Search

In an effort to address some of the gaps in homeland security policy analysis—at present a relatively understudied topic from an analytic perspective—Professor Mueller offers an examination of policy decision making for a subset of low probability–high consequence events; particularly the idea of passive asset defense. This article provides a critical examination of Professor Mueller's work, tendering what we identify as a number of critical limitations with his framework and argues it does not provide an adequate basis for sound analysis in this policy area. We also offer several suggestions where one could build upon a portion of the groundwork his paper lays, especially in moving toward a greater appreciation of what terrorism means for an all-hazards management system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The REAL ID Act was passed in 2005 by Congress in part to address preoccupations with breaches to homeland security after the 9/11 attacks. The Act requires states to introduce more standardized state driver's licenses by 2008. The goal of this paper is to understand citizens' opinions in the area of personal identification and how these opinions may be shaped by alternative framings of the issue. Using survey responses from Michigan residents provides evidence of the following: (i) a majority of the Michigan public supports the current reforms in identification; however, a majority is not willing to incur larger costs or delays; (ii) framing the issue around immigration can generate as much support as framing the issue around terrorism; however, a more balanced discourse can dampen support; and (iii) partisan and ideological leanings moderately structure support for identification reforms. Overall the findings suggest a comfortable margin for reforms around personal identification if public safeguarding interpretations can predominate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neoinstitutionalists applying the logic of rational choice institutionalism have leavened our understanding of public agency design and evolution in the domestic and national security policy domains. This paper seeks to advance theory building in empirically grounded ways by assessing the explanatory power of an important theoretical perspective (rational choice institutionalism), in an understudied “hybrid” policy domain where domestic and national security aims interact (domestic environmental policy and national security policy), and in an organizational type (the U.S. military) that has drawn scant attention from students of bureaucracy in political science, public administration, or public management. Analysis of three major efforts to green the U.S. military suggests that the patterns of politics accompanying agency evolution involving hybrid policy domains differ from domestic and national security domains in ways that limit the generalizability of rational choice institutionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]