Monday, March 07, 2005

my quasi-necessary paper

Early March, and it's sunny and clear outside - warm enough not to need anything more than a light longsleeve shirt. If I could, I would be playing frisbee in this weather! So this weekend, with the studying for a major exam tomorrow, dancing, and church responsibilities, I made time to write a short piece on political possibility theory. Enjoy!

An introduction to the Overton Window

Of the many ideas and options that exist in the political world and in the minds of politicians, what determines which ideas become reality and which ideas remain banished to the political ether? Somewhere on the spectrum of ideas from the crushingly socialist, and therefore radical, to the breathtakingly libertarian, and therefore also radical, must exist a range of ideas that actually stand a chance of being successfully implemented in the current socio-political climate. The range on the spectrum of ideas in which a policy initiative can be considered politically and socially viable is called the Overton Window of Political Possibilities. Regardless of the economic validity of an idea and how fervent its supporters are, if the idea does not lie within this window of opportunity it simply will not happen.

Politicians are self-interested. Of this there has been little serious doubt since the general acceptance of public choice arguments. Lawmakers will not support an idea unless it receives sufficient public acclaim and acceptance so that backing the idea does, at the very least, not harm the politician. Public policy is judged not its merit, but on its political viability. This only makes sense given politicians’ interest in preserving their jobs, but is often lamented by advocates of any policy that seems doomed to languish in the political shadows. The key insight of the Overton Window theory is that ideas initially outside the range of the politically possible are brought within that range not by political lobbying, but by moving the ‘window’.

Think tanks, pundits, and those economists who engage in policy issues often seek to advance their agendas though direct interaction with politicians. This strategy is a misdirection of energies. In the words of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy; “However principled a politician may be, he or she can only accomplish those things which are within a narrow window of what is politically possible at the present time.” Granted, there are some actions that lie within the discretion of politicians, but instead of expending resources to influence things that cannot be changed, those same resources should be used to shift the Overton Window.

Shifting the Overton Window requires changing the public’s perception of a policy issue. Perspective must be changed so things formerly infeasible become inevitable, through interactions with the public, educating, speaking, providing written perspectives, and conducting sound research. It is towards these aims that many who wish to see policy implemented should orient their resources. By shifting the window of possibilities, policies can be brought into effect with fewer negative “adjustment effects” among the people and whatever unenforceable intent supported the desire to create the policy will be more likely to emerge in society.

One example of an application of the Overton Window is homeschooling. Not too many years ago homeschooling was illegal in many states, and frowned upon even when it was legal. My family still knows people who faced state legal action in Michigan because they dared homeschool their kids during a period of time in which the laws were unclear at best. Yet, in Michigan and every other state, through a mixture of political and popular action, the window of political possibilities was shifted. What was once considered outrageous is now common, and no significant door of educational or employment opportunity remains closed to homeschoolers.

Could Overton Window theory also be applied to concepts of the slippery slope? It is fascinating to dream of ways that could be found to let socio/political “gravity” do the work of enacting and reforming policy, yet the difficulty has always been to find a way to guide the weight of policy as it rolls downhill. However, integrating a concept of political possibilities and the theory of slippery slopes results in the idea that instead of trying to guide the “stone” of policy it would be more advantageous to “shape” the slope so that policy will be “slippery” in the direction you like. Instead of putting a priority on efforts to influence policy makers directly, economists and proponents of ideas should focus on the people of the polity in question. In this way will the most pervasive and lasting reforms be made.

No comments: