The politics of precision : specificity in state mental health policy
By: VANSICKLE-WARD, Rachel
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: Thousand Oaks : SAGE, April 2010State and Local Government Review 42, 1, p. 3-21Abstract: Policy delegation is, in part, a function of the precision of statutesthe more ambiguous or open-ended the statute, the more decisions are delegated to agencies and the courts. Moreover, the study of policy detail sheds light on the objectives pursued, and constraints faced, by policy-making actors. Yet surprisingly little work in political science has concentrated on the conditions that contribute to or diminish the specificity of statutes, and the work that has been done promotes contradictory findings. This article treats the effects of institutional and political fragmentation on the specificity of mental health insurance laws across states. Using a new measure of statute specificity and identifying new sources of fragmentation as independent variables (e.g., gubernatorial power, interest group diversity, and party polarization), the author shows that fragmentation encourages ambiguity in mental health policy. This ambiguity may serve as a tool to achieve compromise when disagreement precludes precision
Policy delegation is, in part, a function of the precision of statutesthe more ambiguous or open-ended the statute, the more decisions are delegated to agencies and the courts. Moreover, the study of policy detail sheds light on the objectives pursued, and constraints faced, by policy-making actors. Yet surprisingly little work in political science has concentrated on the conditions that contribute to or diminish the specificity of statutes, and the work that has been done promotes contradictory findings. This article treats the effects of institutional and political fragmentation on the specificity of mental health insurance laws across states. Using a new measure of statute specificity and identifying new sources of fragmentation as independent variables (e.g., gubernatorial power, interest group diversity, and party polarization), the author shows that fragmentation encourages ambiguity in mental health policy. This ambiguity may serve as a tool to achieve compromise when disagreement precludes precision
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer
There are no comments for this item.