In this comparative policy development analysis, I utilize path-dependence theory and presidential records to analyze President Lyndon Johnson's success in passing Medicare and Medicaid and President Bill Clinton's failure to pass national health care reform. Findings support four major themes from the Johnson administration: 1) President Johnson had a keen understanding of the importance of language in framing debate; 2) He placed control of the legislative process in the hands of a small, select group of seasoned political operatives and career policymaking professionals; 3) He paid considerable attention to the details of negotiations and the policy consequences; and 4) He had a highly developed sense of the political and legislative processes involved in passing major legislation. The case study of the Clinton administration reveals five major themes: 1) There is a lack of evidence that President Clinton remained actively engaged throughout the policy development and legislative processes, instead choosing to delegate the process to the First Lady; 2) There was a naiveté on the part of the Clintons and many administration staff members with regard to the legal and political ramifications of their decisions; 3) The Clintons tried to make the plan fully their own, sharing little credit for its development with Congress; 4) Their attempts to incorporate existing corporate health care delivery structures with their vision for universal coverage proved unworkable; and 5) The extended time from task force launch to bill delivery gave opponents ample time to marshal their opposition forces. I conclude that in developing health care legislation, Johnson had the advantages of: 1) a small group of key policymakers; 2) multiple, simultaneous legislative initiatives which diffused the attention of a more limited media; and, 3) national crises which promoted an environment conducive to sweeping policy change. I suggest that major, national health care reform will not occur until: 1) an economic or geopolitical crisis sets the stage for change; 2) business interests and progressive interests find common ground; and, 3) Americans achieve a new cultural understanding of universal health care as both economically just and economically necessary. / text

No description available.

No description available.

