Public Policy
MSU research helps policymakers, public agencies and the state legislature make informed decisions for the well-being of children and families.
More resources below

Beyond Civics
A primer on political realities and
the forces that shape public policy
by Elizabeth Moore and Michele Corey
Photo by David Trumpie

"Citizens should not watch the making of sausage or public policy."

Perhaps it is true that the less we know about sausage making, the more palatable our breakfasts might be. But when it comes to public policymaking, we as researchers and practitioners must be involved even if the process makes us queasy at times.

Policymaking is inherently messy. Debating, compromising, and consensus building are hard work and time consuming. Yet, these very complications and difficulties offer valuable opportunities for university faculty, Extension educators, community organizations and agencies to get involved with democratic processes that determine the welfare of children and families. Our duty as experts is to join this fray—to offer our expertise, our opinions, and our energies to these deliberations.

In this article, we go beyond a high school civics lesson to discuss the realities that shape the political process, and determine how professionals can get involved to inform public policy decisions that affect Michigan’s communities.

Forces that Shape Policy
Based on our observations and experiences, we have found that numerous forces will converge to bring an issue onto the public agenda and affect the way that issue moves forward. Rarely is one factor responsible for shaping its outcome as is clear from these examples of forces that shape policy decisions.

• Media: A newspaper series about the murder of a two-year old by her parents has spurred legislative discussion about the state’s child protective services system, showing how media attention on an emotional issue can promote discussion and sometimes action.

• Pilot Programs: About 15 years ago, Michigan targeted just a few districts for pre-school education for at-risk four year olds. Now the majority of districts offer such programs, illustrating how pilot efforts often become institutionalized over time.

• Evaluation: The long-term evaluation of the Perry PreSchool Program in Ypsilanti helped to increase the support for preschool programs in the schools. Program evaluation is an important element but such data can also be overlooked or disputed because of different political values.

• Interdependent Systems: New federal welfare rules requiring parents of young children to work increased the need for child care services in local communities. Policy changes at one level of government impact the need for services from state and local agencies.

• Broad Societal Shifts: After 30 years of debate on the way schools were funded, the mid-year closing of a small school district helped trigger a series of actions that led to dramatic changes in state policy. Such major policy shifts usually require bi-partisan efforts, a broad-based coalition of support groups and sufficient public frustration with the current situation.

Given these and many other forces that shape policy, it is especially important to develop an understanding of the political culture and the realities of the political arena.

Political Realities
Policymakers in a democratic society are elected to represent the interests of their constituents. As they come together to make decisions on complex issues, the policy arena can become a swirling cauldron of pressures and influences. Being aware of these pressures makes it easier to negotiate the policy process.

Diverse constituent concerns
Bring together a group of parents to talk about how schools should operate and it is quickly apparent that there are nearly as many policy solutions as there are parents. Legislators and elected officials need to consider a range of viewpoints and represent diverse constituent concerns. Given this political reality, they are often very receptive to learning about how constituents feel about an issue.

Partisan realities
Political parties control the tone and the mechanics of the policy process. The majority party largely determines what policies are taken up and when and how they move forward. A member of the minority party is less likely to be able to marshal the needed support for an issue but can play an important role in questioning issues and providing alternatives. Partisan realities need to be considered when working with policymakers.

Pros and Cons of Term Limits
Term limits for state and some local elected officials create an ongoing turnover in electoral positions. Term-limited policymakers have less time to learn about the complexities of an issue. They also have little time for establishing relationships with their colleagues, making it more difficult to find mutual interests and common ground on an issue. On the other hand, this frequent influx of new faces and fresh perspectives can foster the growth of new ideas and offer opportunities for the university and for community organizations to educate policymakers on child and family issues.

Differing data
Over the years, studies have reported differing results concerning the long-term impact of participation in Head Start programs. Collectively, they represent an important body of research, but policymakers need assistance in sorting through those differences to weigh the relevance of the research findings.

Competing interests
Policymakers continually hear requests for increased funding and for using new approaches to issues. As the state budget is discussed during a time of economic uncertainty, there is heated public debate on funding priorities for community health, public education and social services. Coalition efforts are one way of mitigating competing interests and maintaining a clearer focus on the well-being of children and families.


Informing the Policy Process
As policymakers grapple with an array of complex issues, we need to explore ways the university and community organizations can help inform the debate on behalf of children and families. We will look at some of the opportunities, challenges and approaches to negotiating this “swirling cauldron.”

Providing research data
Timely and reliable research can be tremendously helpful for legislators, and sharing educational resources and research findings with policymakers is a natural way for universities to inform policy debate. However, the sharp contrast between the cultures of campus and the capitol pose special challenges. Factors include differing perceptions of issues, time frames, completeness of information, and sensitivity to political implications.

The university community tends to view issues in a comprehensive, holistic, inter-connected manner, and the academic culture values thoughtful and prolonged inquiry into an issue, making a decision only after all evidence is considered. The work environment of the legislature, however, fosters a sense of urgency, with constituent pressures, looming elections and media attention demanding quick answers. Also, when researchers complete a study, they want the results publicized; whereas policymakers may not be as interested in information that has controversial policy implications.

The MSU Family Impact Seminars, nonpartisan seminars and reports for legislators, offer a successful strategy for negotiating these differences and promoting discussions between policymakers and faculty members on issues such as child care, school readiness, and violence prevention.

Educating the citizenry
Extension educators, on campus and in every Michigan county, use MSU’s resources to help citizens address local or statewide issues, understand newly approved laws, and facilitate community discussions. However, political controversy about social services, education or family issues can make it challenging for Extension educators to keep an unbiased footing and provide objective educational information. Maintaining an educational role can also be difficult when Extension is part of a coalition with advocacy groups.

In spite of such challenges, MSU Extension has a long history of connecting research-based resources with communities and providing the educational component of policy initiatives. Examples of recent successes include efforts to help citizens understand approved food safety legislation, to increase childhood immunizations and to enhance early literacy.

Advocating for families and children
Community organizations are a crucial connection point between citizens and policymakers, sharing constituents’ concerns with lawmakers, serving as “eyes and ears” on the policymaking process, and informing their members about developing policies.

Michigan has an array of nonprofits, faith-based groups, neighborhood organizations, and other agencies, but they are frequently small, and unlike big lobbying groups, have limited financial resources. Also, their diverse values and priorities make it difficult to bring organizations together even when they agree on a common goal, such as preventing teen pregnancy.

Coalition building is one way for groups to pool their resources and advance a common issue. The Michigan Coalition for Children and Families, for example, is a successful statewide network of more than 70 organizations, focused on prioritizing prevention. The coalition offers an annual “Children’s Agenda” related to legislative budget priorities.

Multiple Approaches
As we look at factors that shape the policy agenda, it is important to remember that there are multiple approaches to working in this arena. We need to recognize the value of building relationships with policymakers and their staff and realize that these are long-term efforts that seldom yield immediate results. The university can provide valuable research to inform the debate and expand the policy alternatives. Extension educators can facilitate community discussions. Organizations can target particular issues and advocate for alternatives. These multiple approaches can not only enhance the policy process but also benefit Michigan’s children and families.

Elizabeth Moore is a Public Policy Specialist for Michigan State University Extension.
Michele Corey is the Director of Community Advocacy for Michigan's Children.

MSU Connect Contents