Instructor: Devin Judge-Lord, judgelor@umich.edu, 715-204-4287
Office hours: Tuesday and Thursday 10-11 AM, 3215 Weill Hall
GSI: Caroline Leland, chleland@umich.edu
Office hours: Tuesday and Thursday 11:30 am-12:30 pm, 3204 Weill Hall.
The primary objective of this core course in the MPP curriculum is to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed for effective political analysis of public policy issues and decisions. The course covers conceptual and analytic frameworks for understanding political processes, institutions, stakeholders, contexts, and policy decision-making. In addition, the course builds written and verbal communication skills, emphasizing the ability to convey clear and concise political analyses in a variety of formats, including policy memos.
This section of 510 focuses on the politics of policymaking in the U.S. federal system, with special emphasis on environmental policy. Students will learn how policy agendas are shaped and enacted within and across institutions of local, state, and U.S. federal government, as well as Native nations. We will study the roles of different actors, types of authority, and advocacy strategies and develop skills required to inform and influence policy. We will apply this conceptual understanding to policy challenges related to water quality in the Great Lakes region, which we will use as working examples throughout the semester.
Public policy is defined in many ways. I think of public policy as the government’s statement of what it intends to do. The government part makes it public, and the stated course of action makes it policy. Policy is more than a single decision, it is a statement about how future decisions will be made. Public policy is made at the international, national, state, regional, county, city, and even more local levels and across different types of institutions (legislative, executive, judicial, etc.) at each level.
Learning about public policy—what it is, the legal frameworks within which it is made, the tools available to policymakers, the policymaking process, and how to evaluate public policies—will strengthen your writing, analytical, research, and advocacy skills.
Public policy is inexorably linked to questions of power. Policy emerges from and shapes politics, but it also involves evidence. Political debates define problems, goals, and agendas, but to achieve any goal through policy, evidence about the effects of different policy tools is indispensable. Evidence must come from sources that your audience will trust. Good evidence ought to be convincing to reasonable opponents of one’s policy goals. Good arguments clarify your logic, even to those who may oppose your goals.
“Practical wisdom includes a knowledge of particular facts, and this is derived from experience” - Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics
My objective in teaching this course is to encourage your understanding of the policymaking process.
“Understand federalism and the structure of government. (Hint: the readings help!)”
“Start early on policy memos and come to office hours.”
“Policy memos are short but not easy!”
“Memos take a lot of research.”
“Follow Devin’s feedback, do the readings, ask questions.”
“Do the readings, go to office hours, and understand that this class teaches you a new skill that you may not fully grasp until the final weeks of the course. Trust the process.”
“Try and narrow down their memo topics early so they can get the full advantage of the readings.”
“Read classmate’s discussion posts. Sometimes, classmates summarize and ask a question about the week’s reading, which is helpful if you couldn’t finish it before class. Other times classmates just post interesting things. Have a study buddy you can talk to the readings to. That way, if one of you weren’t able to complete them on your own, you both can enrich one another.”
“Understand what your responsibility is in each section of the policy memo. Visit the writing center and also discuss your memos with Prof. Judge–Lord. He has very specific things he is looking for.”
“Work with Devin and the GSI often and frequently for advice and clarifications on memos.”
“Going to office hours to flush out an idea was very beneficial to me. Devin was very helpful 1–on–1 in giving guidance for memo ideas.”
“Make writing center appointments after you have a rough draft finished to get another set of eyes on your paper really helps during the final editing process, more than going in during the initial brainstorming process in my opinion.”
“Attend Devin’s office hours at least once per memo to ensure that you are writing a memo that incorporates what he wants and it can help with any clarification questions.”
“Engage with in class discussions and readings because it can help when you are formulating your policy options for your memo.”
“Skim readings to to understand the main points and focus on your policy memo.”
“Make use of office hours if you need help. That is where I got a lot of clarity and advice about assignments from Devin and our GSI, and they were immensely helpful.”
“Spend time with the readings and thinking about how they apply to your work experiences and the role you want to have in policy; I think contextualizing them and actually applying them can make them feel less theoretical/lofty, especially if you aren’t connecting to the reading.”
“Trust yourself! It will get overwhelming, especially during the memo writing and roundtable processes, but you will feel so proud of yourself at the end.”
“Go to the writing center before every memo, and think hard about which topics you can see yourself researching for two months when ranking them for the group selection. Try to do some preliminary research on all of them to see how easy they are to find information about and their relevance.”
