Arkansas Politics and Government, Second Edition

13. The Politics of State Services

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 [First Page] [293], (1) Lines: 0 to 60 ——— 7.5pt PgVar ——— Normal Page PgEnds: TEX [293], (1) chapter thirteen The Politics of State Services When I was doing the report there was no question about the fact thatArkansas just jumped out as being a state that has made tremendous progress as far as education is concerned. C. Emily Feistritzer, quoted in Arkansas Democrat, November 12, 1985 Too many of our children are leaving school for a life of deprivation, burdening our culture with the corrosive effects of citizens who lack the education to contribute not only to their community’s welfare but who will be unable to live their own lives except, in many cases, on the outermost fringes of human existence. Judge Collins Kilgore, 2001 Earlier in this book we emphasized that for much of Arkansas’s history, politics, and government were often irrelevant, sometimes obstructionist, and rarely of material value to citizens’ well-being. The previous chapters have described some extensive changes from traditional to contemporary politics as well as many structural strengthenings of state government. Now it is time to ask, have better politics and better government resulted in better programs and services? A sweeping and superficial response could clearly be yes. At the turn of the twentieth century, the state of Arkansas built no roads, provided almost no support to education, and maintained few public institutions other than a Neanderthal state prison and a substandard insane asylum. A century later, the state was collecting and spending well over three billion dollars annually on roads, schools, a host of health and welfare institutions, and many other services. Clearly, then, better politics has produced better policy; but what 294 The Politics of State Services 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 [294], (2) Lines: 60 to ——— 0.0pt PgV ——— Normal Page PgEnds: TE [294], (2) may seem obvious becomes considerably less clear when additional factors are considered, as they must be. First, what if any is the evidence that political and governmental reforms have any causal connection to public policies? Many political scientists insist that public policy is the direct outcome of certain socioeconomic factors, and therefore that Arkansas’s increased spending and services are the automatic by-product of the state’s increased income, urbanization, and industrialization. Other political scientists insist that, to the contrary, though the state’s economic base clearly provides the resources and needs from which public policy is fashioned, factors such as voter turnout, electoral competition, interest-group strength, legislative professionalism, and gubernatorial leadership capacity have a powerful and independent mediating effect between the economic environment and public policy choices.Though this controversy cannot be resolved here, it must be acknowledged.1 Second, what in fact is “better” public policy? The health of a political system can be somewhat objectively measured by certain traditional standards of democracy: How honest and open and competitive are the elections? How attentive and informed and participatory are the citizens? How representative and responsive is the government? Measuring policy output (that is, how much does the government spend on which services) is also fairly straightforward. Assessing policy outcome (what are the ultimate results of these regulations and services on citizens’ lives) is much more complicated and value-laden. Few government programs are so universally beneficial that one can say with certainty they are desirable, or that more is better. Furthermore, opinion data is insufficient to provide proof that government actions are or are not satisfying citizen expectations and demands. Further complications arise when comparative considerations are factored in. Obviously, Arkansas government is a greater presence in the lives of its citizens than was once the case, but how does that measure up against the magnified needs and resources of contemporary times? And how does Arkansas’s governmental effort compare with that of the other states, which have also become much more activist and interventionist regulators and service providers in recent decades? In the edition of one widely used textbook before Bill Clinton’s entrance onto the national stage, college students were introduced to...