact on policymaking, serving as a "vital force shaping the alternatives perceived and the policies adopted."⁷ Policymaking is an iterative process, and scholars must consider both the short- and long-term causes of policy change.

A core claim of the developmental perspective is the significance of policy feedback, the notion that "policies with specific qualities can produce social effects that reinforce their own stability." ⁸ One form of...