000			01645naa a2200181uu 4500
001			0092111160737
003			OSt
005			20190211173716.0
008			100921s2010 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aVANSICKLE-WARD, Rachel _942265
245	1	0	_aThe politics of precision : _bspecificity in state mental health policy
260			_aThousand Oaks : _bSAGE, _cApril 2010
520	3		_aPolicy delegation is, in part, a function of the precision of statutes—the 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
773	0	8	_tState and Local Government Review _g42, 1, p. 3-21 _dThousand Oaks : SAGE, April 2010 _xISSN 0160323X _w
942			_cS
998			_a20100921 _b1116^b _cDaiane
998			_a20120531 _b1449^b _cCarolina
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c36325 _d36325
041			_aeng