自二次世界大戰結束以後，美國對朝鮮半島的安全政策經歷了不同的轉變。韓戰後各個時期的政府主要仍是以對南韓的安全承諾與〈美韓共同防衛條約〉的軍事嚇阻作為其政策與戰略的基石。冷戰後朝鮮半島遭遇了兩次核子危機，但是柯林頓政府卻改變政策，以合作與對話的方式試圖解決危機。小布希政府團隊在執政以前，對於柯林頓政府的作法始終抱持反對的態度，認為應該要對北韓採取強硬態度。但是隨著小布希政府執政、911事件的發生與反恐戰爭的進行，小布希政府對朝鮮半島安全政策卻採取了與柯林頓政府類似的作法。這種變化是否意味柯林頓政府在朝鮮半島安全政策上有其優點，值得後任政府效法。因此，本論文以薄富爾的「行動戰略」理論作為研究途徑，藉由政策與戰略選擇的分析、行動計畫中「政治診斷」與「戰略診斷」的研判，以及各種戰略行動模式的鋪陳，探討柯林頓政府時期的朝鮮半島安全政策。同時比較柯林頓和小布希政府政策與戰略上的差異與因襲，並分析當前情勢，嘗試提出未來可能的變化。 本論文發現，柯林頓政府對於北韓自始至終都是採取「交往與擴大」政策，希望能以「交往與擴大」政策將北韓拉回國際體系內，使其遵守國際體系的規範。小布希政府則是一開始採取典型的現實主義政策，不願意與北韓交往，因為典型現實主義者所重視的是和國際體系中強權國家之間關係的處理，而不是注重在衰敗國家或轉變中國家的事務。一直到911事件後才改採兼具現實主義與理想主義的新政策，對北韓的態度與作法才有所轉變。 柯林頓政府始終均是運用多邊主義的戰略行動。小布希政府最初對於北韓是「冷處理」的方式，不予理會，但是911事件之後，開始調整政策，在戰略也有所改變。小布希的戰略是所謂的「鷹派交往」。「鷹派交往」戰略和「選擇性交往」戰略比較貼近，但是二者還是有差異。雖然「鷹派交往」戰略和「選擇性交往」戰略的內涵均是以多邊主義的方式，聯合經過慎選的重要國家採取間接模式的總體戰略行動來追求政策目標，但是「鷹派交往」戰略卻對對手國更具有壓力，因為「鷹派交往」戰略在採取交往的同時，不忘記強硬的手段。換言之，「鷹派交往」戰略將交往的內容作為誘因，引誘對手國往本國所期望的方向行動，當其行動違反本國所欲時，這項誘因便可以隨時轉變成為懲罰的工具。從這點看來，小布希的戰略選擇，在戰略行動的產出上較柯林頓來得有效率。 由於戰略是「兩個對立意志使用力量以來解決其爭執時所用的辯證法藝術」，因此在決定戰略的選擇時必須考量敵我之間的各項資源、行動自由的大小，乃至於互動模式，這些都是在進行行動計畫，選取戰略之時，必須審慎考量的，否則便可能產生無法指導行動的戰略。柯林頓政府的戰略雖然立意甚佳，但卻沒有考慮到採取此種戰略是否能夠從中規劃出有效的行動模式，來維持原有的行動自由、並進一步爭取最大的行動自由。這是柯林頓政府朝鮮半島安全政策的缺憾。 / Since the end of World War II, There have been different changes in the U.S. Korean Peninsula security policy. During the post-Korean war era, each administration makes its policy and strategy on the basis of security promise to the South Korea and military deterrence toward the North with U.S.-R.O.K. Mutual Defense Treaty. There were two nuclear crises after the end of the cold war, but the Clinton administration changed its policy and tried to solve the problem in way of cooperation and dialog. Before taking office, George W. Bush’s team was against Clinton’s policy and declared that the United States should take coercive actions against the North Korea. However, since George W. Bush took office, 911 broke out and the war on terror was going on, the Bush administration took the similar policy on the Korean Peninsula security policy as the Clinton’s. Does this mean that Clinton’s policy may have goodness that worthy for the administrations after his to follow? Thus, I took Andr□ Beaufre’s “strategy of action” theory as my thesis study approach. Through the analysis on the choice of policy and strategy, the decision on “political diagnosis” and “strategic diagnosis” of action planning, and the display of each kind of strategic actions, this thesis analyzed the Korean Peninsula security policy in the Clinton era. At the same time, I compared the difference and continuance between the two administrations and analyzed the status quo trying to figure out the would-be changes in this thesis In the thesis I discovered that the Clinton administration took the “engagement and enlargement” policy from the beginning to the end, hoping that the policy would pull back the North Korea into the international system and make it follow the international order. At the beginning, Bush administration took the classical realist policy and was not willing to engage North Korea. Because the emphasis of classical realists is to deal with the relations among power nations, not paying attention to the affairs of declining and falling states. Not until the outbreak of 911 did the Bush administration take new policy composite with realism and idealism, and change the attitude toward North Korea. The Clinton administration undertook the strategic action in multi-polarity from the beginning to the end. Bush administration chose to ignore North Korea at the beginning, but changed his policy and strategy after the 911. What Bush undertook is called “Eagle Engagement Strategy”. “Eagle Engagement Strategy” is similar to “Selective Engagement Strategy” but there are still some differences between them. Though both Strategies unite those states carefully chosen and undertake indirect total strategic actions to chase the policy goals in multi-lateral way, the “Eagle Engagement Strategy” is much powerful in pressing the rival states. That is because when people undertake the “Eagle Engagement Strategy” to engage, there are still ways in coerciveness. In other words, the “Eagle Engagement Strategy” provides engagement as motive to make rival states undertake the way we wish. When the rival states do not follow our will, this motive may switch into the tool of punishment. In this point of view, the Bush administration’s strategy is more effective than the Clinton’s. The Clinton administration’s strategy was base on good will, but the Clinton administration did not considerate its effective action modes to maintain its original action freedom and chase the most action freedom by this strategy. To Clinton’s Korean Peninsula security policy it is a pity.

In my thesis, I analyze the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama in 1989-2010. Upon comparing their China policies, I concluded that the approach of the United States to China is inconsistent, mainly due to the changing patterns of power, conflicting value systems and the growing importance of commercial interests in the relationship.

The President performs many roles, but one role of increasing importance over time is that of Chief Manager of the Economy. In the era of the modern presidency, there has been a growing institutionalization of the executive branch’s management of the economy. Presidents approach economic management differently depending upon their personalities, management style, and their time within both the crisis and the administration. Three case studies will be used to explore the differences and similarities in presidential actions during times of economic crisis: these case studies will examine the presidencies of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Richard M. Nixon, and William J. Clinton. The different methods and policy actions taken by these presidents are described as change oriented economic policy, electoral gain economic policy, and preemptive economic policy. This research will examine these methods to determine: 1.) How did each president approach economic policy? 2.) Were their approaches similar to a domestic policy or foreign policy? and 3.) What factors influence these approaches?

The main purpose of this master's thesis is to describe and analyze the opinions of a several selected journalists, associated with the The New York Times, on participation the official policy of the United States in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992- 1995). On the basic of texts of several outstanding personalities of American journalism the early 90s, the thesis presents a picture of how this conflict resonated in one of the most popular American journals and primarily how journalists evaluated the policy of president Bill Clinton and his National Security Council in the Balkans. Besides this main practical part, which includes an overview of the every single journalists and political position of The New York Times, the thesis is also dedicated to the overall nature of foreign policy of W. J. Clinton and George Bush sr., background of Bosnian conflict and detailed summary of events in wartime Bosnia with a strong emphasis on the participation of the White House.

No description available.

This dissertation uses Critical Discourse Analysis to study debates among elite members and affiliates of the Democratic Party from 1988-2008 on class issues and their relevance to the party's environmental agenda. This research builds off of several related historical and theoretical accounts (both primary and secondary) of new social and economic divisions between college-educated and non-college educated workers that have shaped American politics since the 1970s. I focus on how Democratic interest in environmentalism changed as a 'professional-managerial-class' or 'new class' supplanted unionized, industrial workers as the primary social base of the Democratic party. I trace how related people and groups associated with the party understood the relevance of these different classes to consolidating enduring electoral power, and how these informed specific arguments for what ideological views or policy proposals the party should publicly embrace. Furthermore, I identify 'green' narratives related to environmental protection, as an emerging thematic framework that some Democrats felt could help them build a coalition based primarily around support from educated, white-collar workers. I contend that the ideological character of the party's environmental rhetoric, as articulated in this debate, has been influenced mostly by attempts to tailor the party's agenda to the perceived sensibilities of the college-educated, rather than the older working-class base. My analysis proposes three overarching core concepts most often ascribed to the professional class and its members' ideological disposition. I use the discursive method described above to explore their relationship to the framing of the climate issue and its connection to broader ideological values. These are (A) Meritocracy (B) Technocratic Rationality, and (C) Individualism. I argue these professional-oriented climate narratives can be understood as adapting the conceptual reasoning of an older liberal tradition to the structural conditions of the post-70s, globalized economy. Specifically, that the frequent emphasis on these three concepts implicit to the PMC-centric discourse is consistent with a liberal view of freedom as 'non-interference', and a related hostility to democratic interventions into the market. This ideological analysis is significant to the dissertation's focus on framings of climate change because an account this conceptual logic reveals the potential limits of the Democrats' efforts to create majoritarian, political support for environmental protection. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation provides an analysis of debates among elite members and affiliates of the Democratic Party from 1988-2008 on class issues and their relevance to the party's environmental agenda. This investigation is informed by existing accounts of the social and economic divisions between college-educated and non-college educated workers that have shaped American politics since the 1970s. I focus on how Democratic interest in environmentalism developed as a 'professional-managerial-class' or 'new class' supplanted unionized, industrial workers as the primary social base of the Democratic party. I trace how related people and groups associated with the party understood the relevance of these different classes to winning future elections, and how these informed specific arguments for what ideological views or policy proposals the party should publicly embrace. Furthermore, I identify 'green' narratives related to environmental protection, as an emerging thematic framework that some Democrats felt could help them build a coalition based primarily around support from educated, white-collar workers. There are two narratives about class and its relevance to the party that recur frequently in these sources. The first advocates for a coalition made up primarily by the working-class, conceived of as wage-earning, high-school educated voters working in domestically bound, blue collar industries. The second argues the party should build a coalition made up of a professional-managerial class—referred to as the "symbolic analysts", "the rising learning class", "ideapolis dwellers", or "wired workers"— conceived of as affluent, well-educated professionals working in globally integrated sectors of a high-tech "new economy". Each of these views are based on identifying specific ideological sensibilities with the respective classes, which then justify arguments for particular framings of the party's identity and policy agenda. I contend that the ideological character of the party's public philosophy, as articulated in this debate, has been influenced mostly by attempts to tailor the party's agenda (or rhetoric) to the perceived sensibilities of the college-educated, rather than the older working-class base. I show that this was motivated by a belief that a coalition built around votes from the PMC would serve as a more reliable electoral base in a political environment where it was difficult to build support through redistributive, New Deal-style policies as the party had done since the 1930s. Some members perceived the professionals' investment in a post-material "New Politics" or "progressive centrism" as an alternative. The college-educated, they argued, could be motivated to support the Democrats on cultural grounds, allowing the party to embrace more free-market policies. In addition, several figures, including Chuck Schumer, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore argued that environmentalism could or should serve as the foundation of this progressive centrist version of the party, because of green issues' supposed compatibility with a 'pro-business', market-based agenda.

