Home Duke University Press
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 1993 18(3):629-655; DOI:10.1215/03616878-18-3-629
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (17)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jacobs, L. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Duke University Press

Health Reform Impasse: The Politics of American Ambivalence toward Government

Lawrence R. Jacobs
University of Minnesota

This paper presents two interrelated arguments: it rethinks conventional understanding of the policy-making process and analyzes an important substantive issue regarding public opinion. The substantive issue involves the public's deep ambivalence toward government reforms: Americans are simultaneously supportive of significant reform and uneasy about expanding government involvement. The critical question is what, if any, impact this public ambivalence will have on policy deliberations. Answering this question requires an analysis of the role of public opinion in policy-making. Investigation of historic as well as contemporary health reform suggests that the impact of public opinion varies, depending on the character of both public opinion and the policy issue. The public's preferences are not especially influential when they are characterized by uncertainty or when an issue is not salient, but strong and sustained sentiment can affect agenda setting, interest group leverage over government officials, and policymakers' formulation of detailed administrative arrangements.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
S. Steinmo and J. Watts
It's the Institutions, Stupid! Why Comprehensive National Health Insurance Always Fails in America
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, June 1, 1995; 20(2): 329 - 372.
[Abstract] [PDF]


  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents


Copyright 1993 by Duke University Press