Revenue Sharing: The National Policy Debate

1976 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 155
Author(s):  
John Brademas
Housing Shock ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 87-106
Author(s):  
Rory Hearne

This chapter explores the author’s housing journey, from living in private rental housing, to working with disadvantaged communities on housing and human rights, campaigning on homelessness and the right to housing, to being a publically engaged academic researching and engaging in the national policy debate on housing. It details the everyday impact of austerity on disadvantaged social housing communities and their response through a successful ‘Rights-in-action’ human right to housing campaign. It also details participatory action research with homeless families, the Participatory Action Human Rights and Capability Approach. In then discusses the role of academics, policy makers and researchers in social change, empowerment and participation in relation to social justice and housing issues. It interrogates the concept of knowledge production – who’s interest does it serve? Drawing on Freire and Gramsci the Chapter outlines five areas, for the academic researcher (and this can be applied to policy analysts and researchers, NGOs, human rights organisations, trade unions and community activists) to contribute to achieving an egalitarian, socially and environmentally just, and rights-based housing system.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian J McCabe ◽  
Jennifer A. Heerwig

In this paper, we evaluate whether an innovative new campaign finance program in Seattle, Washington shifted the composition of campaign donors in local elections. In 2015, voters in Seattle approved the creation of the Democracy Voucher program with the intent of broadening representation in the campaign finance system and expanding participation from marginalized communities. Every registered voter in Seattle was provided with four, twenty-five-dollar vouchers that they could, in turn, assign to the local candidate(s) of their choice. Through an analysis of the inaugural implementation of the program in 2017, we investigate whether this innovative public financing system increased participation, broadened involvement from underrepresented groups and led to a donor pool that was more representative of the electorate. Compared to cash donors in the municipal election, we report that voucher users are less likely to be high-income and more likely to come from poor neighborhoods. While older residents are over-represented among voucher users, there is little difference in the racial composition of cash donors and voucher users. Our analysis confirms that the Democracy Voucher program successfully moved the donor pool in a more egalitarian direction, although it remains demographically unrepresentative of the electorate. The lessons from Seattle’s inaugural implementation offer key insights for other municipalities considering public financing policies, and these lessons have the potential to reshape the national policy debate about the influence of political money.


1978 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Khadduri ◽  
Katharine Lyall ◽  
Raymond Struyk

2020 ◽  
pp. 227-244
Author(s):  
Andie Reynolds

This chapter examines the relationship between the decline in status of community development, entrenching neoliberal hegemony, and the rise in populism. It does so using a post-structuralist discourse analysis methodology to analyse 74 texts which span national policy debate and the policy and practice within a case-study local authority. The empirical evidence shows that during the administration of the coalition government (2010–15), neoliberal and left-wing populist discourses competed to shape community development debate and practice in England. The chapter calls for community development to unite with left-wing populist strategies to generate and practise counter-hegemonic discourses. However, it also cautions that such discourses can reproduce unhelpful binaries which the community development field must attempt to reconcile.


Author(s):  
Ruth Braunstein

In the wake of the Great Recession, Americans across the political divide flocked to local citizens organizations, where they worked to refocus political attention on the needs of ordinary people like them. This book chronicles the efforts of two such groups—a progressive faith-based community organizing coalition and a conservative Tea Party group. At first glance, these groups could not seem more different: in addition to significant demographic differences between them, their members also lined up on opposite sides of nearly every national policy debate during this period. But these differences do not tell the whole story of these groups. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork with both groups, this book reveals surprising similarities between their efforts that are typically not acknowledged, while also tracing more subtle differences between them that typically go unrecognized. It shows that in the face of rising anxiety and frustration, members of both groups chose to wake up, stand up, and speak up. They dedicated themselves to becoming active citizens, capable of inserting their voices, values, and knowledge into public debates about issues that impacted them. In so doing, they came to understand themselves as prophets and patriots, respectively, carrying forward the promise of American democracy. Yet when the groups set out to actually enact this vision – by holding government accountable and putting their faith in action – their styles of active citizenship diverged, reflecting different ways of imagining how American democracy ought to work and the proper role of active citizens within it.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Thimann

The academic and policy debate about the crisis in Europe's single currency area is usually dominated by macroeconomic and public sector considerations. The microeconomic dimensions of the crisis and the private-sector issues typically get much less attention. However, it is the private sector hiring choices of domestic and foreign firms that will ultimately be decisive. This paper argues there are two main problems holding back private sector employment creation in the stressed eurozone countries. First, there is a persistent competitiveness problem in some of the eurozone countries due to high labor costs relative to underlying productivity. Second, widespread structural barriers make job creation in these countries far more arduous than in many other advanced economies, and even more arduous than in some key emerging economies and formerly planned economies. Structural barriers to private sector development are particularly widespread in the areas of labor market functioning, goods market functioning, and government regulation. Evidence from the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Index and the World Bank's Doing Business dataset confirms the immense size and persistence of these barriers, despite improvements in some countries in recent years. The paper also presents a novel explanation for the difficulty of structural reforms in the eurozone, tracing the challenge to the current trend to “Europeanize” and “politicize” economic reform discussions in national policy fields where “Europe” is not a legitimate actor and the European political level is not effective.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Wormald ◽  
Kim Rennick
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document