Les relations entre les Etats-Unis et l’Amérique latine entre 1988 et 2008 ont connu de nombreux bouleversements et chambardements. Les nombreuses raisons qui en sont les causes ont été abordées dans cette thèse. Après avoir étudié les enjeux théoriques de leurs relations nous nous sommes demandés si la politique étrangère était une politique publique comme les autres. Suite à une comparaison générale nous avons étudié les spécificités de l’aide publique au développement et le cas d’une théorie promue par George Bush Jr qui est la « diplomatie transformationnelle ». Dans un second temps, nous avons étudié les bouleversements diplomatiques apparus dans un certain nombre de pays de cette région du fait de l’arrivée de gouvernements de gauche. Les pages consacrées aux trois programmes élaborés par Washington dans les années 2000 (MCA, les deux plans Colombie et le Plan Merida) montrent leur originalité mais aussi leur application et leurs résultats mitigés tant du point de vue de l’efficacité, de l’efficience que de la consolidation des relations diplomatiques avec les pays de cette région. Enfin, nous avons décrit et analysé l’importance des enjeux énergétiques avec l’Amérique latine pour les Etats-Unis puis développé les raisons qui les poussent à vouloir constituer la ZLEA. Cela démontre l’imbrication des questions économiques, diplomatiques et sécuritaires pour les décideurs américains. / The relations between the United States and Latin America between 1988 and 2008 had known a lot of upheavals. The different reasons which were at the origin of that were approached in this dissertation. After having studied the theorical stakes concerning their relations we asked ourself if foreign policy was a classic public policy. Then, we studied development aid’s specificities and a theory promoted by George W. Bush which is the « transformational diplomacy ». In a second part, we studied diplomatical upheavals appeared in some countries of the region, consequence of the election of left wing governments. Pages dedicated to the three programs worked out by Washington during the 2000’s (MCA, both Colombian plans and Merida Initiative) showed the originality but also their application and their reserved results so much from the point of view of the efficiency and the consolidation of the diplomatical relations with the countries of this region. At last, we described and analyzed the importance the energy challenges with Latin America for the United States and developed reasons which urge them to want to constitute the FTAA. This show The interweaving of the economic, diplomatic and security questions for the American decision-makers.