“Be prepared for a heavier reading and research load compared to other classes. Go to office hours to clarify how you should structure your memos.”
“Research, research, research – especially in anticipation of questions during the roundtables. But also, it’s okay to not know as long as you can respond professionally.
“Take advantage of the time you have earlier on in the semester to work on the policy memo. Help each other edit, research, etc.”
“Don’t be too stressed about the roundtables (you will be ready I promise). When Devin says you will be an expert, don’t be scared.”
“Spend a lot of time in OH with both Devin and the GSI. It really helps. Try your best to get all of the reading done and to come prepared with reflections and questions for class.”
Two texts are required. Any edition of Stone is fine, but more recent editions have more contemporary examples.
Dan Egan, The Death and Life of the Great Lakes
Deborah Stone, Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. Any Edition (New York: W.W. Norton and Co.).
We will read several chapters from
Weimer and Vining’s Policy Analysis (5th or 6th ed.), a classic text that you will likely read in other courses as well.
Deva Woodly’s The Politics of Common Sense, which I highly recommend.
We will post these selected chapters and other readings on Canvas or the class website.
Other readings (e.g., journal articles) are available online, though you may need to access them through the library website. I do not upload these to Canvas because finding material that you have access to through a library is a valuable research skill. Accessing the course readings via the library website is good practice. Your downloads also helps the library and journals know that this content is being used and thus that maintaining access to it is valuable.
For background on the U.S. policymaking system and policy analysis, I recommend two additional textbooks:
No screens in class (unless I give permission). Research shows that they inhibit learning and distract your colleagues. Out of respect to the instructor and your fellow students, put your cell phone away for the duration of class.
Class attendance is required.
We will take attendance at the beginning of each class.
If you are going to miss class, please notify BOTH CAROLINE AND ME by email in advance.
Learning from each other is only possible if we show the respect due to our fellow citizens of this class.
To realize this goal, I expect us to respect our colleagues and cultivate inclusive discussions. This means that we must be careful not to mislead, degrade, interrupt someone who does not speak as much, or enforce hierarchies based on race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender expression, sexual orientation, or ability.
Ford School Inclusivity Statement: Members of the Ford School community represent a rich variety of backgrounds and perspectives. We are committed to providing an atmosphere for learning that respects diversity. While working together to build this community we ask all members to:
Ford School Public Health Protection Policy. In order to participate in any in-person aspects of this course—including meeting with other students to study or work on a team project—you must follow all the public health safety measures and policies put in place by the State of Michigan, Washtenaw County, the University of Michigan, and the Ford School. Up-to-date information on U-M policies can be found on the U-M Health Response website. It is expected that you will protect and enhance the health of everyone in the Ford School community by staying home and following self-isolation guidelines if you are experiencing any symptoms of COVID-19.
Student Mental Health and Wellbeing. The University of Michigan is committed to advancing the mental health and wellbeing of its students. We acknowledge that a variety of issues, both those relating to the pandemic and other issues such as strained relationships, increased anxiety, alcohol/drug problems, and depression, can directly impact students’ academic performance and overall wellbeing. If you or someone you know is feeling overwhelmed, depressed, and/or in need of support, services are available.
You may access the Ford School’s embedded counselor Paige Ziegler (contact information TBD) and/or counselors and urgent services at Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) and/or University Health Service (UHS). Students may also use the Crisis Text Line (text ‘4UMICH’ to 741741) to be connected to a trained crisis volunteer. You can find additional resources both on and off campus through the University Health Service and through CAPS.
Student/Faculty Interaction Best Practices. We strive to ensure a safe learning environment free from gender-based and sexual harassment, sexual violence, retaliation, and a hostile environment based on discrimination and intimidation. We make the following commitments:
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities: If you believe you need accommodation for a disability, please reach out to the UM Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) office to help determine appropriate academic accommodations and how to communicate about your accommodations with your professors. Any information you provide will be treated as private and confidential.
If you require accommodations from SSD, please start that process quickly because it takes time.
Academic Integrity: The Ford School academic community, like all communities, functions best when its members treat one another with honesty, fairness, respect, and trust. We hold all members of our community to high standards of scholarship and integrity. To accomplish its mission of providing an optimal educational environment and developing leaders of society, the Ford School promotes the assumption of personal responsibility and integrity and prohibits all forms of academic dishonesty, plagiarism, and misconduct. Academic dishonesty may be understood as any action or attempted action that may result in creating an unfair academic advantage for oneself or an unfair academic advantage or disadvantage for any other member or members of the academic community. Plagiarism involves representing the words, ideas, or work of others as one’s own in writing or presentations, and failing to give full and proper credit to the original source. Conduct, without regard to motive, that violates academic integrity and ethical standards will result in serious consequences and disciplinary action. The Ford School’s policy of academic integrity can be found in the MPP, BA, and PhD Program handbooks. Additional information regarding academic dishonesty, plagiarism, and misconduct and their consequences is available at U-M’s academic-policies page.
Use of Technology: Students should follow instructions from their instructor as to acceptable use of technology in the classroom, including laptops, in each course. All course materials (including slides, assignments, handouts, pre-recorded lectures, or recordings of class) are to be considered confidential material and are not to be shared in full or part with anyone outside of the course participants. Likewise, your own personal recording (audio or video) of your classes or office hour sessions is allowed only with the express written permission of your instructor. If you wish to post course materials or photographs/videos of classmates or your instructor to third-party sites (e.g., social media), you must first have informed consent. Without explicit permission from the instructor and in some cases your classmates, the public distribution or posting of any photos, audio/video recordings, or pre-recordings from class, discussion section, or office hours, even if you have permission to record, is not allowed and could be considered academic misconduct.
Please review additional information and policies regarding academic expectations and resources at the Ford School of Public Policy.
Please see the end of the syllabus for information about our commitment to best practices of instructor/student interactions.
Credit hours will be earned by attending two classes of \(1.3\bar{3}\) hours each, reading and preparing written work outside of class for 6 to 9 hours per week, round table presentations, one issues memo, three policy memos, one talking points memo, and five roundtable critiques.
All assignments are to be submitted on Canvas.
Subscribe to the due dates calendar.
In addition to attending class, we will continue the conversation by discussing readings and assignment tasks on Canvas.
Every week: Attend lectures or let me know ahead of time if you must miss.
The first assignment is your opportunity to set the agenda for this course. It is also a chance to learn about how political authority is distributed in the U.S. federal system.
Please submit a 1-page single-spaced issues memo on the following question:
What are the most pressing water quality issues in the Great Lakes region? Please identify three issues and three local, state, inter-state, tribal, inter-tribal, or U.S. federal officials who are in a position to advance policies addressing each issue.
You will write three 4-page double-spaced policy memos to public officials following the policy memo template exactly.
The penultimate three class periods are reserved for you to present your policy recommendations on an expert panel. A 1-page single-spaced talking points memo is due 24 hours before your presentation.
You will closely observe and comment on your peers’ presentations, writing a one-page (single-spaced) peer critique for each of the other five panels.
Each assignment builds on the prior assignment. We will comment on your policy memos (click on the “rubric” button in Canvas to see our comments). I expect you to take our comments into account in your next memo and write more effectively each time. If our comments are unclear, please come to office hours.
Assignments must be submitted on time. Grades will be reduced by a full grade after the deadline and an additional grade per 24-hour period for which the assignment is late.
If there are extenuating circumstances, I may reduce or waive penalties for late work, but we may not be able to give written comments on late work. Because the extent to which you address our feedback is critical to how well you will do on the next assignment, I will only reduce penalties for late work if you come to discuss your memo with me during office hours before the next memo is due.
Academic dishonesty is broadly defined as submitting work that is not your own without attribution. This is not acceptable in any academic course. I use software tools to detect plagiarism. If you submit written work containing plagiarized material, you will receive a failing grade for the course and be reported to the University.
You learn by doing work, and I assess your learning by the work you do. You may use tools to help craft your writing, but you must learn the craft of policy writing to succeed in class. To add value to any employer or cause, you must craft policy recommendations that are significantly better than they would get by asking an LLM. I expect the same.
Good policy rests on good evidence. Many LLMs fabricate evidence. Work submitted with fake sources or made-up facts will get a 0 for similar reasons that other forms of academic dishonesty make your work worse than worthless. The key recommendation of experts studying how students can effectively use LLMs is to craft a solid bibliography first and constrain generative tools to those sources. You will still have to do significant work to make sure that sources are used and cited appropriately, but this is much easier than finding real evidence to replace fake evidence and then making sure it is used and cited correctly. If you use people or tools other than your brain and spelling/grammar checkers to string words together, you should be prepared to comment on what you used it for, what it got right, and what it got wrong.
I am not yet sure if LLMs are a helpful tool for the craft of writing policy memos or learning this craft. I worry that they may constrain creativity by focusing our attention on problems and solutions that already exist and have already been frequently linked in the source material on which the LLMs are trained. Additionally, in many fields, including political science, rich White men are disproportionately the authors of the source texts. Uncritically using LLMs trained on biased source material risks reinforcing biases.
As mentioned in the memo template, references must be hyperlinked whenever possible. We will be checking to make sure sources of evidence are used appropriately.
I reserve the right to discuss your papers in length with you if I have concerns.
After the first week, you are expected to do all assigned readings for each week before Tuesday’s class. I will call on students during class.
Each week, we will read some original research and portions of a book for a broader context.
Tuesday: Course goals and expectations
Thursday: Crash course in the distribution of authority in the U.S. federal system
As the foundational structure of the policymaking system in the United States, the Constitution sets out, in broad (ambiguous) language, which institutions have what kind of authority to make policy.
An example of how policy and the power to make policy across institutions shifts over time.
(Note: This episode includes a brief mention of sexual assault in the context of the Violence Against Women Act at minute 48. It is not graphic.)
Additional listening:
More episodes from Radiolab’s More Perfect
More Perfect - The Most Perfect Album (songs and notes about the amendments to the U.S. Constitution)
Constitutional Primers from Pantsuit Politics
Research: Carpenter, Daniel. 2023. “Agenda Democracy.” Annual Review of Political Science Vol. 26:193-212 by Daniel Carpenter
Carpenter reviews research on the power of being able to set the agenda for policy discussions and encourages us to ask questions about how democratic agenda-setting processes are.
Research: Egan, Part 1
Egan’s environmental history of the Great Lakes is full of examples of politics and policymaking. Because it is written as journalism rather than a policy brief or social science, it presents an opportunity to train our eyes to see the policies and shifts in authority to make policy that shape our world.
Recommended Research: Wasow, Omar. 2020. “Agenda Seeding: How 1960s Black Protests Moved Elites, Public Opinion, and Voting.” American Political Science Review 114:638-659
Recommended Context: Birkland, Chapter 1-3
Research: Blackhawk, Maggie. 2019. “Federal Indian Law as Paradigm within Public Law” Harvard Law Review pages 1789-1844 (i.e., Part III is optional reading, as are footnotes)
How should we distribute and limit power across institutions? Why does the power to make policy shift among institutions over time? Blackhawk argues that the examples we hold up as paradigmatic constitutional successes and failures shape the conventional wisdom about how to distribute power. If we look to different examples (e.g., colonialism rather than slavery and Jim Crow), we may arrive at different conclusions about how best to distribute and limit power across institutions. That is, we might advance different policies that empower different sets of institutions depending on what lessons we take from the policy successes and failures we look to in the past.
Research: Egan, Part 2
Listen: The Federalist Society: “A Preview of County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund”
Differing views of the approach that the Supreme Court should take on water pollution, specifically who requires a permit under the Clean Water Act.
A post-decision review of big changes in water quality and wetlands protection law as a result of new Justices being appointed to the Supreme Court. These new interpretations (policies) constraining which wetlands and streams federal agencies can regulate under authority delegated in the Clean Water Act and what Congress can do with Commerce Clause authority reflect broader shifts in the distribution of policymaking power across institutions.
Agenda setting issues memo due Monday at 7 PM
Research: Egan, Part 3
How do actors outside government shape policy? Leech reviews what social science has learned to date.
How do minority groups get heard in the policy process? Dwidar examines the role of lobbying coalitions in advancing minority views.
Listen: SSN: Moonshots - Thomas Kalil
Practical lessons on policy advocacy from Kalil’s experience in the White House.
How is evidence used in the policy process?
Recommended Context: Birkland, Part II, Chapters 4-7
Recommended Listen: Niskanan Center: “How Bureaucrats Make Good Policy”
Memo assignments and round table groups announced Tuesday
Review policy memo research and writing assistance resources from Writing Center staff
Resources:
Library Research Guide: Local News Sources to find issues currently being discussed in Michigan.
University of Michigan Library Databases - Local News to find issues currently being discussed in Michigan.
Harvard Kennedy School Library Think Tank Search to find think tank policy briefs with keyword search.
Most policies are bundles of various policy tools. To assess how a policy (e.g., a forestry certification standard) is changing, we must disaggregate and first assess change in its component parts.
Different policy tools face different political and implementation challenges. Raymond reviews the case of pollution credit markets as a policy approach.
Context: Bardach, Appendix B
A helpful list of policy tools you might think about using to solve problems.
Context: Weimer and Vining, Chapter 1 FROM THE 5th EDITION, not the 6th (current) edition.
The Google Books free preview includes all of Chapter 1 from the 5th edition, but it does not include Chapters 2 and 3, so you will need to get those from Canvas for next week.
Recommended Context:
Memo 1 due Tuesday 7 PM
Research: Drutman, Lee. There are too many lawyers in politics. Here’s what to do about it.
Listen: SSN: Lawyers, Lawyers, and More Lawyers - Adam Bonica
What are the biases of policymaking in the U.S.? One bias that is often underappreciated is the disproportionate share of policymakers who are lawyers. Like economic styles of thinking (see recommended reading by Elizabeth Popp Berman), legal styles of thinking often frame good policymaking as an exercise in rational thinking.
Listen: NPR: Obama Office Alters More Federal Rules Than Bush - Ari Shapiro
Context: Stone, Introduction + Chapters 1 & 2
Recommended Context: Birkland, Part IV, Chapters 12-13
Recommended Research: Thinking Like an Economist: How Economics Became the Language of U.S. Public Policy by Elizabeth Popp Berman
Tuesday: FALL BREAK
Thursday:
Context: Stone, the remainder of Part II (Chapters 3-6)
Context: Weimer and Vining, Chapters 2 and 3 (5th or 6th ed.)
Memo 2 due Tuesday 7 PM
Context: Stone, Part III
Research: Woodly, Deva. 2015. The Politics of Common Sense: How Social Movements Use Public Discourse to Change Politics and Win Acceptance. Oxford University Press, Introduction and Chapter 1
Context: Stone, Part III
Memo 3 due Tuesday 7 PM
Research: Weaver, Vesla M. “How Mass Imprisonment Burdens the United States with a Distrustful Underclass”
Listen: SSN: 147: In Government We Distrust - Suzanne Mettler
Context: Stone, Part IV
Recommended
Research: Seifter. 2016. “Second-Order Participation in Administrative Law.” UCLA Law Review 63
Listen: Citizens’ Initiative SSN 117: The Citizen Expert-John Gastil
Talking Points Memo due 24 hours before your roundtable presentation
Tuesday: Course wrap-up, reflection, and responses to roundtable presentations
- How has your understanding of the politics of policymaking changed since the start of the semester?
- Which reading stands out to us most and why?
- What connections do you see between the memos/roundtables and the readings?
Thursday: No class, Winter Break
Because many topics we cover are subjects of ongoing discussion, I may make occasional changes to the course readings over the semester. I will notify you of any substantive changes. The full revision history is on github.
We will conduct office hours with my door open.
Students who wish to have confidential conversations with me may schedule a private meeting via Zoom or may ask to have a closed-door meeting. But this closed-door meeting must be made on your request in writing, even on the spot. I will never suggest a closed-door meeting myself because of the power dynamic.
We will document all pre-scheduled meetings between the instructor and the student via Google Calendar (or other software) and/or university email.
Students who email to request an office hour appointment should expect to receive an email confirmation or a Google Calendar (or other software) invitation from me, or, upon my email confirmation and request, may send me a Google Calendar (or other software) invitation for this meeting. The purpose is to provide a permanent record of the meeting and to ensure that all class activities are documented and transparent. Students who choose to drop by for informal meetings are welcome to do so, but there will be no documentation provided. (See above for open-door policy.)
We will choose meeting locations and conduct meetings with student and instructor safety in mind.
We will ensure that all individual meetings between instructors/students will take place at university venues.
We will ensure that all off-campus meetings, trips, or events must engage with course material.
Off-campus meetings will not involve alcohol or take place at locations that serve alcohol. If the class goes out for a meal, it will be at a cafe or restaurant that does not serve alcohol. The location/day/time of any off-campus meetings between the instructor and students will be documented in Google Calendar (or other software).
We, the instructors, will conduct all individual communications using the University platforms of email, Canvas, Slack, or Piazza, with the caveat that we may use non-university platforms set up by students (such as GroupMe) only if they include all students in the class.
There will be no instructor-student private communications on any non-University platforms, such as social media, GroupMe, WhatsApp, etc.
For more information on resources for reporting sexual misconduct, please see the faculty senate best practices for faculty interactions and U-M’s page on Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct.