Skip to main content

Full text of "New England Journal of Public Policy (NEJPP)"

See other formats


2295 

N53N5 

v. 13, no. 2   Spr/Sum   1998 


Iftepeived  in  Library 

JAN  1  9  1999 


'pring/Summer  1998 


i   ot  Mass  Boston 

i 


RiiawBiUn  Library 


B 


, 


i±Jtm 


Mass 


Bostor 


L. 


New  England 
Journal  of 
Public  Policy 


A  Journal  of  the 

John  W.  McCormack  Institute 

ofPublicAffairs 

Uni\  ersity  of  Massachusetts  Boston 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 

A  Journal  of  the  John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs 
University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 

Padraig  O'Malley,  Editor 

Sherry  H.  Penney,  Chancellor 
University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 

Robert  L.  Woodbury,  Director 

John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs 

Geraldine  C.  Morse,  Copy  Editor 

Ruth  E.  Finn,  Design  Coordinator 


The  John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs  is  named  for  the  Speaker  of  the 
United  States  House  of  Representatives  from  1962  to  1971.  John  W.  McCormack  was 
born  in  South  Boston,  less  than  a  mile  from  the  University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 
Harbor  Campus.  The  McCormack  Institute  represents  the  university's  commitment  to 
applied  policy  research  —  particularly  on  issues  of  concern  to  New  England  —  and  to 
public  affairs  education  and  public  service. 


The  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy  is  published  by  the  John  W.  McCormack 
Institute  of  Public  Affairs,  University  of  Massachusetts  Boston.  Subscriptions  are  $40  per 
year  for  libraries  and  institutions,  $20  per  year  for  individuals.  Manuscripts  and  corre- 
spondence should  be  sent  to  the  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy,  John  W. 
McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs,  University  of  Massachusetts  Boston,  100 
Morrissey  Boulevard,  Boston,  Massachusetts  02125- 

3393  (telephone  617-287-5550;  fax:  617-287-5544).  See  Guide  for  Contributors  on  inside 
back  cover.  Articles  published  in  the  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy  are  ab- 
stracted and  indexed  in  Sociological  Abstracts  (SA),  Social  Planning/Policy  &  Develop- 
ment Abstracts  (SOPODA),  Sage  Public  Administration  Abstracts  (SPAA),  Sage  Urban 
Studies  Abstracts  (SUSA),  and  Current  Index  of  Journals  in  Education  (CUE). 

Copyright  ©  1998  by  the  John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs 


New  England  Rec&ffi^Wary 

Journal  of 


Public  Policy 

Editor's  Note 


JAN  i  9  1999 
Univ.  of  Mass  Boston 

3 


Padraig  O'Malley 

Industrial  Policy: 

Federal,  State,  and  Local  Response 


Zenia  Kotval,  Ph.D.,  AICP 

The  Politics  of  Deindustrialization: 
Three  Case  Studies 


19 


Eve  Weinbaum,  Ph.D. 


Is  Boston  Becoming  a  Branch-Plant  Town?  ,-, 

Lawrence  G.  Franko,  Ph.D. 

Institutional  Design  and  Regulatory  Performance: 

Rethinking  State  Certificate  of  Need  Programs  <-t 

Robert  B.  Hackey,  Ph.D. 
Peter  F.  Fuller,  MLS,  MPA 


Predicting  Success  in  JTPA: 

Test  of  a  Three-Component  Model 


73 


Carolyn  Ball,  Ph.D. 

The  Professional  Decline  of  Physicians 
in  the  Era  of  Managed  Care 


87 


Aimee  E.  Mar  low 


Cambodian  Political  Succession 

in  Lowell,  Massachusetts ReCe'lVed  Jfl  LibfafV  103 

Jeffrey  Gerson,  Ph.D.  rrn    c\  n    -jonq 

Univ.  of  Mass  Boston 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Governing  Massachusetts  Public  Schools: 


Assessing  the  1993  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act 
John  Portz 


Citizen  Participation  and  Strategic 
Planning  for  an  Urban  Enterprise  Zone 


143 


Michael  L.  Owens 


Editor's  Note 


Padraig  O'Malley 


The  first  weekend  in  May  brought  revolutionary  change  to  the  global  economy,  a 
revolution  that,  for  all  intents  and  purposes,  occurred  right  under  the  public's  nose, 
unnoticed  and  evoking  less  comment  than  the  public's,  or  at  least  the  media's,  unending 
preoccupation  with  the  travails  of  the  likes  of  Monica  Lewinsky  or  Kathleen  Willey,  or 
the  continuing  unfolding  of  White  House  shenanigans. 

Not  that  we  should  be  surprised  by  this.  The  lurid  and  the  lewd  have  a  fascination 
that  allows  us  to  wallow  in  our  own  sense  of  righteousness,  beat  our  breasts  with  moral 
gusto,  and  keep  our  minds  properly  focused  on  the  minutiae  of  scandal  in  High  Places. 
Besides,  wallowing  is,  at  the  best  of  times,  a  confessional  experience,  a  cleansing  exer- 
cise: it  decontaminates  our  own  shortcomings,  encouraging  a  slight  feeling  of  superior- 
ity that  elevates  our  humble  positions  in  the  larger  scheme  of  things. 

And,  of  course,  it  is  to  this  larger  scheme  of  things  to  which  the  revolution  I  cite,  the 
birth  of  a  currency  —  the  euro  —  belongs,  namely,  the  agreement  among  eleven  Euro- 
pean nations  to  phase  out  their  individual  species  and  replace  them  with  a  single  Euro- 
pean legal  tender.  The  countries  involved  in  the  historic  monetary  union  —  Austria, 
Belgium,  Finland,  France,  Germany,  Ireland,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  the  Netherlands,  Por- 
tugal, and  Spain  account  for  19.4  per  cent  of  the  world's  GDP  compared  with  the 
United  States'  19.6  percent  and  Japan's  7.7  percent.  It  is  responsible  for  18.6  percent  of 
world  trade,  not  counting  internal  trade,  to  this  country's  16.6  percent  and  Japan's  8.2 
percent.  Which  means  that  the  euro  will  at  once  become  the  world's  second  currency 
and  may,  in  time,  challenge  the  dollar  for  supremacy. 

The  euro  is  the  culmination  of  an  experiment  that  grew  out  of  the  ruins  of  post- 
World  War  II  Europe,  out  of  the  conviction  that  the  devastation  of  the  war  must  never 
happen  again.  First,  the  Council  of  Europe,  then  the  European  Coal  and  Steel  Commu- 
nity, the  European  Common  Market,  the  European  Economic  Community,  and  today's 
European  Community.  Nor  is  it  an  experiment  that  is  over.  There  is  the  continuing  de- 
bate over  whether  the  EC  should  focus  its  direction  on  widening  —  the  admission  of 
other  European  countries,  especially  those  to  the  East,  or  on  deepening  —  the  pursuit  of 
stronger  ties  among  existing  members,  with  the  implicit  implication  of  some  form  of 
political  union  at  some  unspecified  time  in  the  future. 

For  better  or  worse,  the  advent  of  the  euro  will  change  the  way  we  do  business, 
trade,  perhaps  the  balance  of  economic  power,  how  we  will  align  ourselves  politically, 
how  we  entertain  new  forms  of  governance,  and  not  least,  of  course,  how  the  process  of 
globalization  advances.  By  any  measure,  it  is  a  giant  step  in  the  direction  of  a  more 
cathartic  globalism,  but  giant  steps  leave  giant  imprints  in  their  wake,  not  all  of  which 
bring  tidings  of  good  news. 


Padraig  O'Malley  is  a  senior  fellow  at  the  John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs, 
University  of  Massachusetts  Boston. 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Readers  of  this  journal  will  have  noticed  an  increasing  emphasis  on  the  impacts  of 
globalization  in  recent  issues.  Not  only  has  it  become  the  mantra  of  the  last  years  of  the 
dying  millennium,  it  is  being  presented  as  an  elixir  of  unbounded  possibilities,  a  pro- 
cess that  will,  with  the  help  of  some  undefined  alchemy,  make  the  twenty-first  century 
fulfill  the  promises  and  potential  that  somehow  got  lost  or  marginalized  in  the  tumultu- 
ous upheavals  of  the  twentieth.  Yet  its  implications  are  largely  unknown,  the  pace  and 
speed  of  change  are  laboratory  equations,  and  the  unintended  consequences  of  our 
hubris  in  our  capabilities  to  manage  our  planet  are  a  matter  of  guesswork. 

Thus,  in  "Industrial  Policy:  Federal,  State,  and  Local  Response,"  Zenia  Kotval 
quotes  from  Ann  Markusen's  study  of  industrial  districts  and  how  they  succeed  in  an 
increasingly  competitive  world  ("sticky  places  in  slippery  space").  She  characterizes  the 
problem  as  follows:  "Sticky  places  are  complex  products  of  multiple  forces  of  corporate 
strategies,  industrial  structures,  profit  cycles,  state  priorities,  local  and  national  politics. 
Their  success  cannot  be  studied  by  focusing  only  on  local  institutions  and  behaviors, 
because  their  companies  are  embedded  in  external  relationships."  Yet,  as  Kotval  points 
out,  "planners  have  been  slow  to  analyze  these  impacts  .  .  .  and  for  the  most  part,  indus- 
trial planning  as  a  topic  of  scholarly  and  professional  inquiry  can  be  described  as  a 
black  hole.  A  quick  review  of  the  recent  programs  of  the  annual  conference  of  the 
American  Planning  Association  shows  that  the  word  industry  scarcely  appears  in  the 
description  of  the  sessions."  "Have  we  been  ignoring  a  critical,  swiftly  changing,  and 
complex  issue  that  is  likely  to  have  major  impacts  on  all  our  communities?"  she  asks. 

Kotval 's  analysis:  "Influential  to  the  current  debate  on  industrial  policy  and  global 
competition  are  the  conceptual  frameworks  put  forth  under  the  rubric  of  'new  growth 
theory.'  These  frameworks,  purposely  constructed  for  use  by  policymakers,  renounce  the 
current  effectiveness  of  Keynesian  macroeconomics  and  monetarist  policies  put  in  place 
by  the  United  States  in  the  post-World  War  II  years.  This  discourse  is  a  response  to  the 
new  global  competition  and,  more  specifically,  the  interpenetration  through  trade  of  the 
industrialized  economies.  The  changing  competition  has  been  brought  about  by  a  level- 
ing of  the  playing  fields  among  industrial  nations,  continuous  technological  innova- 
tions, and  the  globalization  of  industry  in  general." 

While  the  debate  between  "new  growth"  theorists  and  their  protagonists  continues, 
Kotval  argues  that  one  important  variable,  perhaps  the  most  important  —  the  increasing 
interdependence  of  the  world's  large  companies  —  is  unaddressed.  "These  companies," 
she  writes,  "are  virtually  free  of  commitment  to  nations  and  exist  increasingly  as  global 
entities  of  their  own.  They  are  quickly  responsive  to  the  initiatives  of  Japan  Inc., 
NAFTA,  GATT,  and  the  European  Union  in  terms  of  the  impact  on  the  company  rather 
than  on  their  workers  or  on  their  home  nation.  Given  the  mobility  of  capital,  varying 
labor  costs,  and  the  internationalization  of  markets,  they  have  little  choice."  Kotval's 
conclusion:  "It  is  essential  that  industrial  policy  confront  this  issue  and  strive  to  create 
approaches  which  create  stability  and  worker  security  before  any  public  investment 
occurs."  And:  "As  multinational  corporations  divide  and  multiply  their  operations 
throughout  the  globe,  engaging  in  joint  ventures  for  research  and  production  with  other 
corporations  and  governments,  they  create  an  increasingly  complex  web  of  relationships 
that  supersede  the  borders  of  the  nation-state  and  stretches  the  balance  of  political- 
economic  theory  and  policy." 

The  recent  $39  billion  merger  between  Daimler-Benz  and  Chrysler  is  merely  a  har- 
binger of  deals  to  come.  Chrysler,  once  a  symbol  of  all  things  American  and  apple  pie, 
is  no  longer  even  American.  Good-bye,  America. 


4 


As  a  result  of  the  way  in  which  states  and  localities  have  experienced  the  effects  of 
economic  restructuring  —  for  some  it  has  brought  economic  and  social  disaster,  for 
some  mere  disruption,  and  for  some  new  opportunities  for  growth  and  expansion  — 
localities  have  developed  increasingly  sophisticated  economic  development  programs  to 
replace  lost  jobs  and  lost  programs.  The  retreat  of  the  federal  government  from  local 
affairs  in  the  1980s  has  forced  local  regions  to  compete  with  one  another  for  jobs 
through  their  business  recruitment  policies.  States  and  localities  are  rapidly  acquiring 
the  expertise  to  understand  regional  and  economic  forces  and  develop  sophisticated 
tools  to  promote  their  own  economic  prosperity.  But  in  the  final  analysis,  the  ultimate 
success  or  failure  of  these  efforts  depends  on  the  voracious  appetites  of  global  economic 
forces.  These  are  the  issues  we  must  recognize  and  address. 

Hence  the  emphasis  on  Kotval's  article.  It  provides  the  context  for  reading  Eve 
Weinbaum's  "The  Politics  of  Industrialization:  Three  Case  Studies,"  Michael  Leo 
Owens's  "Citizen  Participation  and  Strategic  Community  Planning  for  an  Urban  Enter- 
prise Community,"  Lawrence  Franko's  "Is  Boston  Becoming  a  Branch-Plant  Town?" 
and  Carolyn  Ball's  "What  Predicts  Success  in  JTPA?  Test  of  a  Three-Component 
Model." 

Four  other  articles  covering  a  potpourri  of  public  policy  questions  round  out  this 
issue:  Aimee  Marlow's  "The  Professional  Decline  of  Physicians  in  the  Era  of  Managed 
Care"  evaluates  the  history  and  ultimate  failure  of  propositions  214  and  216  in  Califor- 
nia. John  Portz's  "Governing  Massachusetts  Public  Schools:  Assessing  the  1993  Massa- 
chusetts Education  Reform  Act"  concludes  that  superintendents  are  most  satisfied  with 
their  role,  especially  their  authority  over  principals  and  teachers,  while  school  commit- 
tee members  are  least  satisfied  with  the  changes,  although  they  still  provide  general 
support  for  the  aims  and  goals  of  the  act.  Jeffrey  Gerson's  "Cambodian  Political  Suc- 
cession in  Lowell,  Massachusetts"  argues  that  five  key  factors  appear  to  determine  the 
degree  of  Cambodian  participation  and  representation  in  Lowell  politics  Three  are  inter- 
nal —  coming  to  terms  with  the  legacy  of  the  genocide  perpetrated  by  the  late  Pol  Pot's 
murderous  regime,  the  lack  of  a  tradition  of  democratic  participation  in  the  home  coun- 
try, and  general  differences  between  those  who  regard  themselves  as  Cambodians  and 
the  American-born.  Two  factors  are  external  —  Lowell's  two-tiered  political  system  and 
the  response  of  the  city's  elected  officials  to  the  influx  of  Southeast  Asians  that  began  in 
the  early  1 980s.  Finally,  Robert  Hackey  and  Peter  Fuller,  in  "Institutional  Design  and 
Regulatory  Performance:  Rethinking  State  Certificate  of  Need  Programs,"  review  the 
capability  of  Rhode  Island  in  this  regard  and  conclude  that  the  state's  experience  with 
capital  expenditure  regulation  in  the  1980s  and  1990s  underscores  the  importance  of 
institutional  design  and  policymaking  capacity  on  regulatory  effectiveness. 

Robert  Reich,  the  former  secretary  of  labor,  often  referred  to  in  these  pages  for  his 
recondite  insights  into  how  public  policy  works  in  this  country,  puts  things  in  perspec- 
tive in  Locked  in  the  Cabinet,  his  memoir  of  his  years  in  the  Clinton  administration.  He 
recounts  the  following  incident,  which  truly  illustrates  that  government  regulation  im- 
pinges on  the  lives  of  not  only  the  poor  and  the  downtrodden,  but  of  those  of  us  who 
would  assume  ourselves  to  have  rather  important  roles  to  play  in  the  conduct  of  our 
affairs.  I  quote. 

[I  enter}  a  small  windowless  room  [in  the  Department  of  Labor].  ...  A  man  in  a 
white  jacket  is  cleaning  a  small  vial.  He  turns  to  me  "Oh,  Mr.  Reikk.  "  He  has  an 
Eastern  European  accent  and  a  full  white  beard.  "I'm  Doktor  Svenkell.  I'll  be  vit 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


you  in  just  vun  moment.  Tis  must  be  prepared  carefully,  of  course."  He  turns  back  to 
his  cleaning.  .  .  . 

"Are  you  ready,  Mister  Reikk?" 

"Yes,"  I  say  bravely. 

Dr.  Svenkell  offers  me  the  small  glass  container.  "Perfectly  clean.  Now,  if  you'll 
just  step  troo  tat  door-vay,  you  can  do  your  business  in  private." 

"Excuse  me?" 

I  hold  the  container,  but  I  still  don't  get  it. 

"Mister  Reikk,  you  need  somp  time  perhaps?" 

"What  do  you  want  me  to  do?" 

"Urine.  .  .  .  Pee.  .  .  .  Piss.  Into  container.  Troo  dat  door  is  a  batroom.  Sometink 
wrong?  Nutting  in  your  bladder  right  now?" 

"But  why?" 

"Federal  rek-u-la-tion.  Drug  test.  Can't  even  be  in  te  cabinet  vit-out  havink  your 
pee  looked  at.  Quite  a  country  we  haf,  isn't  it?"  He  laughs,  opening  the  door  to  the 
bathroom  before  ushering  me  in.  "Everyone's  got  to  pee  for  te  government,  no 
matter  who.  Dat's  what  I  luf  about  tis  country.  Everyone's  apisher"  ** 


I  apologize  for  omitting  from  the  masthead  of  the  special  issue  Workforce  Development: 
Health  Care  and  Human  Services  the  names  of  the  guest  editors,  James  Green  and 
Andres  Torres. 


Industrial  Policy  Federal,  State,  and 

Local  Response 

Zenia  Kotval,  Ph.D.,  AICP 


During  the  past  twenty  years,  many  economists  and  policymakers  have  strongly 
advocated  that  the  United  States  formulate  a  national  industrial  policy  to  improve 
the  competitiveness  of  American  firms  in  the  global  marketplace.  These  proposals 
call  for  both  direct  and  indirect  assistance  to  specific  industrial  sectors.  Some 
would  contend  that  U.S.  industrial  policies  are  being  challenged  by  newer  growth 
theories  that  shift  the  focus  from  the  nation  as  the  basic  unit  of  industrial  geogra- 
phy to  regions  and  municipalities.  There  is  little  argument  about  the  need  for  in- 
dustrial policies  that  tie  national,  state,  and  local  initiatives  together.  However, 
confusion  and  disagreement  exist  as  to  what  defines  industrial  policy  and  what  its 
appropriate  level  should  be.  This  article  addresses  the  debate  about  national  in- 
dustrial policy  and  state  and  local  responses  to  industrial  policy  and  offers  a  sum- 
mary of  key  themes  in  the  current  literature. 


Over  the  past  two  decades,  local  planners  have  become  increasingly  aware  of  the 
changing  character  of  the  industrial  base  in  their  communities.  The  end  of  the 
cold  war  and  concomitant  closing  of  defense  industries,  the  downsizing  of  industry  as  it 
becomes  less  labor  intensive,  the  increased  mobility  of  capital  and  international  trade 
agreements  are  but  a  few  of  the  factors  that  are  influencing  this  change.1  Ann 
Markusen's  study  of  industrial  districts  and  how  they  succeed  in  an  increasingly  com- 
petitive world  ("sticky  places  in  slippery  space")  summarized  the  problem  as  follows: 
"Sticky  places,  then,  are  complex  products  of  multiple  forces-corporate  strategies, 
industrial  structures,  profit  cycles,  state  priorities,  local  and  national  politics.  Their 
success  cannot  be  studied  by  focusing  only  on  local  institutions  and  behaviors,  because 
their  companies  .  .  .  are  embedded  in  external  relationships.2  Yet  planners  have  been 
slow  to  analyze  these  impacts,  among  others,  and  to  reflect  on  them  in  their  proposals. 
Indeed,  for  the  most  part,  industrial  planning  as  a  topic  of  scholarly  and  professional 
inquiry  can  be  described  as  a  black  hole.  A  quick  review  of  the  recent  programs  of  the 
annual  conference  of  the  American  Planning  Association  shows  that  the  word  industry 
scarcely  appears  in  the  description  of  the  sessions.  Have  we  been  ignoring  a  critical, 
swiftly  changing,  and  complex  issue  that  is  likely  to  have  major  impacts  on  all  our 
communities? 

This  article  is  designed  to  help  overcome  the  lack  of  knowledge  about  industrial  policy 
and  planning  by  presenting  and  analyzing  key  scholarly  works  on  the  topic.  I  hope  that 
academics  and  professional  planners  can  gain  increased  understanding  of  the  key  issues 
that  frame  the  topic  and,  at  least  in  the  case  of  practitioners,  begin  to  react  to  them  in 


Zenia  Kotval,  an  assistant  professor  of  urban  and  regional  planning,  Michigan  State  University, 
researches  the  impacts  of  policy  choices  on  local  economic  development  and  planning. 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


their  professional  plans  and  projects.  The  first  of  three  sections  addresses  the  debate 
over  national  industrial  policy  and  the  second  the  state  and  local  responses  to  industrial 
policy,  while  the  third  section  summarizes  the  key  themes  in  current  literature  and  the 
missing  elements  of  the  debate. 


The  Industrial  Policy  Debate 


Since  the  end  of  World  War  n,  an  explicit  goal  of  U.S.  economic  policy  has  been  to 
establish  and  maintain  conditions  that  permit  the  free  market  system  to  work  with  mini- 
mal government  intervention.  Increasingly,  however,  advocates  for  industrial  policy 
seek  to  involve  the  federal  government  in  the  domestic  economy  to  an  unprecedented 
extent,  while  opponents  of  industrial  policy  deplore  the  moves  toward  increased  inter- 
vention at  home  and  protectionism  abroad.3  The  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  U.S.  national 
economic  policies  have  evolved  steadily  since  the  Industrial  Revolution.  The  changing 
role  of  the  federal  government  in  the  affairs  of  the  private  economy  has  dictated  much 
of  what  has  occurred  over  the  past  two  hundred  years.  This  is  a  curious  paradox  given 
the  U.S.  government's  laissez-faire,  anti-interventionist  philosophy  concerning  private 
enterprise. 

Traditionally,  the  federal  government  became  involved  in  the  private  economy  only 
when  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  correct  free  market  imperfections  such  as  monopolies 
or  negative  externalities.  Notable  exceptions  include  U.S.  intervention  in  the  agricul- 
tural sector  to  maintain  stable  farm  prices;  its  defense  procurement  policies,  which 
directly  affected  the  development  of  the  shipbuilding,  aerospace,  telecommunication, 
and  electric  industries;  and  its  antipoverty  programs.4  In  the  international  realm,  the 
United  States  has  focused  its  trade  policy  on  lowering  the  barriers  to  free  trade  among 
nations  under  the  umbrella  of  the  General  Agreement  on  Tariffs  and  Trade  (GATT)  and 
the  North  American  Free  Trade  Agreement  (NAFTA). 

At  the  national  level,  the  federal  government  has  historically  assumed  a  significant 
economic  role  by  routinely  engaging  in  regulatory  and  budgetary  matters.  These  forms 
of  interventions  and  macroeconomic  controls  were  also  put  in  place  to  ensure  an  effi- 
cient and  unfettered  free  market  system. 

Not  until  the  Great  Depression  did  the  federal  government  become  directly  involved 
with  economic  development  matters  at  the  state  and  local  levels.  The  economic  pro- 
grams that  were  enacted  as  part  of  the  New  Deal  legislation  would  profoundly  influence 
the  public's  expectations  of  the  federal  government's  role  in  the  economic  affairs  of  the 
nation. 

Since  the  1960s,  regional  and  local  economic  development  has  assumed  a  more 
activist  role.  Planning  efforts  at  the  substate  level  began  to  focus  more  on  the  debilitat- 
ing effects  of  failed  national  monetarist  policies  and  the  mounting  wave  of  deindus- 
rialization.  The  domain  of  economic  development  planning  activities  was  mainly  two- 
fold: (1)  the  administration  of  federal  and  state  programs  to  deal  with  the  economic  and 
social  impacts  of  deindustrialization,  and  (2)  the  development  of  local  and  regional 
reindustrialization  strategies  that  were  aimed  at  expanding  the  economic  base  of  com- 
munities.5 During  this  period,  economic  development  efforts  were  extensively  influ- 
enced by  federal  legislation  and  federal  funding.  Many  of  the  federal  programs  specifi- 
cally attempted  to  address  the  growing  problem  of  structural  unemployment  through  a 
myriad  of  programs  aimed  at  creating  jobs  and  expanding  the  economic  base  of  cities 
and  towns.  Structural  unemployment  also  developed  a  geographic  aspect  during  the 

8 


1970s  as  scores  of  industrial  plants  closed  and  relocated  to  other  parts  of  the  country 
and  throughout  the  world.  Capital  became  much  more  mobile  than  populations  and 
workers  in  the  emerging  global  economy.6 

Ironically,  the  enactment  of  more  recent  federal  economic  and  community  develop- 
ment programs  and  the  infusion  of  funds  to  localities  occurred  in  the  absence  of  a  na- 
tional economic  development  policy.  It  has  been  argued  that  the  federal  initiatives  were 
tantamount  to  a  de  facto  national  policy  that  effectively  removed  the  federal  govern- 
ment from  economic  and  community  development  and  instead  passed  the  problems  on 
to  individual  states  and  localities.  Still  others  have  commented  that  this  wave  of  federal 
legislation  and  funding  was  but  a  piecemeal  solution  to  the  powerful  forces  that  were 
reshaping  local  and  regional  economies.7 

Many  states  and  substate  regions  with  more  than  their  share  of  declining  industries 
and  job  loss  simply  could  not  afford  to  wait  for  the  national  political  climate  to  grow 
more  hospitable  toward  a  national  industrial  policy.  The  continuous  evaporation  and 
relocation  of  jobs  in  mature  industrial  sectors  has  prompted  the  need  for  state  and  local 
industrial  policies.8  It  has  been  argued,  in  fact,  that  state  and  local  industrial  policies 
may  be  more  appropriate  for  state  and  substate  regions  that  may  want  to  target  specific 
industrial  sectors.9  Industrial  regions  and  localities  also  have  varied  power  structures 
among  groups  with  stakes  in  the  industrial  policy  and  in  their  expectation  in  terms  of 
cost  benefits.10  Thus,  it  can  be  argued  that  locally  authored  industrial  policy  is  better 
able  than  national  policy  to  speak  to  the  more  defined  political  and  economic  interests 
of  a  particular  region  or  locale.11 

National  Industrial  Policies 

In  its  simplest  form,  national  industrial  policy  can  be  defined  as  public  initiatives  that 
influence  and  guide  the  development  of  targeted  industrial  sectors  in  society.12  This 
definition  closely  fits  industrial  policy  as  it  currently  works  in  the  United  States,  an 
approach  consisting  of  short-term  programs  and  projects  without  an  overall  framework. 
Robert  Reich  offers  a  more  comprehensive  definition: 

Industrial  policy  focuses  upon  the  most  productive  patterns  of  investment,  and  thus 
it  factors  business  segments  that  promise  to  be  strong  international  competitors 
while  helping  to  develop  the  industrial  infrastructure  (highways,  ports,  sewers,  and 
skilled  workforce)  needed  to  support  these  elements.  At  the  same  time,  by  balanc- 
ing regional  growth  and  by  assisting  workers  to  retrain  and  relocate,  it  seeks  to 
reduce  the  resistance  to  economic  change  likely  to  come  from  those  who  would  be 
the  hardest  hit.13 

Reich's  definition  includes  almost  all  the  elements  of  industrial  policy  that  are  being 
discussed  at  the  national  level.  These  are  public  incentives,  industrial  targeting,  political 
involvement,  international  competition,  infrastructure  improvements,  workforce  devel- 
opment, worker  training,  balanced  growth,  and  help  for  the  displaced  worker.  Although 
there  is  no  common  agreement  as  to  the  scope  of  industrial  policy,  advocates  generally 
focus  on  the  needs  discussed  in  the  following  sections. 

Prerequisites  for  Industrial  Policy 

Attempts  to  forge  an  industrial  policy  face  a  twofold  challenge,  namely,  to  ensure  that 
the  policy  is  both  analytically  sound  and  democratically  responsive.  Liberals  maintain 
that  current  industrial  policies  are  partially  hidden  or  implicit,  contradictory  and  ad  hoc. 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


The  federal  government  should  "tailor  and  coordinate  the  broad  range  of  government 
programs  in  order  to  ensure  that  they  facilitate  growth  in  competitive  productivity."14 

In  addition  to  program  coherence,  a  rational  industrial  policy  also  requires  adminis- 
trative coherence.  There  is  no  single  entity  presently  accountable  for  all  the  implicit 
industrial  policies  of  the  United  States;  they  are  spread  among  dozens  of  competing 
agencies.  Ira  Magaziner  and  Reich  advocated  in  1983  that  the  president  and  Congress 
each  establish  an  agency  to  evaluate  the  initial  competitive  consequences  of  all  govern- 
ment policies  and  programs.15 

Second,  industrial  policies  formulated  by  various  agencies  must  be  consistent  with 
one  another  and  provide  the  same  messages  to  all  types  of  companies.  There  should  be 
one  voice  to  tie  together  the  operational  procedures  and  directives  of  the  bureaucracy. 
Otherwise,  efforts  to  create  a  workable  industrial  policy  will  be  meaningless.16 

Third,  government  regulations  and  the  capacity  of  industries  to  adhere  to  them 
should  be  cooperative.  Any  regulatory  intrusion  in  the  industrial  marketplace  should 
allow  companies  time  and  funds  to  react.  The  regulatory  process  should  also  include  a 
commitment  by  the  regulators  to  assist  in  finding  solutions  to  critical  problems.17 

Fourth,  there  must  be  a  commitment  to  long-term  research  and  development  activi- 
ties. Current  tax  policies  penalize  companies  that  emphasize  long-term  research.  Anti- 
trust laws  discourage  competing  industries  from  undertaking  joint  research  projects.18 

Last,  industrial  trade  policies  must  be  formulated  in  response  to  increased  global 
competition  and  the  growing  interpenetration  through  trade  among  industrialized 
economies.  The  traditional  economic  development  approach,  which  studies  a  region's 
natural  resources,  industrial  mix,  and  economic  base,  must  be  expanded  to  develop  an 
appreciation  of  the  "international  dynamics"  of  the  industries  involved.19 

The  Challenge  for  Industrial  Policy  Development 

Irrespective  of  ideology,  most  industry  analysts  would  agree  that  in  order  for  an  indus- 
trial policy  to  be  successful,  it  must  clearly  articulate  competitive  strategies  aimed  at 
improving  the  efficiency  and  productivity  of  U.S.  manufacturers.  While  specific  strate- 
gies differ  according  to  ideological  persuasion,  each  would  need  to  focus  on  such  fac- 
tors as  firm  innovation,  increased  productivity,  and  market  penetration.20 

Influential  to  the  current  debate  on  industrial  policy  and  global  competition  are  the 
conceptual  frameworks  put  forth  under  the  rubric  of  "new  growth  theory."  These  frame- 
works, purposely  constructed  for  use  by  policymakers,  renounce  the  current  effective- 
ness of  Keynesian  macroeconomic  and  monetarist  policies  put  in  place  by  the  United 
States  in  the  post-World  War  II  years.  This  discourse  is  a  response  to  the  new  global 
competition  and,  more  specifically,  the  interpenetration  through  trade  of  the  industrial- 
ized economies.  The  changing  competition  has  been  brought  about  by  a  leveling  of  the 
playing  field  among  industrial  nations,  continuous  technological  innovations,  and  the 
globalization  of  industry  in  general.21 

Growth  theorists  would  argue  that  U.S.  industrial  policy  has  taken  on  a  bad  connota- 
tion among  economists  and  the  public  because  it  is  normally  associated  with  the  federal 
government's  propensity  for  bailing  out  "sick  firms  in  dying  industries."22  Criticism  has 
also  been  leveled  at  the  federal  government  for  providing  subsidies  and  tax  breaks  for 
corporations.  This  so-called  corporate  welfare  as  a  means  of  government  intervention 
has  steered  investment  away  from  the  training  and  development  of  the  American 
workforce.23  The  subsidization  of  industry  by  the  federal  government  also  has  a  direct 
bearing  on  state  and  local  industrial  policies.  For  instance,  states  have  often  used  fed- 


10 


eral  tax  dollars  to  poach  companies  and  jobs  from  other  states. 

The  challenge  for  successful  U.S.  industrial  policy,  according  to  new  growth  theo- 
rists, is  not  to  subsidize  inefficient  corporations  in  declining  industries  or  simply  to  help 
stabilize  the  national  economy.  Rather,  government  policy  must  help  to  stimulate  in- 
vestment and  innovation  to  match  industry's  evolving  structure.24  Successful  industrial 
policy  should  also  help  serve  the  market  and  help  create  "organizational  superiority"  in 
strategic  industrial  sectors.25 


State  and  Local  Responses  to  Industrial  Restructuring 

The  impacts  of  economic  restructuring  are  experienced  not  at  some  abstract  national 
level  but  at  the  state  and  local  levels  where  people  live  and  work.26  This  section  de- 
scribes economic  development  programs  used  by  state  and  local  governments  to  help  re- 
place lost  jobs  and  tax  revenues  and  to  take  advantage  of  new  economic  opportunities.  It 
focuses  on  state  and  local  practices  rather  than  on  ideologically  based  policy  debates.27 

Ideological  values  do,  however,  play  a  role  in  the  choice  and  critique  of  state  and 
local  economic  development  policies.  Conservatives  believe  that  a  nation  maximizes  its 
potential  by  organizing  its  economic  development  activity  through  market  forces  with 
little  or  no  government  intervention.  Liberals  believe  that  market  forces,  though  power- 
ful and  useful  tools,  need  the  government  to  channel  and  regulate  the  forces  to  ensure 
an  equitable  society.  Progressives  view  market  forces  as  but  one  aspect  of  an  entire 
capitalist  system  that  harms  some  to  increase  the  wealth  of  others.  The  only  way  to 
improve  conditions  is  to  democratize  decision  making.  Progressives  believe  that  incre- 
mental reform  can  accomplish  this  goal  while  Marxists  hold  that  only  a  full-scale  revo- 
lution can  achieve  lasting  reform.28 

According  to  this  classification  system,  the  state  and  local  economic  development 
policies  that  have  evolved  since  the  Great  Depression,  and  especially  those  of  the 
1980s,  generally  fall  within  or  close  to  the  liberal  approach.  States  and  localities  inter- 
vene in  the  market  in  numerous  ways,  through  public  financing  as  well  as  worker  train- 
ing. New  Deal  policies  and  programs  of  the  1930s  represent  what  has  been  referred  to 
as  the  "First  Wave"  of  economic  development  activity  in  the  United  States.29  The  forma- 
tion of  the  National  Resources  Planning  Board  during  the  New  Deal  era  set  the  tone  for 
the  federal  government's  interventionist  activity  by  promoting  state  and  local  economic 
development  planning  agencies.  Although  the  National  Resources  Planning  Board  was 
short-lived,  vestiges  of  its  industrial  development  programs  had  already  become  en- 
trenched in  most  states.  The  conservatism  of  the  federal  government  through  the  1980s 
was  partially  accountable  for  the  increasing  liberal  interventionism  of  states  and  locali- 
ties during  that  decade.  By  the  early  1990s,  virtually  every  state  and  large  city  had 
adopted  a  form  of  industrial  policy.30  Local  government  thus  became  more  liberal  in  an 
effort  to  compensate  for  conservative  federal  power.31 

Features  of  State  and  Local  Industrial  Policy 

It  is  also  evident  that  the  ideologies  at  the  national  level  have  a  clear,  direct  link  to  the 
states.  The  increased  strength  of  conservatives  in  Congress  has  already  had  deep  im- 
pacts on  how  the  states  determine  priorities.  For  example,  debt  reduction,  one  of 
Congress's  priorities,  has  resulted  in  fewer  funds  for  transportation,  infrastructure,  and 
community  development  assistance.  Welfare  reform,  in  turn,  means  that  the  states  and 
their  localities  must  take  action  to  either  replace  federal  benefits  or  to  turn  their  backs 

11 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


on  some  of  their  citizens.  Defense  downsizing  has  already  caused  hundreds  of  military 
bases  to  be  closed  and  a  major  restructuring  of  our  defense  industries.  What  is  most 
interesting  is  that  these  federal  initiatives  are  occurring  as  random  acts.  They  are  not 
connected  by  any  set  of  policies,  for  example,  toward  cities,  toward  competition,  or 
toward  the  poor.  It  is  here  that  the  states  and  their  communities  have  had  to  focus  their 
actions.  In  the  broadest  sense,  they  deal  with  recruiting  new  businesses,  retaining  and 
expanding  the  existing  industrial  base,  and  more  recently,  exporting  local  goods  and 
services  to  national  and  international  markets. 

Business  Recruitment,  Retention,  Formation,  and  Expansion 

Until  recently,  the  practice  of  economic  development  was  virtually  synonymous  with 
business  recruitment,  or  "smokestack  chasing."  This  approach  consisted  mainly  of  mar- 
keting a  region's  low  taxes,  low  financing  costs,  and  low  wages.  As  competition  in- 
creased, states  and  localities  added  numerous  incentives  to  outbid  each  other.32 

These  programs  gained  particular  popularity  in  southern  states  where  commerce 
departments  were  created  to  perform  a  variety  of  economic  development  functions  that 
included  industrial  promotion  and  recruitment.33  These  agencies  were  also  empowered 
to  offer  generous  financial  incentives  to  companies.  The  so-called  First  Wave  policies, 
which  were  originally  conceived  as  planning  tools  to  assist  distressed  areas  in  building 
their  capacity  for  value-added  innovation,  evolved  into  state  strategies  for  capturing  as 
much  industry  as  possible  from  other  regions  and  localities.34  The  model  had  a  singular 
focus,  which  was  to  recruit  manufacturing  plants  from  outside  the  state  by  offering 
them  "low-cost  investment  locations  and  public  financial  incentives."35 

Some  argue  that  state  and  local  economic  development,  based  on  business  recruit- 
ment, often  does  not  help  the  segments  that  need  it  most  and  that  current  state  and  local 
development  practices,  especially  business  recruitment  approaches,  are  undemocratic. 
They  claim  that  the  process  is  elitist  because  public  officials  tend  to  identify  with  the 
interests  of  the  business  and  development  community  that  they  are  courting.  Elected 
and  appointed  officials  underplay  the  magnitude  of  the  incentives  they  offer  to  firms 
and  exaggerate  the  benefits  in  jobs  and  future  economic  growth  that  will  come  from  an 
improved  business  climate.36 

The  industrial  recruitment  model  has  lost  little  of  its  political  allure.  A  large 
manufacturer's  announcement  of  its  intention  to  relocate  to  a  community  and  bring  a 
specified  number  of  jobs  remains  a  highly  visible  and  newsworthy  event.37  Unfortu- 
nately, in  too  many  cases  it  was  learned  that  the  motivations  of  large  multinational  firms 
were  not  necessarily  compatible  with  the  needs  or  interests  of  local  communities. 

What  the  recruitment  strategies  formulated  by  economic  development  agencies 
failed  to  consider  were  the  factors  and  conditions  that  contributed  to  the  demise  of 
manufacturing  jobs  in  the  first  place.  For  instance,  there  existed  little  understanding 
concerning  the  magnitude  to  which  the  emerging  global  economy  and  the  use  of  new 
technologies  had  altered  the  geographical  boundaries  of  industry.  The  increased  mobil- 
ity of  capital  greatly  diminished  the  comparative  advantage  of  individual  cities  and 
regions  of  the  country. 

This  economic  reality  eventually  gave  birth  to  the  "Second  Wave"  of  economic 
policy  in  the  United  States.  In  the  Second  Wave,  which  unfolded  during  the  1980s, 
economic  development  planners  began  to  experiment  with  a  host  of  new  global  strate- 
gies to  help  foster  local  and  regional  economic  growth.  These  tactics  included  the  de- 
velopment of  entrepreneurial  environments,  university-industry  linkages,  manufacturing 


12 


modernization,  and  regional  industrial  clusters.38  Second  Wave  economic  development 
did  not  entirely  abandon  the  business  attraction  or  industrial  recruitment  model.  Rather, 
planners,  realizing  its  limitations,  changed  their  focus  to  "indigenous"  economic  devel- 
opment activities  that  would  help  existing  firms  improve  their  productivity.  Local  ca- 
pacity building  was  key  to  the  new  economic  development  consciousness.  There  existed 
a  newfound  belief  that  the  strongest  magnet  for  economic  growth  is  "an  economic  envi- 
ronment rich  with  the  human,  technological,  financial,  and  infrastructure  resources  that 
support  existing  firms  and  entrepreneurship."39 

The  economic  policies  of  the  Second  Wave  were  nurtured  by  a  hospitable  political 
environment  in  the  United  States  and  abroad.  The  role  and  legitimacy  of  big  govern- 
ment was  being  questioned  by  a  neoconservative  movement  that  had  gained  political 
power  and  strongly  influenced  public  opinion.  The  conservative  brand  of  Reaganomics 
practiced  in  the  United  States  espoused  the  virtues  of  decentralized  free  markets,  de- 
regulation, small  business,  and  entrepreneurship.40  It  could  be  argued,  therefore,  that 
Second  Wave  strategies  were  formulated  more  in  response  to  an  ideological  persuasion 
than  from  a  prescribed  set  of  operational  principles  derived  from  a  coherent  national 
economic  policy.  The  recipe  for  successful  economic  development  bestowed  on  regions 
and  communities  was  simply  to  build  entrepreneurial  environments  in  which  business 
and  industry  could  flourish  with  minimal  government  regulation  and  interference. 

It  was  soon  determined  that  Second  Wave  economic  development  thinking  had  also 
missed  the  mark.  The  major  criticism  was  that  Second  Wave  policies  and  strategies 
misread  the  dynamics  of  the  evolving  global  economy.  The  transition  from  the  First  to 
Second  Wave  represented  a  policy  change  from  industrial  recruitment  to  internal  or 
indigenous  economic  development.  However,  the  emerging  "Third  Wave"  has  repre- 
sented a  growing  recognition  that  in  order  to  create  the  total  economic  environment 
envisioned  by  Second  Wave  proponents,  new  economic  institutions  and  organizations 
would  have  to  be  developed.  Third  Wave  economic  development  principles  have  been 
based  on  various  state  initiatives  and  experiments.  They  typically  involve  different 
forms  of  manufacturing  network  programs.  The  key  elements  or  set  of  operational  prin- 
ciples that  have  evolved  from  these  state  initiatives  include  (1)  the  application  of  gov- 
ernment resources  only  to  "demand  driven"  strategies,  (2)  a  greater  leveraging  of  public 
and  private  resources,  (3)  the  encouragement  of  competition  among  resource  suppliers, 
and  (4)  the  creation  of  "automatic  feedback  loops"  to  determine  program  accountability 
and  effectiveness.41 

Third  Wave  programs  and  initiatives  continue  to  emphasize  a  limited  role  for  govern- 
mental involvement.  The  underlying  motivation  is  to  create  a  new  flexible  business 
environment  free  of  the  existing  maze  of  government  regulation.  The  model  manufac- 
turing network  would  have  a  close  spatial  dimension  and  a  knowledge-based  production 
system  with  mutually  supportive  business  firm  relationships.  Economic  development 
planning  in  a  knowledge-based  manufacturing  environment  would  also  take  on  a  more 
entrepreneurial  identity.  Planners  would  be  expected  to  assume  the  role  of  facilitator  in 
helping  to  create  and  nurture  an  environment  that  is  conducive  to  economic  growth  and 
competition.  Planners  would  also  routinely  be  expected  to  provide  targeted  economic 
incentives,  infrastructure  improvements,  and  more  flexible  land  use  regulations. 

Third  Wave  case  study  examples  include  the  "high  performance"  manufacturing 
zones  popularized  in  the  Midwest42  and  new  manufacturing  network  initiatives  in 
Michigan,  Indiana,  and  Ohio.43  Battle  Creek,  Michigan,  is  viewed  as  a  prototypical 
high-performance  manufacturing  zone  because  the  city  and  the  region  were  severely 


13 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


impacted  by  a  wave  of  deindustrialization  during  the  1970s  and  have  since  been  revital- 
ized through  a  proliferation  of  Japanese  transplants.  A  number  of  other  traditional 
manufacturing  locations  in  the  upper  Midwest  have  also  been  targeted  by  Japanese 
foreign  investors.  In  each  case,  the  new  economic  development  strategies  focused  on 
organizational  restructuring,  new  delivery  systems,  innovative  management  practices, 
and  more  formalized  worker  training  and  vocational  education  programs.  States  and 
communities  are  increasingly  focusing  on  business  formation  or  growth  from  within. 
Regardless  of  its  total  accuracy,  David  Birch's  point  on  the  majority  of  new  jobs  being 
created  by  firms  that  are  less  than  ten  years  old,  employ  fewer  than  twenty  people,  and 
manufacture  a  product  is  taken  seriously  in  most  states,  especially  in  New  England.44 
Many  states  and  localities  are  paying  equal  attention  to  business  retention  and  expan- 
sion strategies  and  realizing  that  they  are  more  cost-effective  than  business  recruit- 
ment.45 

Even  if  one  accepts  business  retention  approaches  on  ideological  grounds,  it  does 
have  several  limitations  as  a  development  strategy.  First,  from  the  political  standpoint,  it 
is  riskier  and  less  glamorous  than  business  recruitment,  since  politicians  have  nothing 
new  to  show  for  their  efforts.  Instead  of  being  able  to  unveil  a  brand-new  building  or 
corporation,  a  politician  is  given  the  unenviable  task  of  selling  something  familiar  back 
to  the  constituents.46  Is  it  any  wonder  that  politicians  are  reluctant  to  endorse  such  a 
strategy?  Second,  retention  efforts  work  only  in  communities  that  already  have  a  fairly 
healthy  economic  climate.  If  there  are  local  shortages  of  labor,  problems  with  work- 
force skills,  land  use  problems,  and  high  operational  costs,  all  the  retention  efforts  in 
the  world  will  not  work.  Again,  it  could  be  argued  that  the  very  communities  most  in 
need  are  those  which  are  too  poor  to  afford  this  type  of  aid.  Last,  retention  efforts  are 
not  immune  to  the  state  wars  and  interstate  bidding  games.47 


What  Does  the  Literature  Tell  Us?  A  Summary  of  Key  Themes 

Virtually  all  the  books  and  articles  reviewed  point  out  that  if  the  United  States  is  to  be 
competitive,  it  must  compete  globally.  This  is  probably  no  surprise  to  the  reader.  How- 
ever, what  is  striking  is  the  difference  of  opinions  on  how  best  to  improve  our  competi- 
tive posture.  The  debates  over  NAFTA  and  GATT  illustrate  the  difficulty  in  coming  to 
agreement.48  What  is  most  interesting,  however,  is  the  fact  that  business  at  the  local 
level  has,  in  many  ways,  ignored  the  debate  and  undertaken  efforts  on  its  own  to  be- 
come internationally  competitive. 

In  second  place  is  the  need  to  stimulate  research  and  development  (R&D)  and  to 
move  it  away  from  its  military  orientation.49  While  opinions  differ  concerning  how  best 
to  accomplish  this,  there  are  indications  of  some  movement  in  this  direction.  The  shift 
from  Defense  Advanced  Research  Projects  Agency  to  Advanced  Research  Projects 
Agency,  while  partially  a  simple  change  in  name,  reflects  the  government's  understand- 
ing of  the  need  for  this  change.  Also,  the  role  of  the  National  Institute  of  Standards  and 
Technology  in  creating  regional  innovation  centers  is  another  positive  step. 

The  third  is  the  interest  in  industrial  clustering.50  The  idea  that  regions  have  existing 
and  emerging  groupings  of  industry  with  linkages  among  labor,  finance,  and  R&D  is 
quite  popular.  While  few  argue  for  government  to  target  clusters,  most  scholars  see 
great  merit  in  stimulating  local  strengths  and  opportunities. 

As  part  of  the  industrial  clustering,  most  industrial  policy  advocates  see,  as  the 
fourth  factor,  the  need  to  change  corporate  culture.  More  specifically,  they  are  aware  of 

14 


the  necessity  to  develop  industrial  networks  that  share  ideas  and  approaches.  The  age  of 
totally  isolated  individual  firms  developing  products  totally  from  within  has  passed. 
They  also  argue  for  government  to  help  stimulate  business  commitments  for  the  long 
term.  The  quick  return-on-investment  strategies  of  many  companies  creates  a  climate  of 
insecurity  and  instability  at  the  local  level. 

The  fifth  focuses  on  education  and  training.  The  nation  must  effect  an  extensive  shift 
in  the  way  we  educate  and  train  our  workforce.51  It  is  clear  that  lifelong  education  is  a 
requirement  for  a  healthy  economy. 

The  sixth  is  the  need  to  improve  our  infrastructure.52  This  is  not  simply  a  matter  of 
roads  and  bridges  but  ensuring  that  our  telecommunications  systems  are  state  of  the  art 
and  meet  the  requirements  of  all  regions  of  the  nation.  It  means  that  our  water  must  be 
pure  and  deliverable  to  regions  that  lack  it.  And  it  means  that  our  sanitation  needs  must 
be  environmentally  appropriate  and  that  our  people  are  protected. 

Finally,  regulatory  reforms  have  to  be  addressed.53  These  include,  as  examples,  anti- 
trust laws  at  the  national  level,  unemployment  and  workers'  compensation  laws  at  the 
state  level,  and  zoning  laws  at  the  local  level.  Putting  all  these  together  is  no  easy  task! 

Missing  Elements 

What  is  the  debate  lacking?  The  first  element  is  the  link  between  industry  and  the  envi- 
ronment. Yes,  we  see  an  increased  concern  over  protecting  the  environment.  Yes,  we  see 
higher  and  higher  standards  that  govern  environmental  hazards.  And  yes,  we  have  noted 
increased  environmental  awareness  at  the  local  level.  But  beyond  this,  we  see  little 
attention  being  paid  at  the  federal  level  to  industrial  site  recovery.  It  is  ironic  that  the 
Environmental  Protection  Agency  is  responsible  for  the  "brownfields"  initiative.  EPAs 
mandate  is  not  to  attract  industry  to  brownfields,  it  is  to  stimulate  the  cleanup  of  the 
polluted  industrial  landscape.  This  action  is  "stove  piping"  at  its  worst.  EPA  should  not 
own  this  problem  at  the  federal  level  but  should  share  it  with  the  departments  of  Hous- 
ing and  Urban  Development  and  Commerce.  Few  industrial  policy  advocates  or  ana- 
lysts, except  George  Lodge,  have  picked  up  on  this  issue.  It  clearly  needs  to  be  ad- 
dressed. 

Second,  industrial  policy  advocates  have  steered  away  from  place-specific  programs. 
Little  current  literature  calls  for  the  creation  of  an  Appalachian-type  commission  in 
some  region  of  the  country.  This  represents  a  fundamental  shift  in  the  position  of  advo- 
cates in  the  1970s  and  early  1980s.  Perhaps  the  current  advocates  no  longer  see  the 
need  for  such  agencies,  perhaps  the  inherent  policy  of  the  nation  to  redistribute  wealth 
across  the  country  is  working,  or  perhaps  there  are  newer,  less  bureaucratic  methods  to 
undertake  regionally  assisted  development.  The  fact  remains  that  the  literature  under- 
plays the  desirability  of  regionally  directed  approaches. 

Third,  relatively  little  attention  is  being  placed  on  cities.  Beyond  Michael  Porter's 
call  to  make  cities  more  competitive,  Robert  Beauregard's  perspective  that  the  negative 
sides  of  urban  life  have  been  exaggerated,  and  Ann  Markusen's  call  to  use  some  of  the 
mythical  peace  dividend  for  urban  restructuring,  mighty  few  advocates  are  looking  at 
linking  industrial  policies  and  urban  revitalization.  It  is  as  if  our  cities  are  to  sink  or 
swim  on  their  own  merits. 

Finally,  the  increasing  independence  of  the  world's  large  companies  is  under- 
addressed.  These  companies  are  virtually  free  of  commitment  to  nations  and  exist  in- 
creasingly as  global  entities  of  their  own.  They  are  quickly  responsive  to  the  initiatives 
of  Japan  Inc.,  NAFTA,  GATT,  and  the  European  Union  in  terms  of  the  impact  on  the 

75 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


company  rather  than  on  their  workers  or  on  their  home  nation.  Given  the  mobility  of 
capital,  varying  labor  costs,  and  the  internationalization  of  markets,  they  have  little 
choice.  In  light  of  this  phenomenon,  it  is  essential  that  industrial  policy  confront  this 
issue  and  strive  to  create  approaches  which  create  increased  stability  and  worker  secu- 
rity before  any  public  investment  occurs.  Otherwise  our  communities  will  be  involved 
in  risky  business. 


A  Final  Word 

Even  as  we  debate  and  adopt,  reject,  or  compromise  on  various  visions  of  national 
industrial  policy,  the  global  economy  itself  continues  to  change  rapidly.  As  multina- 
tional corporations  divide  and  multiply  their  operations  throughout  the  globe,  engag- 
ing in  joint  ventures  for  research  and  production  with  other  corporations  and  govern- 
ments, they  create  an  increasingly  complex  web  of  relationships  that  supersedes  the 
borders  of  the  nation-state  and  stretches  the  balance  of  political-economic  theory  and 
policy.54 

It  is  tempting  to  assume  that  these  developments  will  continue  unchecked,  gradu- 
ally pushing  protectionism  aside  until  the  world  becomes  one  big  market.  We  must, 
however,  avoid  such  simple  assumptions.  National  nontariff  barriers  are  increasing  in 
significance,  as  are  regional  trading  blocs.  Indeed,  the  division  of  the  world  economy 
into  a  yen  bloc  in  the  Pacific,  a  dollar  bloc  in  the  Americas,  and  a  mark-dominated 
bloc  in  Europe  has,  to  some  extent,  already  occurred.  It  is  therefore  important  that  we 
make  conscious  choices  among  the  industry  and  trade  policy  options  before  us,  mind- 
ful of  their  consequences  not  only  for  the  world  output  and  income,  but  for  each 
nation's  worker,  consumer,  and  community  income  and  well-being. 

Furthermore,  states  and  localities  have  experienced  the  effects  of  economic  restruc- 
turing in  different  ways,  some  as  economic  and  social  disasters,  others  as  mere  disrup- 
tions, yet  others  as  opportunities  for  new  growth  and  expansion.  In  response,  localities 
have  established  increasingly  sophisticated  economic  development  programs  to  re- 
place lost  jobs  and  tax  revenue.  Owing  in  part  to  the  retreat  of  the  federal  government 
from  their  affairs  through  the  1980s,  local  regions  have  focused  their  energies  on  com- 
peting with  one  another  for  jobs  through  their  business  recruitment  policies.  They  are 
also  using  more  deliberate  analysis  and  planning  procedures  to  establish  appropriate 
development  goals  and  strategies.55 

With  or  without  a  change  in  federal  priorities,  several  trends  seem  irreversible. 
States  and  localities  are  rapidly  acquiring  the  expertise  to  understand  regional  and 
economic  forces  and  developing  increasingly  sophisticated  tools  to  promote  their  own 
economic  prosperity.  Yet  the  ultimate  success  or  failure  of  the  state  and  local  eco- 
nomic development  efforts  also  depend  on  the  development  of  global  economic  forces 
as  well  as  that  of  other  national  governments.  The  task  ahead  for  states  and  localities, 
and  for  the  federal  government,  is  to  generate  mutually  cooperative  policies  that  pro- 
mote equity  and  human  welfare.  ** 


Notes 


Helzi  Nopponen,  Julie  Graham,  and  Ann  R.  Markusen,  Trading  Industries,  Trading 
Regions  (New  York:  Guilford  Press,  1993). 


16 


2.  Ann  R.  Markusen,  "Sticky  Places  and  Slippery  Space:  The  Political  Economy  of  Post 
War  Fast-Growth  Regions,"  Working  Paper  #79  (New  Brunswick,  N.J.:  Center  for 
Urban  Policy  Research,  1994). 

3.  Kevin  P.  Phillips,  "U.S.  Industrial  Policy:  Inevitable  and  Ineffective,"  Harvard  Business 
Review  70,  no.  4  (1992),  104-112. 

4.  John  J.  Accordino,  The  United  States  in  the  Global  Economy:  Challenges  and  Policy 
Choices  (Chicago:  American  Library  Association,  1992). 

5.  Barry  Bluestone  and  Bennett  Harrison,  The  Deindustrialization  of  America:  Plant 
Closings,  Community  Abandonment,  and  the  Dismantling  of  Basic  Industry  {New  York: 
Basic  Books,  1982). 

6.  John  E.  Ullman,  The  Anatomy  of  Industrial  Decline:  Productivity,  Investment,  and 
Location  in  U.S.  Manufacturing  (New  York:  Quorum,  1988). 

7.  Bennett  Harrison,  Lean  and  Mean:  The  Changing  Landscape  of  Corporate  Power  in  the 
Age  of  Flexibility  (New  York:  Basic  Books,  1994). 

8.  Margaret  E.  Dewar,  "The  Industrial  Policy  Dilemma,"  Economic  Development  Quarterly 
6,  no.  2  (1992):  211-219. 

9.  Michael  Porter,  in  collaboration  with  Monitor  Company,  Inc.,  The  Competitive  Advan- 
tage of  Massachusetts  (Cambridge:  Monitor  Company,  1991). 

1 0.  Harvey  A.  Goldstein,  ed.,  The  State  and  Local  Industrial  Policy  Question  (Chicago: 
American  Planning  Association,  1987). 

1 1 .  David  Osborne,  Laboratories  of  Democracy:  A  New  Breed  of  Governor  Creates  Models 
for  National  Growth  (Boston:  Harvard  Business  School  Press,  1990). 

12.  Sar  A.  Levitan  and  Chalmers  Johnson,  "The  Contradictions  of  Industrial  Policy," 
Journal  of  the  Institute  of  Socioeconomic  Studies  7,  no.  4  (1983-1984):  48-63. 

13.  Robert  Reich,  "Why  the  United  States  Needs  an  Industrial  Policy,"  Harvard  Business 
Review  60,  no.  1  (1982):  74-81. 

14.  Ira  Magazmer  and  Robert  Reich,  Minding  America's  Business:  The  Decline  and  Rise  of 
the  American  Economy  {New  York:  Harcourt  Brace  Jovanovich,  1983). 

1 5.  Robert  Kuttner,  "Facing  Up  to  Industrial  Policy,"  New  York  Times  Magazine,  April  19, 
1992,  and  Phillips,  "U.S.  Industrial  Policy." 

16.  George  Lodge  and  William  Glass,  "U.S.  Trade  Policy  Needs  One  Voice,"  Harvard 
Business  Review  61],  no.  3  (1983):  75-83,  and  Michael  M.  Weinstein,  "A  Stealth 
Industrial  Policy,"  New  York  Times,  February  24,  1993,  A14. 

17.  Harvey  Goldstein  and  Edward  Bergman,  "Institutional  Arrangement  for  State  and  Local 
Industrial  Policy,"  Journal  of  the  American  Planning  Association  52,  no.  3  (1986): 
265-276;  Virginia  D.  McConnell  and  Robert  M.  Schwab,  "The  Impact  of  Environmen- 
tal Regulation  on  Industrial  Location  Decisions:  The  Motor  Vehicle  Industry,"  Land 
Economics  66,  no.  1  (February  1990):  67-81;  and  Keith  Schneider,  "Rules  Easing  for 
Urban  Toxic  Cleanups,"  New  York  Times,  September  20,  1993,  A12. 

18.  Edward  J.  Malecki,  Technology  and  Economic  Development.  (Essex,  England: 
Longman  Scientific  &  Technical;  New  York:  Wiley,  1991). 

19.  Porter,  The  Competitive  Advantage  of  Massachusetts,  and  Robert  B.  Reich, 
"Clintonomics  101:  And  Why  It  Beats  Bush-Reagan,"  New  Republic  207,  no.  10 
(August  31,  1992):  23-24. 

20.  Porter,  The  Competitive  Advantage  of  Massachusetts,  Michael  Best,  The  New 
Competition:  Institutions  of  Industrial  Restructuring  (Cambridge:  Harvard  University 
Press,  1990),  and  Reich,  "Clintonomics  101." 

2 1 .  Porter,  The  Competitive  Advantage  of  Massachusetts. 

22.  Best,  The  New  Competition. 

23.  Reich,  "Clintonomics  101." 

24.  Porter,  The  Competitive  Advantage  of  Massachusetts. 

25.  Best,  The  New  Competition. 

26.  Nancey  Green  Leigh,  Stemming  Middle-Class  Decline:  The  Challenges  to  Economic 
Development  Planning  (New  Brunswick,  N.J.:  Center  for  Urban  Policy  Research, 1994). 

27.  Osborne,  Laboratories  of  Democracy,  and  Brian  J.  Berry,  Long  Wave  Rhythms  in 
Economic  Development  and  Policy  Behaw'or  (Baltimore  and  London:  Johns  Hopkins 
University  Press,  1991). 


17 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


28.  Accordino,  The  United  States  in  the  Global  Economy,  and  Phillips,  "U.S.  Industrial 
Policy." 

29.  Doug  Ross  and  Robert  E.  Friedman,  "The  Emerging  Third  Wave:  New  Economic  Develop- 
ment Strategies,"  in  Local  Economic  Development:  Strategies  for  a  Changing  Economy, 
ed.  Scott  R.  Fosler  (Washington,  D.C.:  International  City  Management  Association, 
1991),   125-138. 

30.  Goldstein,  The  State  and  Local  Industrial  Policy  Question. 

31.  Richard  D.  Bingham  and  Robert  Mier,  eds..  Theories  of  Economic  Development  (Newbury 
Park,  Calif.:  Sage,  1993),  and  Robert  A.  Beauregard,  Voices  of  Decline:  The  Post  War 
Fate  of  U.S.  Cities  (Cambridge,  England:  Basil  Blackwell,  1993). 

32.  David  Friedman  and  Joel  Kotkin,  "Begging  as  an  Economic  Development  Strategy:  Let 
Other  States  Do  It,"  Los  Angeles  Times,  April  18,  1993,  M6. 

33.  Stuart  A.  Rosenfeld,  Competitive  Manufacturing:  New  Strategies  for  Regional  Develop- 
ment {New  Brunswick,  N.J.:  Center  for  Urban  Policy  Research,  1992). 

34.  Fosler,  Introduction  to  Local  Economic  Development,  xiii-xxix. 

35.  Ross  and  Friedman,  "The  Emerging  Third  Wave." 

36.  Timothy  J.  Bartik,  Who  Benefits  from  State  and  Local  Economic  Development  Policies? 
(Kalamazoo:  W.  E.  Upjohn  Institute  for  Employment  Research,  1991). 

37.  Fosler,  Introduction. 

38.  Richard  Florida  and  Timothy  McNulty,  "High  Performance  Economic  Development," 
Economic  Development  Commentary  19,  no.  1  (1995). 

39.  Jeanne  Armstrong  and  John  R.  Mullin,  "National  Industrial  Policy  and  the  Local  Plan- 
ners," Journal  of  Planning  Literature  2  (Spring  1987):  119-135,  and  Ross  and  Friedman, 
"The  Emerging  Third  Wave." 

40.  Harrison,  Lean  and  Mean. 

41 .  Ross  and  Friedman,  "The  Emerging  Third  Wave,"  and  AnnaLee  Saxenian,  Regional 
Advantage:  Culture  and  Competition  in  Silicon  Valley  and  Route  128  (Cambridge: 
Harvard  University  Press,  1996). 

42.  Florida  and  McNulty,  "High  Performance  Economic  Development." 

43.  Walter  H.  Plosila,  "Technology  Development:  Perspectives  on  the  Third  Wave,"  in  Local 

Economic  Development,  48-55,  and  Ross  and  Friedman,  "The  Emerging  Third  Wave." 

44.  David  Birch,  The  Job  Generation  Process  (Cam  bridge:  MIT  Program  on  Neighborhood  and 
Regional  Change,  1979). 

45.  Friedman  and  Kotkin,  "Begging  as  an  Economic  Development  Strategy." 

46.  John  M.  Levy,  Economic  Development  Programs  for  Cities,  Counties,  and  Towns,  2d  ed. 
(New  York:  Praeger,  1990). 

47.  Osborne,  Laboratories  of  Democracy,  Accordino,  The  United  States  in  the  Global 
Economy,  and  Peter  S.  Fisher,  "The  National  Consequence  of  Decentralized  Industrial 
Policy  in  the  United  States,"  paper  presented  at  the  Association  of  Collegiate  Schools  of 
Planning  Annual  Conference,  Austin,  Texas,  October  1990. 

48.  Max  Holland,  When  the  Machine  Stopped:  A  Cautionary  Tale  from  Industrial  America 
(Boston:  Harvard  Business  School  Press,  1989). 

49.  Alex  Mintz,  ed..  The  Political  Economy  of  Military  Spending  in  the  United  States  (New 
York:  Routledge,  1992),  and  Ann  Markusen  and  Joel  Yudkin,  Dismantling  the  Cold  War 
Economy  (New  York:  Basic  Books,  1992). 

50.  Manuel  Castells  and  Peter  Hall,  Technopoles  of  the  World  (London:  Routledge,  1994). 

51.  William  J.Wilson,  When  Work  Disappears:  The  World  of  the  New  Urban  Poor  (New 
York:  Knopf,  1996). 

52.  James  W.  Harrington  and  Barney  Warf,  Industrial  Location:  Principles,  Practice,  and 
Policy  (London:  Routledge,  1995). 

53.  Michael  L.  Dertouzos,  Richard  K.  Lester,  and  Robert  M.  Solow,  Made  In  America: 

Regaining  the  Competitive  Edge  (Cambridge:  MIT  Press,  1989). 

54.  Accordino,  The  United  States  in  the  Global  Economy. 

55.  Bingham  and  Mier,  Theories  of  Economic  Development. 


18 


The  Politics  of  Three  Case  Studies 

Industrialization 


Eve  S.  Weinbaum,  Ph.D. 


This  article  analyzes  the  grassroots  efforts  of  the  working  and  unemployed  poor  of 
three  Appalachian  communities  to  improve  their  towns '  devastated  economy  in  an 
era  of  rapid  economic  change  and  globalization.  While  all  three  were  beset  by 
plant  closings,  their  forms  of  political  mobilization,  both  before  and  after  the  shut- 
down, differed.  Each  group  of  workers  mounted  a  communitywide  campaign  de- 
signed to  convince  the  company  to  stay,  to  induce  local  government  action,  to  re- 
ceive pay  and  benefits  due,  and  to  influence  state  legislation  and  economic  devel- 
opment policy.  Mobilization  in  the  wake  of  a  plant  closing  is  rather  extraordinary, 
especially  in  isolated,  low-income  rural  areas.  Why  did  it  occur  in  these  communi- 
ties, and  what  were  its  consequences  for  the  participants  and  for  the  state?  First, 
each  group's  ultimate  failure  to  influence  an  economic  outcome  and  policy  reveals 
the  grim  prospects  for  meaningful  local  democratic  politics  in  a  global  economy. 
But  second,  the  mobilization  in  two  of  the  three  cases  succeeded  in  transforming 
the  participants  and  the  local  community. 


There  is  something  new  and  disturbing  about  current  economic  afflictions,"  says 
The  New  York  Times.1  In  the  1990s,  journalists  and  social  scientists  of  all  politi- 
cal persuasions  are  observing  troubling  trends  and  widespread  anxiety  regarding  eco- 
nomic issues,  especially  among  the  unemployed  and  the  poor,  but  increasingly  through- 
out the  American  middle  class.  The  changes  that  accompany  downsizing  and 
deindustrialization  are  affecting  a  broad  group  of  workers  —  from  blue-collar  produc- 
tion workers  to  high-level  managers  —  in  nearly  every  region  of  the  country. 

The  changes  of  the  late  1980s  and  early  1990s  in  New  England  have  been  particu- 
larly severe.  Partly  because  of  decreases  in  defense-related  spending,  the  Northeast  has 
seen  what  one  economist  has  called  "dramatic  employment  reductions  ...  the  most 
severe  recession  the  region  has  faced  since  the  Great  Depression."2  A  disproportionate 
share  of  these  reductions  has  been  caused  by  business  failures  or  plant  closings  in  a 
variety  of  economic  sectors.  Closings  in  New  England,  as  elsewhere  in  the  nation,  have 
had  serious,  undesirable  implications  for  the  regional  economy.  Firms  that  cease  to  exist 
cannot  rehire  workers  in  periods  of  economic  recovery,  banks  whose  business  customers 
default  become  less  likely  to  finance  new  ventures,  and  communities  are  decimated  as 
laid-off  workers  disperse.  Accordingly,  economists  argue  that  high  rates  of  plant  clos- 
ings tend  to  have  lasting  repercussions  and  to  slow  eventual  economic  recovery.3  The 
"global  economy"  has  had  an  obvious  and  well-documented  impact  on  Americans' 


Eve  S.  Weinbaum,  a  political  scientist,  is  education  and  political  director  for  the  southern 
region  of  the  Union  of  Needletrades,  Industrial,  and  Textile  Employees  (UNITE). 

19 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


standard  of  living  and  economic  expectations,  but  it  also  has  affected  our  politics. 

I  analyze  the  political  changes  that  accompany  deindustrialization  in  cities  and  rural 
areas  all  across  the  United  States  by  closely  examining  three  plant  closings  in  Appala- 
chian Tennessee.  Although  local  conditions  and  regional  differences  are  important, 
these  communities  provide  a  useful  microcosm  for  the  study  of  political  mobilization 
around  economic  change  in  any  region.  Many  of  the  firms  that  once  left  New  England 
and  the  Midwest  for  the  low  wages  and  less  stringent  regulations  of  southern  regions 
like  Tennessee  are  now  moving  on.  Some  are  going  overseas  in  a  continuing  quest  to 
reduce  production  costs,  others  are  moving  between  states  and  counties  to  benefit  from 
economic  development  policies  and  incentives.  Whatever  the  reason,  capital  mobility  is 
becoming  more  prevalent  than  ever,  leading  to  serious  consequences  for  every  region  of 
the  United  States. 

All  three  subject  communities  analyzed  experienced  plant  closings  between  1988 
and  1993.  The  workers  in  each  plant,  deciding  to  protest  the  shutdown  in  some  way, 
undertook  an  effort  to  improve  their  community's  devastated  economy  in  an  era  of  rapid 
economic  change  and  globalization.  Different  forms  of  political  mobilization  took  place 
either  before  the  closing  (with  the  hope  of  preventing  it)  or  afterward,  or  both.  Each 
community  mounted  a  communitywide  campaign  to  prevent  the  plant  from  closing,  to 
induce  local  government  action,  to  acquire  the  pay  and  benefits  due  them,  or  to  lobby 
for  state  or  federal  legislation.  Such  mobilization  in  the  wake  of  a  plant  closing  is  rather 
extraordinary,  and  I  examine  the  reasons  for  its  occurrence  and  its  results  in  all  three 
cases. 

I  discuss  the  mobilization  in  several  stages,  the  first  covering  the  circumstances  of 
the  shutdowns.  It  is  striking  that,  although  the  workers  in  these  plants  had  more  or  less 
notification  and  time  to  prepare,  this  made  little  difference;  all  the  closings  came  as  a 
shock  and  a  hardship.  The  three  factories  are  in  small  towns  in  rural  areas,  and  the 
workers  knew  that  once  laid  off,  finding  work,  except  at  fast-food  restaurants,  cleaning 
houses,  or  through  temporary  agencies,  would  not  be  easy. 

The  second  stage  is  the  mobilization  campaign.  The  nature  of  the  effort  varies  tre- 
mendously between  cases.  Is  the  problem  framed  as  a  single  plant's  failure  or  as  a  chal- 
lenge to  the  structure  of  the  American  economy?  Besides  the  breadth  of  the  issue,  there 
is  the  question  of  the  nature  of  the  target  of  the  activity:  the  plant  manager,  the  corpora- 
tion, the  local,  state,  or  federal  government.  I  show  that  these  are  not  given  parameters 
but  the  choices  of  the  leaders  in  the  early  stages  of  a  campaign. 

The  third  stage  involves  the  nature  of  the  coalition  that  forms  around  the  issue  as  it  is 
framed.  To  be  successful,  organizers  must  recruit  others  who  can  provide  resources  and 
examples.  Their  ability  to  do  this  depends  on  many  factors,  including  the  current  degree 
of  organization  in  the  workplace  and  in  the  community  and  between  the  two,  as  well  as 
the  leadership  and  organizing  skills  of  those  involved  in  the  drive. 

Finally,  I  argue  that  the  success  or  failure  of  each  mobilizing  effort  must  not  be 
judged  by  economic  outcomes  alone.  When  small,  rural,  economically  and  politically 
marginalized  groups  confront  national  and  international  institutions  on  the  direction  of 
the  global  economy,  positive  material  outcomes  are  a  rarity.  At  least  as  important  are 
the  changes  in  the  individual  participants  and  in  their  communities  brought  about  by  the 
experience  of  political  mobilization.  Through  this  process,  participants  come  to  under- 
stand many  factors  in  an  entirely  different  light:  their  own  power  and  the  power  of  col- 
lective action;  power  relations  in  their  communities;  their  relationship  to  authority  and 
the  ability  to  stand  up  for  what  is  right;  the  "economy";  national  debate  of  public  policy 

20 


issues;  politics  and  the  role  of  elected  officials;  and  their  commonality  with  working 
people  across  the  country  and  the  world.  I  based  the  description  and  analysis  of  the 
striking  differences  in  their  perceptions  of  their  experiences,  and  of  politics  more  gener- 
ally, on  my  sixty  in-depth  interviews,  conducted  October  1993  through  February  1994, 
with  employees  in  all  three  communities.  These  transformations  demonstrate  the  poten- 
tial of  grassroots  organizing  to  generate  political  change. 

These  cases  show  that  organized  and  sustained  struggle  requires  many  factors,  in- 
cluding various  types  of  resources,  preexisting  community  networks,  and  perhaps  most 
important,  leadership.  I  show  that  the  differences  in  the  types  of  issues  defined,  the 
campaigns  waged,  the  coalitions  formed,  and  the  changes  in  both  understandings  and 
material  conditions  are  directly  related  to  the  type  of  political  organizing  that  character- 
ized each  effort. 


Case  1:  Greenbrier  Industries 


The  more  than  five  hundred  Greenbrier  Industries  employees  who  returned  from  their 
Fourth  of  July  vacation  in  the  summer  of  1993  found  a  rude  surprise  awaiting  them.  The 
Clinton,  Tennessee,  workers  were  greeted  by  a  telephone  message  instructing  them  not 
to  report  to  work  the  following  day.  Some  disregarded  the  message  or,  certain  it  could 
not  be  true,  went  to  the  factory  to  find  out  more  about  what  was  happening.  There  they 
found  supervisors  and  plant  managers  who  were  equally  confused.  The  workers  were 
told  only  that  they  would  receive  word  in  a  week  as  to  when  they  should  come  back  to 
work.  When  they  checked  in  the  following  week,  they  received  the  same  response.  No 
one  knew  what  to  expect,  but  there  was  no  work.  Little  by  little,  the  employees  discov- 
ered the  truth:  Greenbrier  would  not  reopen.  Even  worse,  it  appeared  that  the  company 
had  for  months  been  secretly  siphoning  off  funds.  Most  workers'  final  paychecks  had 
bounced.  Many  payroll  taxes  had  not  been  paid,  suppliers  had  stopped  deliveries  when 
months-old  bills  were  left  unpaid,  and  the  company  was  behind  on  its  obligations.  On 
July  28,  1993,  Greenbrier  Industries  quietly  filed  for  Chapter  7  bankruptcy  at  its  New 
Jersey  headquarters. 

Hiring  as  many  as  650  people,  Greenbrier  Industries  had  been  the  second  largest 
employer  in  Clinton,  a  town  of  only  8,000.  An  apparel  plant  owned  by  Northerners,  it 
was  a  rather  typical  rural  southern  factory  employing  mainly  women  to  sit  in  front  of 
assorted  sewing  machines  for  long  days.  The  pay  was  low;  in  1994,  most  new  workers 
were  paid  $4.50  an  hour.  More  experienced  workers  hoped  to  be  placed  in  piece-rate 
jobs  in  which  they  could  be  rewarded  for  extraordinary  speed.  But  when  a  worker  or  a 
group  became  too  efficient  at  a  particular  task  —  when  their  earnings  neared  $7.00  or 
even  $8.00  an  hour  —  engineers  appeared  to  conduct  new  time  studies  and  reevaluate 
the  piece  rate  downward.  Sewing  machine  operators  did  not  get  rich  at  Greenbrier,  yet 
workers  maintain  that  they  liked  working  there.  Treated  well,  they  considered  them- 
selves part  of  the  Greenbrier  "family." 

The  large  old  brick  factory  building  by  the  river,  just  two  blocks  from  City  Hall  and 
in  clear  view  of  the  Anderson  County  courthouse,  could  not  have  been  a  more  centrally 
located  landmark.  It  drew  workers  from  very  poor  rural  Campbell,  Union,  and  Roane 
counties,  but  most  of  the  employees  lived  nearby,  and  nearly  everyone  in  Clinton  seems 
to  have  had  at  least  one  relative,  friend,  or  neighbor  who  worked  at  Greenbrier.  The 
twenty-two-year-old  company  had  a  rather  checkered  past.  Plagued  by  investigations 
and  allegations  of  corruption,  Greenbrier  had  been  shifted  among  various  interrelated 

21 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


owners  for  many  years,  yet  had  continued  to  grow  and  thrive.  Greenbrier's  main 
customer  —  for  years  it  had  been  the  only  one  —  was  the  U.S.  government.  The  plant, 
which  was  awarded  Department  of  Defense  contracts,  had  started  by  making  body  bags, 
eventually  branching  out  into  parkas,  bulletproof  vests,  camouflage  suits,  tents,  wind- 
breakers,  and  dress  coats.  The  workload  had  been  extremely  heavy  during  Operation 
Desert  Storm,  and  managers  not  only  hired  many  more  workers,  but  everyone  put  in 
overtime  hours,  sometimes  as  long  as  sixteen-hour  shifts  several  days  in  a  row.  But 
business  had  slowed  so  that  workers  were  being  shifted  around  and  sometimes  laid  off. 
Everyone  seemed  to  know  that  business  was  bad,  but  management  had  continued  to 
assure  workers  that  everything  was  all  right.  The  sudden  bankruptcy  was  a  shock  to  the 
entire  Clinton  community. 

For  many  workers,  the  devastation  of  suddenly  being  faced  with  no  work  and  no 
income  was  intensified  when  they  learned  the  details  of  the  bankruptcy.  Many  were 
burdened  by  the  most  serious  problem  of  owing  huge  hospitalization  bills.  While  they 
were  employed,  the  workers  had  continued  to  contribute  weekly  payments  —  approxi- 
mately $30  a  week  from  a  gross  salary  of  less  than  $200  —  for  health  insurance.  But 
without  informing  anyone,  the  company  had  stopped  paying  their  bills  six  months  pre- 
viously. Greenbrier,  a  self-insured  business,  had  not  paid  medical  bills  for  half  a  year. 
Some  workers  owed  up  to  $40,000  in  hospital  bills,  despite  the  assurance  of  the  com- 
pany, to  both  the  workers  and  the  doctors,  that  it  would  cover  all  services,  including 
major  surgery.  By  the  fall,  the  workers  were  being  hounded  by  collection  agencies  on 
behalf  of  hospitals,  and  some  began  to  receive  notices  that  their  wages,  if  they  had  any, 
would  be  garnisheed  to  pay  Greenbrier's  outstanding  bills. 

Many  workers  had  also  contributed  to  a  401  (k)  pension  plan,  some  up  to  15  or  20 
percent  of  their  monthly  wages,  on  the  promise  that  their  personal  contributions  were 
being  matched  by  those  of  their  employer.  After  the  company  declared  bankruptcy, 
these  employees  found  that  not  only  had  there  been  no  matching  payments,  but  their 
own  contributions  had  been  seized  by  the  bank.  Workers  watched  helplessly  as  their 
livelihood  and  their  entire  savings  disappeared. 

The  Greenbrier  Workers  Committee 

When  it  was  clear  that  the  plant  was  permanently  closed,  the  Greenbrier  workers  called 
a  meeting  at  which  almost  three  hundred  people  appeared.  Comparing  notes,  they  dis- 
covered common  ground:  everyone  had  been  promised  that  they  would  return  to  work 
after  the  summer  vacation;  nobody's  hospital  and  doctor  bills  had  been  paid  for  at  least 
six  months;  no  one  knew  what  had  become  of  their  401  (k)  savings.  One  by  one,  out- 
raged workers  stood  up  to  tell  their  stories.  The  group,  becoming  increasingly  angry, 
discussed  possible  courses  of  action.  Because  the  company  had  declared  bankruptcy,  no 
one  was  optimistic  about  the  plant's  reopening.  Someone  pointed  out  that  although  the 
workers'  bills  had  not  been  paid  and  many  of  their  final  paychecks  had  bounced,  the 
managers  and  office  staff  were  still  working.  So  the  group  decided  to  begin  picketing 
twice  a  week.  They  demanded  that  the  company  dedicate  whatever  money  remained  not 
to  office  staff  in  an  empty  factory  but  to  repayment  of  its  debts  to  the  workers.  The 
activists  also  decided  to  continue  meeting  in  the  county  courthouse  every  Thursday 
evening  to  share  information  and  to  make  further  plans. 

Although  the  decision  to  picket  was  spontaneous,  it  was  taken  seriously  by  the  at- 
tendees. More  than  one  hundred  workers,  armed  with  angry  picket  signs,  arrived  the 
following  Saturday  morning  and  led  a  lively  parade  in  front  of  the  factory.  The  local 

22 


press  showed  up,  and  even  the  Knoxville  newspaper  and  television  stations  took  notice, 
for  picket  lines  are  an  unusual  sight  in  the  quiet  Cumberland  plateau.  Energized  by  this 
attention  to  their  plight,  the  workers  told  their  stories  and  attempted  to  garner  even 
more  notice.  They  called  their  senators  and  representatives  and  contacted  county  and 
city  executives,  asking  that  an  official  investigation  be  undertaken.  The  federal  officials' 
only  response  was  to  refer  them  to  the  nearest  job  training  and  employment  offices,  and 
the  local  officials  claimed  that  they  had  no  power  to  intervene. 

When  a  report  of  the  Greenbrier  workers'  initial  meeting  and  picket  line  appeared  in 
the  Knoxville  press,  the  Tennessee  Industrial  Renewal  Network  (TIRN)  became  inter- 
ested. A  coalition  of  labor,  community,  church,  and  environmental  groups  dedicated  to 
organizing  around  such  economic  issues  as  plant  closings,  TIRN  had  been  involved  in 
helping  workers  in  similar  situations.  TIRN  sent  a  staff  organizer,  Tom  Turner,  to  speak 
with  the  Greenbrier  workers  to  determine  whether  they  would  be  receptive  to  his  assist- 
ing them  in  planning  strategies  and  educating  people  about  their  rights  and  opportuni- 
ties. Turner  attended  an  early  meeting,  bringing  with  him  two  women  who  had  lost  their 
jobs  when  their  sewing  factories  closed.  They  described  to  the  group  the  hardship  of 
surviving  a  plant  closing  and  provided  information  regarding  the  various  government 
programs  and  what  could  be  expected  of  each.  Following  this  gathering,  Turner  contin- 
ued to  attend  Greenbrier  meetings  and  picket  lines  and  began  to  work  more  closely  with 
a  group  of  key  leaders.  They  decided  to  call  themselves  the  Greenbrier  Workers  Com- 
mittee (GWC),  elected  officers,  and  formally  joined  TIRN. 

The  picket  lines  and  meetings  continued,  but  as  weeks  passed  the  ex-workers  became 
demoralized.  They  had  succeeded  in  getting  the  office  staff  out  of  the  empty  plant,  but 
were  given  no  answers  concerning  the  money  due  them.  The  media  ceased  to  be  inter- 
ested in  the  stale  plant-closing  news,  and  politicians  no  longer  returned  phone  calls. 
Some  of  the  workers  found  new  jobs,  most  requiring  significant  commutes  and  paying 
less  than  their  previous  amounts,  and  most  had  no  time  to  continue  protesting.  Others 
decided  that  the  situation  was  hopeless  and  gave  up.  By  early  December,  fewer  than  ten 
people  attended  a  Thursday  meeting,  and  it  seemed  unlikely  that  the  GWC  would  con- 
tinue to  exist.  The  leaders  decided  to  hold  one  more  meeting,  in  mid-January,  to  see  if 
progress  had  been  made  in  tracking  down  their  401  (k)  and  other  funds,  and  to  disband 
after  that. 

The  Failure  of  the  GWC 

At  an  early  meeting  the  laid-off  workers  had  discussed  possible  strategies.  Understand- 
ably, their  immediate  goal  was  to  secure  the  money  they  feared  was  lost:  their  final 
paychecks,  health  insurance,  and  pension  savings.  Toward  this  end,  Turner  suggested 
that  they  contact  a  lawyer,  bringing  Rick  DeLone,  a  Knoxville  attorney  experienced  in 
bankruptcies  to  their  next  meeting.  The  attorney  had  spoken  with  the  bankruptcy  trustee 
in  New  Jersey  to  ascertain  the  status  of  the  Greenbrier  estate.  After  listening  to  the 
workers'  concerns  and  needs,  DeLone  presented  the  bad  news.  If  he  were  in  their  shoes, 
he  told  them  honestly,  he  would  not  spend  the  time  and  money  either  suing  Greenbrier 
or  following  up  on  their  claims.  It  would  be  prohibitively  expensive  for  the  workers  to 
hire  him,  DeLone  said,  because  it  would  require  repeated  trips  to  the  northern  New 
Jersey  company  headquarters  where  all  its  records  and  the  bankruptcy  papers  were 
filed.  And  it  would  be  unlikely  to  pay  off,  since  the  bankruptcy  was  complete,  and 
Greenbrier's  individual  owners,  who  reportedly  had  fled  to  South  America,  were  protected 
by  American  incorporation  laws. 

23 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Some  workers  at  the  meeting  resisted  DeLone's  conclusion.  Some  wanted  to  think  of 
ways  of  raising  money.  They  were  eager  to  offer  proof  of  management's  wrongdoing 
and  to  prosecute  the  offenders.  One  woman  verbalized  the  certainty  of  many  concerning 
the  firm's  mismanagement.  "They  knew,  probably  two,  three,  four  years  ago,  that  they 
were  running  into  financial  difficulties.  There's  no  doubt  in  my  mind  that  in  this  time 
frame,  they  started  taking  money  and  putting  it  into  other  companies,  changing  names, 
putting  it  in  their  own  pockets.  They  really  did.  And  if  I  had  the  time,  if  I  had  the 
money,  I  could  prove  this  with  Greenbrier.  But  I  just  don't  have  the  money."  She  also 
explained  that  their  goal  in  hiring  an  attorney  would  not  be  to  win  a  large  settlement  but 
simply  to  see  justice  done.  "It  wasn't  the  money  that  we  wanted.  I  think  we  would  have 
been  satisfied  with  an  apology.  But  we  never  heard  from  them.  It's  just  horrendous."4 

Another  woman  described  her  sense  of  violation  and  powerlessness.  "When  they 
claimed  bankruptcy,  it  made  me  so  mad  I  wanted  to  die.  I  said  it's  like  standing  on  the 
courthouse  steps  being  raped,  and  the  police  driving  by  and  just  waving.  You  know,  they 
took  our  money.  And  apparently  they'd  been  taking  it  a  long  time."5  A  man  wondered  at 
the  imbalance  of  justice  he  suddenly  saw:  "It's  like,  you've  let  them  steal  everything 
you've  got,  and  there's  nothing  you  can  do  about  it.  But  now  if  we  —  if  you  or  I  —  go 
out  here  and  steal  something,  they'll  put  us  in  jail.  It's  just  not .  .  .  it's  just  not  fair."6 

Yet  this  tremendous  sense  of  injustice  and  anger  had  no  outlet.  The  workers,  unable 
to   dispute  DeLone's  conclusions,  deferred  to  his  expertise.  Certain  individuals  contin- 
ued to  look  for  ways  to  fight  rather  than  to  accept  their  fate  passively.  Ann  Ritter  went 
to  the  Anderson  County  courthouse  to  see  if  she  could  take  out  a  warrant  for  the  plant 
manager's  or  the  owner's  arrest,  because,  as  she  said,  "He's  took  money  out  of  our 
checks  and  used  it  for  his  own."  But,  as  she  was  told,  "He's  protected  by  the  bankruptcy 
court."7  She  persisted,  calling  news  stations  and  being  interviewed  repeatedly  about  the 
Greenbrier  situation.  She  called  Senator  Jim  Sasser's  office  and  sent  reams  of  informa- 
tion to  his  aides,  but  ultimately  received  no  response.  Eventually  Ritter,  who  had  to  take 
on  three  jobs  to  replace  her  Greenbrier  work,  had  no  more  time  for  protest. 

Months  later  a  group  of  workers  reconvened  and  decided  that  they  should  continue  to 
try  to  raise  awareness  about  their  plight.  They  were  still  saddled  with  huge  hospital  bills 
—  one  was  trying  to  pay  off  a  $38,000  debt  at  $5.00  a  month,  which  was  all  he  could 
afford.  They  had  received  no  word  about  their  savings  money.  They  were  still  outraged 
and  energetic,  but  after  brainstorming  awhile,  they  could  think  of  no  real  channels  by 
which  they  could  hope  to  effect  positive  changes.  They  decided  to  stage  a  one-day 
picket  at  the  county  courthouse,  to  try  one  last  time  to  move  local  officials  to  take  up 
their  case  and  at  least  investigate,  or  preferably  to  advocate  on  behalf  of  the  displaced 
workers.  By  then,  only  about  ten  workers  showed  up  on  the  picket  line.  There  was  a 
palpable  sense  that  their  cause  had  been  lost,  and  that  further  actions  were  unlikely  and 
probably  futile. 

The  Greenbrier  workers  were  desolate  and  bitter.  Although  their  work  was  tedious, 
dangerous  (injury  rates,  including  carpal  tunnel  syndrome,  nerve  damage,  severed 
fingers,  and  back  injuries,  were  astronomical)  and  low-paying,  they  had  been  surpris- 
ingly content.  One  worker  said,  "I  thoroughly  enjoyed  my  job.  I  enjoyed  learning.  And  I 
just  learned  so  many  things,  I  just  loved  it."8  Nearly  all  talked  about  how  terribly  they 
would  miss  their  coworkers,  about  the  close  relationships  they  had  formed  at  work. 

To  many,  the  most  devastating  aspect  of  being  laid  off  was  the  extreme  disrespect 
demonstrated  in  Greenbrier's  actions.  As  one  worker  explained,  "We  knew  they  was  in 
trouble.  We  were  not  surprised  they  were  going  to  close.  We  were  just  surprised  at  how 

24 


they  treated  us.  That  it  was  done  so  dirty."9   Another  elaborated: 

"I  think  it  wouldn't  have  bothered  any  of  us  near  as  bad  if  they  had  said,  'Hey, 
we  don't  have  a  job  for  you  anymore,  we  don't  have  your  401fkj,  we  don't  have 
this  .  .  .'  But  they  didn't  say  anything.  And  that's  what  bothers  you  so  bad.  It  is 
terrible.  And  it  takes  a  long  time  to  get  over  that.  Because  you  have  the  devastation 
of  being  without  employment,  you  know,  just  the  financial  aspects  of  it,  you  have 
no  health  insurance,  but  then  you  have  to  deal  with  being  treated  that  way.  And  that, 
for  me,  has  been  the  hardest  part.  I'm  not  over  that  yet.  Because  I  feel  like  some- 
body that  they  had  no  respect  for  whatsoever.  And  that  has  been  very  difficult  for 
me."10 

Prior  to  the  closing,  most  workers  had  felt  extremely  loyal  to  Greenbrier.  Bob 
Walker,  who  worked  on  maintenance  and  security  for  eighteen  years,  described  his  deep 
loyalty  to  the  plant  manager. 

"He  was  like  a  father  to  me.  ...  I  would  have  done  anything  for  him,  really.  I  was 
always  a  company  person  ...  I  cared  about  the  place  and  wanted  to  see  it  grow.  I 
had  opportunities  on  top  of  opportunities  to  take  kickbacks  on  things  and  I  didn't." 

He  described  being  injured  several  years  ago,  and  his  decision  not  to  file  a  workers' 
compensation  claim  or  to  ask  for  sick  pay. 

"No  pay,  no  workmen's  comp,  or  anything.  I  wanted  to  be  ...  I  felt  at  the  time  that 
it  would  just  hurt  the  company.  Then  I  had  a  car  wreck  with  one  of  their  vehicles, 
reinjured  my  back.  But  I  didn't  sue  or  apply  for  workmen's  comp  or  anything.  The 
company  had  enough  of  that  on  'em,  so  I  didn't."11 

Like  many  other  workers,  Walker  was  astonished  to  learn  that  the  managers  did  not 
have  the  same  respect  for  him. 

When  asked  to  explain  why  the  plant  closed,  the  Greenbrier  ex-workers  were  unani- 
mous in  their  judgment:  bad  management.  Some  blamed  the  plant  and  personnel  man- 
agers; other  placed  the  fault  on  upper  management  and  owners  in  New  Jersey.  Some 
believed  their  bosses  to  have  been  devious  and  manipulative;  others  guessed  that  they 
were  merely  incompetent  and  lost  money  by  planning  and  running  the  factory  poorly. 
Every  worker  believed  that  the  plant  was  entirely  profitable,  efficient,  and  productive, 
and  that  it  therefore  closed  unnecessarily.  Most  workers  personalized  their  blame,  and 
expressed  their  sense  of  extreme  betrayal  by  the  plant  managers  who  had  been  like 
parents  to  them. 

Although  Greenbrier  Industries  survived  entirely  on  government  contracts  with  gov- 
ernment inspectors  always  overseeing  every  aspect  of  its  production,  the  workers  did 
not  blame  the  government  for  what  happened.  All  they  would  ask  the  government  to  do 
differently  is  to  punish  the  "thieves"  —  the  corporate  officials  who  took  their  savings 
and  health  premiums  without  providing  the  promised  benefits.  None  of  those  inter- 
viewed had  ever  been  involved  in  political  campaigns  or  issues,  and  many  had  never 
even  voted.  For  them,  the  plant  closure  and  their  elected  officials'  inefficacy  only  rein- 
forced their  sense  of  powerlessness  and  their  belief  that  the  political  system  is  ulti- 
mately corrupt. 

The  fired  Greenbrier  workers  were  more  likely  to  look  within  the  plant  itself  for  an 


25 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


explanation.  Many  blamed  their  fellow  workers.  One  supervisor  described  the  high 
turnover  rates,  which  compromised  both  efficiency  and  product  quality.  While  she 
noted  that  machine  operators  whose  $8.00  or  $9.00  an  hour  rate  for  piecework  had  been 
decreased  to  $4.50  an  hour,  she  did  not  connect  this  fact  to  the  high  turnover.  Instead, 
she  blamed  the  workers:  "People  don't  take  any  more  pride  in  their  work.  They're  really 
not  that  ambitious,  you  know  .  .  .  especially  young  people.  I  guess  they're  spoiled,  prob- 
ably. I  think  a  lot  of  them  are  satisfied  with  welfare  and  that  kind  of  help."  She  also 
blamed  workers  for  submitting  excessive  workers'  compensation  claims,  although  ac- 
knowledging that  work-related  injuries  were  rampant,  and  she  had  no  examples  of 
fraud.12  Even  after  the  extreme  hardship  foisted  on  them  by  the  company,  the  workers 
often  blamed  one  another  for  hurting  Greenbrier.  Even  after  being  forced  to  apply  for 
welfare  and  food  stamps,  the  workers  put  down  people  who  drew  welfare  or  relied  on 
any  type  of  government  subsidy,  seeing  themselves  as  fundamentally  "different."  Al- 
though they  were  down  on  their  luck,  the  Greenbrier  workers  believed  that  unlike  other 
recipients  of  aid,  they  were  more  than  willing  to  work. 


Case  2:  Acme  Boot  Company 

Once  upon  a  time,  the  Acme  Boot  Company  owned  and  operated  five  large  boot-mak- 
ing plants  in  Tennessee.  It  employed  thousands  of  workers  in  sorting,  cutting,  stamping, 
stitching,  piping,  and  shipping  and  receiving.  Making  high-quality  casual,  dress,  and 
cowboy  boots  for  such  famous  labels  as  Dingo,  Dan  Post,  and  Luchessi,  Acme  was  the 
largest  boot  manufacturer  in  the  world.  Unlike  most  factories  in  rural  Tennessee,  Acme 
Boot  was  unionized,  and  employees  were  well  treated  and  relatively  well  paid.  Workers 
describe  leaving  farms  or  coal  mines  to  work  at  Acme,  then  encouraging  their  families 
and  friends  to  join  them.  Many  attest  to  the  closeness  they  felt  with  their  fellow  workers 
and  to  their  pride  in  the  unsurpassed  quality  of  the  product  they  turned  out  every  day. 
The  company  had  been  in  Tennessee  for  nearly  seventy  years,  and  at  corporate  head- 
quarters in  Clarksville,  Acme  was  proud  to  be  the  county's  largest  and  best-known  em- 
ployer. People  in  Clarksville  still  remember  how,  during  the  Great  Depression,  the  com- 
pany had  sent  its  workers  out  to  cut  the  grass  every  day  rather  than  lay  them  off. 

Beginning  in  the  early  1980s,  Acme  Boot  plants  began  to  shrink  or  close,  as  the  work 
was  moved  elsewhere.  Acme  had  opened  nonunion,  lower-wage  plants  in  Texas, 
Mexico,  and  South  America,  and  much  of  the  production  was  done  there,  with  boots 
returning  to  Tennessee  for  finishing,  repairs,  and  shipping.  By  1990,  the  Clarksville 
plant  was  the  only  one  remaining,  and  many  laid-off  workers  had  relocated  there  to 
keep  their  boot-making  jobs.  In  November  1992,  the  final  bomb  fell.  Acme  announced 
plans  to  close  the  Clarksville  manufacturing  plant.  About  six  hundred  people  would  be 
laid  off,  most  within  two  months,  and  production  work  would  shift  south,  especially  to 
a  new  plant  in  Puerto  Rico.  The  company  president  announced  that  some  management 
and  supervisory  personnel  would  move  to  Puerto  Rico  immediately  to  begin  operations 
there.  He  reassured  the  community  that  although  no  manufacturing  operations  would 
remain  in  Clarksville,  almost  a  hundred  managerial  employees  would  remain  in  corpo- 
rate headquarters  there.  "Acme  will  continue  to  be  in  Clarksville  .  .  .  Clarksville  is 
home,"  he  said.13  The  workers  saw  it  differently. 

The  events  leading  to  this  closing  had  begun  several  years  earlier.  In  1985  the  com- 
pany had  been  bought  out  by  Farley  Industries,  a  Chicago-based,  privately  held  firm  led 
by  industrialist  and  high-profile  takeover  specialist  William  F.  Farley.  A  diversified 
company  with  interests  in  automotive  components,  railroad  parts,  apparel,  and  foot- 

26 


wear,  Farley  Industries  is  best  known  for  its  Fruit  of  the  Loom  label.  Farley  viewed 
Acme's  reported  annual  sales  of  more  than  $3  billion  as  a  profitable  addition  to  its  foot- 
wear holdings.  The  decision  to  close  the  Clarksville  plant,  made  in  Farley's  offices  in 
Chicago's  Sears  Tower,  was  part  of  a  long-term  restructuring  toward  outsourcing,  ac- 
cording to  corporate  spokespeople.  Acme  would  move  out  of  manufacturing  and  into 
marketing,  buying  low-cost  boots  from  makers  in  Latin  America  and  elsewhere  and 
selling  them  under  the  Acme  labels. 

For  the  immediate  future,  however,  production  was  booming  in  El  Paso  —  much  of 
the  actual  work  was  done,  for  much  lower  wages,  across  the  border  in  Mexico,  where 
the  two  Acme  plants  had  doubled  their  employee  base  and  tripled  production  in  the 
previous  year.14  The  Clarksville  boot-making  operations  were  being  moved  to  Puerto 
Rico.  Asked  to  explain  this  decision,  Acme  president  Mike  Vogel  said,  "It's  better  for  us 
to  do  it  there.  It's  less  costly  .  .  .  There  are  some  tax  code  advantages  to  doing  work  in 
Puerto  Rico."  He  also  cited  lower  wage  and  benefit  costs  and  potential  employee  train- 
ing incentives  for  Acme.  He  did  not  say  that  the  Clarksville  plant  was  closing  because  it 
was  doing  badly.  Indeed,  1992  was  Acme  Boot's  second  best  profit-making  year  of  all 
time.15 

The  decision  to  move  the  plant  to  Puerto  Rico  was  directly  encouraged  by  both  the 
Puerto  Rican  and  the  U.S.  governments.  After  discussions,  Puerto  Rican  officials  gave 
Acme  Boot  a  building  in  Toa  Alta  owned  by  the  Puerto  Rico  Industrial  Development 
Company,  a  government  entity.  The  building  and  its  surrounding  roads  and  utilities  had 
been  built  with  federal  government  money,  and  had  previously  been  occupied  by  a  phar- 
maceutical division  of  Baxter  International  Inc.  Acme,  in  return,  had  promised  to  invest 
$1  million  in  production  equipment  and  machinery  and  to  hire  six  hundred  workers.  The 
newspaper  Caribbean  Business  reported,  "The  establishment  of  Acme  Boot  operations 
in  Puerto  Rico  is  a  major  boost  to  the  island's  footwear  and  leather  goods  industry,  espe- 
cially in  light  of  the  North  American  Free  Trade  Agreement,  which  is  seen  as  influenc- 
ing labor-intensive  industries  such  as  apparel  and  leather  goods  to  set  up  plants  in 
Mexico."16 

This  great  boon  for  economic  developers  in  Puerto  Rico  was  an  equally  great  tragedy 
for  the  Clarksville  workers.  The  Acme  jobs  were  not  extremely  well  paid,  and  the  work 
was  certainly  not  easy.  The  highest  pay  bracket  for  unionized  workers,  $7.95  an  hour, 
was  only  for  those  who  had  been  on  the  job  more  than  thirty  years.  When  the  plant 
closed,  the  average  employee  was  forty-eight  years  old  and  the  average  length  of  senior- 
ity was  twenty-five  years.  Most  workers  had  believed  their  jobs  were  absolutely  secure. 
Having  worked  at  Acme  for  their  entire  adult  lives,  they  had  no  experience  or  training  in 
anything  else.  Moreover,  Clarksville  was  in  the  middle  of  a  serious  recession  —  accord- 
ing to  most  workers  a  true  depression  —  and  they  knew  other  jobs  would  be  scarce  and 
pay  well  below  Acme's  rates.  Jobs  above  minimum  wage  were  nearly  impossible  to 
find. 

The  Union  Fights  Back 

For  about  ten  years  previous  to  Acme  Boot's  closing,  management  had  been  telling  the 
union  —  United  Rubber  Workers  Local  330  (URW)  —  that  times  were  tough  and  de- 
manded cuts  in  wage  scales  and  concessions  on  benefits.  Alan  Buckner,  Local  330's 
chief  steward  at  the  time,  remembers  one  particularly  harsh  round  of  negotiations  in  the 
early  1980s.  "We  went  through  negotiations  to  give  concessions  to  keep  the  plants  open. 
I  tried  at  that  time  to  get  [the  union  president]  not  to  do  it.  I  said,  'They're  going  to 


27 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


close  the  plants  anyways.'  But  cuts  and  concessions  came.  I  went  from  piecework  to 
hourly  work.  I  went  from  $13.22  an  hour  to  $5.35."17  With  every  contract,  more  pay 
cuts  were  handed  down  and  more  hard-won  benefits  were  lost.  Managers  brought  in 
cost  figures  from  El  Paso  and  elsewhere  and  told  the  employees  that  to  retain  the  work 
in  Clarksville  they  had  to  be  "competitive"  and  cut  their  own  costs.  The  workers  voted 
to  go  along  with  the  concessions  in  the  hope  of  saving  the  factory  and  their  jobs. 

When  the  company  announced  that  the  Clarksville  plant  would  close,  the  union 
leadership  was  surprised  and  furious.  They  had  seen  Acme's  other  Tennessee  plants 
close,  and  had  been  reassured  that  the  Clarksville  factory  —  Acme  Boot's  first  and 
flagship  plant  —  was  doing  better  than  ever.  Suddenly  they  were  told  that  within  two 
months  from  the  announcement,  half  the  employees  would  be  laid  off.  Even  worse, 
managers  were  already  being  relocated  to  Puerto  Rico  to  hire  250  workers  for  the 
brand-new  Acme  Footwear,  Inc. 

The  union  immediately  challenged  the  legality  of  the  shutdown,  claiming  that  Acme 
Boot  officials  had  violated  the  federal  Worker  Adjustment  and  Retraining  Notification 
Act  by  not  telling  the  employees  who  would  be  laid  off  when.  Federal  law  requires 
companies  to  give  employees  sixty  days'  advance  notice  of  potential  layoffs  or  plant 
closings.  The  Tennessee  Department  of  Labor  was  given  a  list  of  those  who  were  to  be 
separated  in  the  coming  two  weeks,  but  the  workers  were  never  advised. 

The  union  then  began  a  publicity  campaign,  notifying  the  local  press  and  local  offi- 
cials of  Acme  Boot's  plans.  The  union  held  a  very  well-attended  rally,  claiming  that 
closing  the  Clarksville  plant  was  possibly  illegal  and  certainly  immoral.  Individual 
workers  told  their  stories  and  wondered  what  they  would  do  after  losing  one  of  the  best 
jobs  in  Clarksville.  Forced  to  respond,  company  officials  assured  the  public  that  they 
intended  to  be  a  "good  corporate  citizen"  of  Clarksville,  providing  more  assistance  and 
notification  on  the  closing  than  required  by  law.  Focusing  on  the  hundred  remaining 
employees,  Vogel  claimed,  "The  last  five  or  six  years  have  been  very  tough.  What  we 
are  trying  to  do  is  make  this  company  well  so  we  have  jobs  for  the  remaining  employ- 
ees."18 The  workers,  who  had  received  their  highest  production  bonuses  ever,  knew 
differently.  The  Clarksville  plant's  profits  were  higher  than  they'd  ever  been. 

Union  leadership,  who  began  to  research  Acme's  proposed  move  to  Puerto  Rico, 
found  that  the  company  was  taking  advantage  of  the  Possessions  Tax  Credit,  also  known 
as  Section  936  of  the  U.S.  Internal  Revenue  Code,  which  allows  Puerto  Rico  subsidiar- 
ies to  repatriate  their  profits  back  to  their  American  corporate  parents  without  federal 
taxation.  Federal  corporate  income  taxes  are  waived  on  profits  earned  in  U.S.  territories, 
including  Puerto  Rico,  Guam,  and  the  Virgin  Islands,  giving  multinational  corporations 
a  legal  100  percent  tax  break.  Also,  under  the  Puerto  Rico  Tax  Incentive  Act,  an  Ameri- 
can company  is  not  required  to  pay  the  high  Puerto  Rico  income  taxes.  The  company 
acknowledged  that  it  was  looking  forward  to  the  tax  breaks. 

With  the  help  of  the  Oil,  Chemical,  and  Atomic  Workers  International  Union 
(OCAW),  which  had  just  been  through  a  similar  fight  against  the  Elkhart,  Indiana, 
Whitehall  Pharmaceuticals,  the  URW  learned  more  about  Section  936  and  decided  to 
fight  Acme's  plans.  The  strategy  was  to  block  the  company  from  taking  advantage  of 
Puerto  Rico's  tax  breaks,  relying  on  a  1987  commonwealth  law  which  said  that  local 
officials  can  refuse  to  waive  the  local  corporate  taxes  if  they  find  that  a  company's 
move  caused  economic  hardships  on  the  mainland.  A  question  on  the  tax  break  applica- 
tions asks  if  the  jobs  in  Puerto  Rico  would  cost  jobs  in  the  United  States.  If  the  answer 
is  yes,  the  company  is  ineligible  for  tax  benefits.  Acme's  answer,  no,  was  a  lie,  which 


28 


constitutes  tax  fraud. 

In  January  the  union  held  a  second  rally,  focusing  on  Acme's  move  to  Puerto  Rico. 
Calling  Acme  a  runaway  shop,  the  URW  directly  blamed  Section  936  for  Clarksville's 
expected  loss  of  480  jobs  in  one  year.  The  United  Rubber  Workers  vowed  to  save  Acme 
Boot  by  convincing  either  the  U.S.  or  the  Puerto  Rican  government  to  review  and  deny 
the  company's  claims,  an  action  that  had  never  been  taken.  The  union  amassed  proof 
that  equipment  was  shipped  directly  from  Clarksville  to  Puerto  Rico  and  that  the  work 
planned  for  Puerto  Rico  duplicated  part  of  the  Clarksville  operation.  The  union  found 
support  from  other  organizations,  such  as  the  Midwest  Center  for  Labor  Research 
(MCLR),  which  identified  thirty-five  communities  from  which  more  than  15,000  jobs 
were  transferred  from  mainland  plants  to  Puerto  Rico  tax-sheltered  factories  —  these 
represented  only  a  fraction  of  the  100,000  people  known  to  be  employed  in  Puerto 
Rican  factories  owned  by  American  corporations.  A  researcher  with  the  MCLR  called 
this  "a  case  of  tax-loophole-driven  job  destruction"  and  agreed  with  the  URW's  position 
against  Acme's  petition. 

Union  leaders  traveled  to  Washington  to  try  to  convince  the  American  government  to 
block  Acme  Boot's  936  request.  There  they  found  themselves  up  against  the  Puerto 
Rico-USA  Foundation,  a  lobbying  group  made  up  of  seventy  major  Fortune  500  corpo- 
rations fighting  to  uphold  Section  936  and  other  incentives.  Initiatives  by  members  of 
Congress  to  amend  936,  or  to  require  corifirmation  that  job  transfers  do  not  harm  main- 
land workers,  have  repeatedly  failed.  The  congressmen  cannot  compete  with  aggressive 
lobbyists  for  companies  like  Pfizer  Pharmaceuticals,  which  saves  $156,400  in  taxes  for 
every  employee  in  Puerto  Rico,  whose  earnings  average  only  $26,471.  The  U.S.  Trea- 
sury Department  estimates  that  it  annually  loses  about  $3  billion  in  taxes  to  Section  936 
—  profits  that  accrue  directly  to  transnational  corporations.19 

Union  leaders  also  initiated  contacts  with  Puerto  Rican  officials,  urging  that  they 
enforce  their  law  prohibiting  tax  benefits  to  manufacturing  companies  whose  relocation 
on  the  island  is  directly  responsible  for  job  losses  in  the  States.  They  found  that  Acme 
had  already  been  received  with  open  arms  by  local  politicians  desperate  for  new  jobs  at 
almost  any  price.  URW  president  Mitch  Tucker  wrote  to  Puerto  Rico  governor  Pedro 
Rossello  to  ask  that  he  deny  tax  benefits  to  Acme  Boot.  He  said  that  the  plant  scheduled 
to  open  in  Toa  Alta,  Puerto  Rico,  would  be  carrying  out  essentially  the  same  manufac- 
turing procedures  being  performed  in  Clarksville.  "We  state  to  you  unequivocally  that 
this  is  a  runaway  shop  ...  If  an  exemption  has  already  been  granted,  you  must  revoke  it 
...  If  an  application  is  now  pending,  it  should  be  denied."  Tucker  added  that  Acme 
"plans  to  perform  Clarksville  production  processes  on  Clarksville  brand  name  boots 
with  equipment  shipped  from  Clarksville  .  .  .  Any  attempt  by  Acme  Footwear,  Inc.,  to 
represent  the  facts  otherwise,  especially  on  its  application  under  the  Puerto  Rico  Tax 
Incentive  Act,  would  be  fraudulent."20  Tucker  also  sent  letters  to  resident  commissioner 
Carlos  Romero  Barcelo  and  to  vice  president-elect  Albert  Gore,  neither  of  whom  re- 
plied. 

Thwarted  in  its  efforts  within  regular  political  channels,  the  URW  launched  a  public 
campaign.  Its  goal  was  to  increase  public  pressure  to  persuade  the  company  to  continue 
manufacturing  operations  in  Clarksville  and  to  abandon  its  plans  to  open  a  boot  finish- 
ing plant  in  Puerto  Rico.  At  a  rally  in  Clarksville,  Mitch  Tucker  vowed,  "We  want  to 
send  William  Farley  a  message.  We  intend  to  fight  this  illegal  shutdown."  Turner  called 
on  Farley  to  fulfill  his  promise,  made  at  the  time  of  purchase,  that  Acme  Boot  would 
maintain  manufacturing  in  Clarksville.21  The  rally  featured  Connie  Malloy  of  the 


29 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


OCAW,  who  had  helped  fight  Section  936  in  Elkhart,  and  Ricky  Mullins,  a  dislocated 
Decaturville  Sportswear  worker.  The  URW  repeatedly  drew  on  the  parallels  between  the 
Clarksville  and  Decaturville  stories,  as  the  Decaturville  plant  closing  had  been  a  major 
campaign  issue  in  1992  when  the  company  moved  from  Tennessee  to  Central  America 
with  the  support  of  the  Agency  for  International  Development.  Vice  President  Gore  had 
visited  Decaturville  and  denounced  the  pattern  it  represented,  and  Ricky  Mullins  had 
been  invited  to  the  Faces  of  Hope  luncheon  at  the  Clinton  inaugural.  Yet  when  the  URW 
pointed  out  the  similarity  and  asked  for  the  Clinton  administration's  support,  it  received 
no  reply. 

The  union  urged  all  area  unions  as  well  as  community  groups  and  churches  to  attend 
its  rallies,  demonstrations,  and  events  and  to  participate  in  its  campaign.  The  media, 
and  some  public  officials,  began  to  take  notice.  The  San  Juan  Star  quoted  Puerto  Rico's 
new  chief  of  economic  development,  Clifford  Myatt:  "If  it  is  a  clear  case  (of  a  run- 
away), then  we  will  be  obliged  to  make  a  decision  in  accordance  with  the  facts."  But 
Myatt  also  cautioned  that  while  his  agency  would  take  a  close  look  at  the  Acme  appli- 
cation, there  is  "a  very  thin  fine"  between  runaways  and  normal  plant  closings.  "We 
will  have  to  see  the  reasons  for  the  closing,  whether  the  company  thinks  it  makes  busi- 
ness sense,  and  if  it  does  not  relocate  in  Puerto  Rico,  if  it  intends  to  relocate  somewhere 
else."  And  a  spokeswoman  for  vice  president-elect  Al  Gore  said  Acme's  proposed  move 
was  "an  unfortunate  use  of  the  existing  tax  law,  which  was  intended  to  create  jobs."22 

With  other  groups  from  Clarksville  and  elsewhere  in  Tennessee  and  the  nation,  the 
Acme  workers  planned  event  after  event.  They  held  demonstrations,  press  conferences, 
and  marches.  Supported  by  the  Clarksville  community,  they  held  a  three-hundred-car 
motorcade  through  the  small  downtown.  Every  weekend,  workers  stood  in  front  of 
K-Mart  and  Winn-Dixie,  distributing  flyers  that  explained  Section  936  and  their  plight 
and  encouraging  community  members  to  contact  all  relevant  decision  makers.  In  April 
the  union  sponsored  a  mass  public  boot-burning,  at  which  hundreds  of  Clarksville  resi- 
dents burned  their  Acme-made  boots.  This  dramatic  gesture  inaugurated  a  national 
boycott  of  Acme,  Dingo,  and  Dan  Post  boots.  A  boycott  flier,  "The  Anatomy  of  an 
Acme  Boot,"  designed  by  award-winning  labor  cartoonist  Mike  Konopaki,  was  distrib- 
uted by  labor  unions  nationwide. 

On  May  29,  1993,  the  Walter  Cronkite  Report  covered  the  shutdown  of  the 
Clarksville  plant.  Invited  by  the  URW,  the  Report  staff  attended  the  boot-burning  and 
other  events,  including  the  last  day  of  work  at  Acme  Boot  on  May  21.  The  Cronkite 
Report  aired  extensive  footage  of  interviews  with  dislocated  employees  and  showed  the 
devastating  impact  of  job  loss  on  workers  in  the  already  depressed  Clarksville  economy. 
It  emphasized  job  flight,  the  lure  of  Section  936,  and  the  connection  between  tax  policy 
and  job  loss.  Following  the  Cronkite  Report,  other  national  and  local  news  media 
picked  up  the  Acme  Boot  story.  Members  of  Local  330,  who  received  mail  and  support 
from  individuals  and  groups  around  the  country,  were  tremendously  encouraged  by  the 
outpouring  of  public  support  for  their  cause. 

At  the  end  of  May,  Acme  suddenly  announced  that  it  would  not  seek  federal  income 
tax  exemptions  on  profits  from  the  Puerto  Rico  plant.  The  company  withdrew  its  appli- 
cation for  Section  936  benefits.  Acme  president  MikeVogel  explained  that  although  the 
company  was  distancing  itself  from  the  936  issue,  it  would  still  receive  local  incentives 
and  was  still  moving.  He  claimed  that  the  Clarksville  plant  closing  and  the  establish- 
ment of  a  new  plant  in  Puerto  Rico  were  "nonrelated,  coincidental  issues."23  A  high- 
ranking  Puerto  Rican  official  cited  "corporate  exhaustion"  as  the  reason  for  Acme's 


30 


withdrawal  of  its  tax  exemption  application.  And  Clifford  Myatt  said,  "I  think  the  union 
has  been  so  vociferous  and  unfair  in  its  attack  on  them  that  [Acme  doesn't]  want  any 
more  bad  P.R.  Also,  they've  been  inundated  with  so  much  paperwork  and  expenses  that 
they  decided  to  forget  it."24 

This  was  a  major  victory  for  the  workers'  campaign  against  Acme.  Yet  they  had  not 
succeeded  in  saving  their  jobs  or  their  community.  The  Clarksville  plant  closed  on 
schedule,  and  the  company,  without  benefit  of  tax  breaks,  moved  its  operations  to 
Puerto  Rico.  After  months  of  mobilization,  coalition  building,  public  education,  media 
attention,  political  lobbying,  and  protest,  the  Clarksville  community  lost  Acme  Boot. 

Lessons  from  the  United  Rubber  Workers  Fight 

The  most  obvious  and  significant  difference  between  the  situations  at  Greenbrier  and 
Acme  Boot  was  the  presence  of  a  strong  union.  First,  because  the  URW  was  regularly 
negotiating  contracts  with  the  company,  it  had  access  to  financial  reports  and  other 
information  and  could  see  the  coming  changes  before  anything  drastic  happened.  Sec- 
ond, because  the  union  had  an  organizing  structure  in  place,  workers  could  be  informed 
almost  immediately  as  events  unfolded.  They  were  therefore  less  likely  to  blame  one 
another  and  were  kept  up  to  date  on  the  situation.  Third,  the  union  had  connections  to 
larger  organizations,  especially  to  the  URW  International  Union,  other  labor  unions, 
coalitions  like  Tennessee  Industrial  Renewal  Network,  and  research  and  advocacy  insti- 
tutes like  the  MCLR.  All  these  provided  crucial  support  at  various  stages  of  the  work- 
ers' mobilization  and  lobbying.  Fourth,  the  union  knew  how  to  launch  a  public  cam- 
paign. It,  and  other  unions,  unlike  the  Greenbrier  workers,  had  held  marches,  parades, 
rallies,  boycotts,  and  other  events  previously  and  knew  how  to  organize  actions  success- 
fully. They  had  dealt  with  the  press  regularly.  Union  leaders  and  members  had  been 
active  in  political  campaigns,  so  they  knew  which  officials  to  call  first.  Finally,  the 
URW  had  access  to  resources  from  outside  the  Clarksville  community.  They  could  pay 
people  to  fly  in  for  rallies;  send  representatives  to  Washington  to  lobby;  create  leaflets, 
posters,  and  banners;  and  buy  advertising  space  in  local  newspapers.  By  contrast,  the 
Greenbrier  workers  could  not  even  communicate  with  the  bankruptcy  trustee  because 
they  could  not  afford  a  long-distance  phone  call  to  New  Jersey. 

Interestingly,  despite  all  these  benefits  Acme's  workers  were  not  more  pro-union 
than  Greenbrier's.  A  few  blamed  the  union  for  giving  away  too  much  or  for  not  doing 
more  to  prevent  the  closure,  but  most  were  absolutely  indifferent  on  the  subject  of 
unions.  Although  they  were  not  ideologically  committed  to  unions,  they  appreciated  the 
benefits  and  work  environment  created  by  a  union.  Sally  Kellam  was  typical;  referring 
to  her  search  for  a  new  job,  she  said,  "I  don't  care  one  way  or  the  other;  it  don't  matter 
to  me  if  it's  union  or  non-union."  On  the  other  hand,  she  noticed  real  differences  be- 
tween the  two  types  of  plants,  and  she  did  have  a  preference.  "I  just  don't  like  the  way 
that  things  are  just  different  [at  nonunion  plants]."  Her  most  serious  complaints  at  her 
new  job  involved  layoffs,  which  were  random  or  involved  favoritism,  mandatory  over- 
time, and  unequal  treatment  of  workers.25  With  the  union  at  Acme  Boot,  workers  had 
come  to  expect  fair  treatment,  open  and  agreed-upon  procedures,  and  reliable  avenues 
for  redress  of  grievances.  This  general  expectation  of  fair  treatment  seems  to  have  fu- 
eled the  campaign  against  Section  936  as  well. 

Although  the  Acme  Boot  campaign  failed  in  its  immediate  goal,  it  had  a  striking 
impact  on  both  participants  and  other  members  of  the  community.  Ironically,  while 
unions  are  usually  charged  with  creating  antagonism  between  workers  and  management, 


31 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


just  the  opposite  can  be  demonstrated  here.  Unlike  the  Greenbrier  workers,  no  Acme 
Boot  employees  blamed  their  supervisors  or  managers.  Instead,  they  blamed  the  federal 
government  for  maintaining  the  Section  936  tax  loophole  and  helping  major  corpora- 
tions rather  than  workers  of  either  country.  The  workforce  was  effectively  educated  to 
understand  the  national  and  international  political  decisions  that  led  to  the  plant  clos- 
ing. They  understood  Acme's  move  as  a  strategic  decision  encouraged  by  a  series  of 
governmental  decisions  made  under  pressure  from  large  transnational  corporations. 
When  other  economic  issues  arose,  such  as  the  North  American  Free  Trade  Agreement, 
they  could  understand  them  in  this  same  context.  While  most  of  the  Greenbrier  workers 
who  had  opinions  said  they  believed  NAFTA  would  probably  be  "a  good  thing,"  all  the 
Acme  Boot  workers  interviewed  could  speak  quite  knowledgeably  about  the  agreement 
and  its  effects  on  both  American  and  Mexican  workers. 

The  Acme  personnel  were  better  educated  about  American  politics  as  well.  They  had 
participated  in  letter-writing  campaigns,  met  with  politicians,  and  learned  a  great  deal 
about  the  political  process.  They  were  not,  however,  necessarily  more  sanguine  about 
the  political  system.  Sally  Kellam  expressed  a  common  sentiment:  "We  [the  URW 
workers]  went  out  here  and  worked  for  [President  Clinton]  to  get  him  in  office.  Now  we 
feel  like  we've  been  let  down.  So,  I  don't  think  I'm  gonna  vote  again.  What's  the  point? 
.  .  .  Now,  maybe  I'll  change  when  the  time  comes  again." 

But  whether  or  not  she  participates  in  electoral  politics,  Kellam  was  changed  by  the 
Acme  Boot  campaign:  "I've  gotten  more  involved  in  a  lot  of  things  since  this  plant 
closing  .  .  .  I've  gotten  more  involved.  I  have  never  in  my  life  wrote  letters  to  congress- 
men and  the  White  House;  I  never  was  like  this  .  .  .  But  I  feel  like  we  need  to  stand  up 
because  that's  important.  They  need  to  know  how  the  people  feel.  It  could  make  a 
change.  It  could  make  a  difference."26 


Case  3:  General  Electric 

In  Morristown,  a  midsize  town  in  the  mountainous,  rural  Appalachian  region,  a  job  at 
General  Electric  had  been  considered  one  of  the  best  positions  a  person  could  hold. 
Morristown  has  a  low  rate  of  unionization  and,  like  all  of  upper  East  Tennessee, 
Hamblen  County  has  been  hard  hit  by  plant  closings  and  layoffs.  In  1988,  GE  was  con- 
sidered a  progressive  employer  and  an  invaluable  asset  to  the  community,  with  wage 
scales  higher  than  those  of  most  local  industrial  facilities.  Most  workers  earned  between 
$9.00  and  $12.00  an  hour,  had  been  there  for  many  years,  and  considered  that  they  had 
secure,  permanent  jobs.  Yet  a  new  management  team  had  begun  to  institute  changes  that 
seemed  to  alter  the  character  of  the  plant  and  labor-management  relations  for  the  worse. 
The  workers  felt  increasingly  harassed  and  powerless. 

In  June  of  that  year,  the  International  Brotherhood  of  Electrical  Workers  (IBEW) 
launched  a  union  organizing  campaign  at  GE's  Morristown  plant.  There  was  great  ini- 
tial support  among  workers,  but  the  company  spared  no  expense  to  counter  the  union 
campaign.  Management  treated  employees  to  parties  and  gifts.  Workers  were  shown 
films  describing  how  the  union  would  hurt  them  and  the  plant.  The  company  produced 
its  own  videocassette  devoted  to  "the  GE  family,"  complete  with  shots  of  nearly  every 
worker,  some  with  families  and  friends,  and  the  beautiful  surrounding  area.  For  the 
video,  the  company  commissioned  an  original  country  music  song  dedicated  to  the 
people  and  countryside  of  Morristown.  It  promised  that  GE  would  protect  its  workers 
and  their  community  more  than  any  "outside"  union  could. 


32 


By  September  of  1988,  by  instilling  a  mixture  of  fear  and  complacency,  the  company 
had  won  the  struggle,  and  the  union  was  voted  down  by  a  3-to- 1  margin.  One  observer 
noted  that  "the  employees  beamed  with  pride  because  they  thought  this  would  demon- 
strate to  the  company  how  they  believed  in  General  Electric."27 

One  week  after  the  vote,  GE  laid  off  more  than  one  hundred  of  those  same  workers. 
They  were  told  that  they  would  be  recalled  to  work  in  the  spring  of  1989.  But  the  next 
week  they  learned  from  radio,  television,  and  newspapers  that  their  jobs  were  perma- 
nently lost.  The  distribution  center  warehouse  was  moving  thirty  miles  away,  literally 
down  the  road,  to  the  town  of  Mascot  in  adjacent  Knox  County.  GE  had  received  eco- 
nomic development  incentives  from  Knox  County  to  encourage  the  move,  as  well  as 
state  funding  to  train  new  workers.  At  the  new  site,  GE  announced,  all  work  would  be 
subcontracted  through  USCO,  an  independent  company,  and  all  jobs  would  be  rede- 
fined as  "temporary,"  even  though  the  work  was  no  different  than  it  had  been.  The  pay 
would  be  about  $6.00  an  hour,  with  no  benefits,  a  far  cry  from  the  union  wages  the 
workers  had  once  anticipated.  Knox  County  executive  Dwight  Kessell  commended  the 
county's  director  of  economic  development  for  "the  extraordinary  work  she  did  in  se- 
curing this  new  industry  and  these  new  jobs  for  Knox  County."28 

After  hearing  about  the  new  plans,  the  laid-off  workers  attempted  to  contact  manag- 
ers to  see  if  there  was  any  alternative.  They  met  as  a  group  to  discuss  possible  courses 
of  action.  Their  offers  to  freeze  or  cut  their  own  wages  in  order  to  keep  their  jobs,  ben- 
efits, and  seniority  were  refused.  Attempting  to  initiate  negotiations  to  retain  their  jobs, 
they  were  again  refused.  The  company  stated  that,  in  order  to  remain  competitive  in  the 
global  market,  tough  measures  were  necessary.  After  giving  up  on  changing  manage- 
ment's mind,  some  workers  simply  traveled  to  the  USCO  plant,  asking  to  be  hired  there 

—  to  do  their  own  jobs,  for  half  the  pay  and  no  benefits.  They  were  never  called  back. 
By  the  end  of  1989,  the  hundred  permanently  laid-off  workers  were  looking  for  new 

jobs.  The  official  listings  at  the  Tennessee  Department  of  Employment  Security  Job 
Service  comprised  very  few  openings,  and  hardly  any  above  minimum  wage.  Officials 
referred  worker  after  worker  to  temporary  service  and  contract-labor  agencies.  Unlike 
traditional  employers,  these  agencies  were  continually  hiring.  Morristown-area  facto- 
ries were  increasingly  choosing  to  contract  out  for  "temporary"  employees  rather  than 
hire  their  own  permanent  workers. 

The  Birth  of  CATS 

Having  lost  good  jobs  at  General  Electric,  the  workers  were  shocked  to  hear  that  tempo- 
rary service  was  their  only  option.  Many  had  to  support  families  and  could  not  rely  on 
jobs  with  absolutely  no  security  or  stability,  at  such  low  pay  and  —  most  important  for 
some  —  with  no  health  insurance  or  pension  benefits.  They  were  shocked,  too,  to  find 
that  they  were  not  alone;  permanent,  decent-paying  jobs  in  Morristown  were  systemati- 
cally being  replaced  by  temporary  jobs,  either  through  agencies  or  through  in-house 
temporary  labor  pools  at  large  companies.  The  outraged  workers,  mostly  women,  began 
to  meet  regularly.  At  one  meeting,  someone  —  no  one  can  now  remember  exactly  who 

—  suggested  they  call  their  group  Citizens  Against  Temporary  Services,  or  CATS,  and 
the  name  stuck. 

One  of  their  plans  was  to  hire  an  attorney  who  would  file  a  lawsuit  against  GE. 
Charging  age  discrimination,  since  older  workers  had  been  disproportionately  singled 
out  for  layoffs,  and  fraudulent  use  of  government  funds,  they  compiled  evidence  for  a 
case  against  GE.  Although  they  believed  their  case  was  strong,  the  initial  hearings 


33 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


dragged  on,  and  it  became  apparent  that,  if  they  could  win  at  all,  the  legal  route  would 
not  further  their  goals  in  a  timely  fashion.  Eventually,  under  pressure  from  GE  manage- 
ment, their  lawyer  withdrew  from  the  case  and  they  were  forced  to  drop  the  suit  without 
winning  anything. 

Initially  optimistic  that  aid  would  be  forthcoming  once  the  facts  of  their  case  were 
public,  they  began  to  contact  politicians  and  community  leaders  to  see  if  anything  could 
be  done.  When  they  met  with  only  apathy  or  outright  hostility  from  officials,  CATS 
decided  to  plan  community  meetings  to  put  pressure  on  GE  but  also  to  expose  their 
larger  concerns  about  the  increasing  use  and  abuse  of  temporary  and  contingent  workers 
by  large  companies.  CATS  set  out  to  generate  support  and  to  exert  pressure  to  get  their 
jobs  back,  but  also  to  look  for  ways  to  address  issues  of  injustice  in  the  workplace  that 
were  affecting  workers  in  Hamblen  County. 

With  a  little  research,  CATS  leaders  quickly  discovered  that  the  loss  of  permanent 
jobs  to  the  instability  and  inequities  of  temporary  jobs  was  a  national  trend.  In  fact,  the 
growth  of  part-time,  seasonal,  and  other  forms  of  contingent  work  represents  a  sea 
change  in  the  American  workplace.  In  1989  the  National  Planning  Association  esti- 
mated that  nearly  one  third  of  the  entire  workforce  was  composed  of  contingent  work- 
ers, and  that  the  percentage  was  growing.  Perhaps  unsurprisingly,  women  and  minorities 
are  disproportionately  represented  in  the  temporary  workforce  —  nearly  double  their 
percentages  in  the  total  workforce.29  Between  1983  and  1993,  the  number  of  temporary 
workers  increased  by  more  than  300  percent.30  The  payroll  of  temporary  employment 
services  —  one  part  of  the  contingent  work  boom  —  increased  by  almost  3000  percent 
between  1970  and  1992.31  By  1994,  Manpower,  Inc.  —  a  temporary  help  supply  service 
—  was  the  largest  employer  in  the  United  States,  with  nearly  one  million  employees. 

As  CATS  began  to  seek  help  elsewhere  and  to  devise  plans,  they  found  many  local 
groups  and  individuals  who  had  similar  concerns.  They  talked  with  unionized  and  unor- 
ganized workers,  and  with  community  groups,  politicians,  and  unemployed  people. 
Workers  from  all  industries  were  aware  of  the  problem  and  troubled  by  the  trend  toward 
contingent  work.  On  the  one  hand  there  was  a  broad  concern  and  support  for  reform;  on 
the  other  hand,  there  was  very  little  precedent  for  positive  change.  CATS  found  that 
because  temporary  service  agencies  in  Tennessee  were  completely  unregulated,  there 
was  no  official  route  through  which  to  address  abuses.  At  a  legislative  meeting  in  late 
1989,  the  administrator  of  Tennessee's  Personnel  Recruiting  Service  Board,  which  li- 
censes permanent  employment  placement  agencies,  said  she  receives  about  ten  com- 
plaints per  year  about  permanent  employment  agencies,  but  she  gets  three  complaints 
per  week  about  temporary  agencies,  over  which  she  has  no  jurisdiction. 

After  organizing  in  the  fall  of  1989,  CATS  proved  extremely  persistent  and  deter- 
mined. Wearing  their  self-made,  bright  red  T-shirts  emblazoned  CITIZENS  AGAINST 
TEMPORARY  SERVICES  across  the  back,  they  were  highly  visible  around  town.  One 
of  their  initial  events  was  a  community  meeting  in  Morristown  to  publicize  their  plight 
and  the  issue  of  temporary  jobs.  Nearly  four  hundred  people  attended  —  a  record  for 
the  small  town.  Shortly  thereafter,  CATS  marched  down  the  streets  of  Morristown  call- 
ing for  fair  labor  laws  in  Tennessee.  Hundreds  of  people  attended  the  parade,  which  was 
spirited  yet  serious  in  its  demands  for  attention  and  reform. 

These  events,  and  the  remarkable  turnout  they  generated,  were  all  the  more  impres- 
sive because  the  only  Morristown  newspaper  refused  to  carry  any  stories  about  CATS. 
The  city  and  county  governments,  the  Chamber  of  Commerce,  the  local  business  com- 
munity, and  the  local  media  either  actively  opposed  CATS  —  as  antagonistic  to  corpo- 


34 


rate  interests  and  therefore  harmful  to  Hamblen  County's  "business  climate"  —  or  dis- 
missed it  as  irrelevant.  After  being  blacked  out  by  the  town's  one  paper,  CATS  had  to 
find  other  strategies  to  publicize  its  message  and  events.  One  way  involved  organizing 
members  and  their  families  to  distribute  leaflets  advertising  events  at  supermarkets  and 
other  public  places.  Another  was  to  buy  space  in  the  Smoky  Mountain  Trader,  a  small, 
free  advertising  weekly  that  was  available  all  over  town.  In  it,  CATS  publicized  its 
meetings  and  other  activities,  even  publishing  short  articles.  This  proved  most  effective, 
as  the  Trader's  wide  circulation  made  it  a  useful  conduit  of  information. 

If  CATS's  public  events  did  not  draw  mainstream  media,  they  did  serve  another  cru- 
cial function:  attracting  the  attention  of  important  potential  allies.  One  of  the  marchers 
at  the  April  parade  was  Bill  Troy,  a  staff  member  of  the  Committee  on  Religion  in  Ap- 
palachia  (CORA),  a  coalition  of  church  groups  working  on  issues  of  economic  justice. 
Troy  was  in  the  process  of  founding  a  new  organization,  the  Tennessee  Industrial  Re- 
newal Network  (TIRN),  a  coalition  of  labor,  community,  and  environmental  groups  to 
work  on  economic  issues  statewide.  Having  learned  about  the  CATS  march  through 
friends  at  the  Highlander  Center  for  Research  and  Education,  another  Appalachian 
institution  interested  in  economic  justice,  Troy  was  inspired  by  CATS  members.  He 
immediately  got  in  touch  with  the  group  and  remained  involved  for  the  next  five  years. 
He  invited  CATS  representatives  to  a  June  1990  Chattanooga  conference  he  was  orga- 
nizing for  June  1990,  "Responding  to  Plant  Closings  in  Tennessee."  CATS  members 
attended  the  conference,  speaking  movingly  about  their  experiences  with  the  GE  ware- 
house closing  and  its  aftermath.  This  was  the  beginning  of  a  close  alliance  with  TIRN, 
which  set  up  an  ongoing  committee  to  assist  CATS  efforts  with  staff  support  and  other 
resources. 

Through  their  contacts  with  Highlander  Center  staff,  CATS  became  aware  of  an 
Appalachian  citizens  group,  Save  Our  Cumberland  Mountains  (SOCM).  It  had  worked 
primarily  on  environmental  and  land  use  problems  for  many  years,  but  had  recently 
become  more  involved  with  economic  and  job  issues  as  well.  In  1990,  CATS  voted  to 
become  the  Morristown  chapter  of  SOCM,  thereby  taking  advantage  of  the  group's 
extensive  experience  in  organizing,  strategizing,  and  lobbying  skills  and  resources.  This 
alliance  was  a  further  means  of  institutionalizing  CATS  and  ensuring  a  strong  base  from 
which  it  could  continue  its  work. 

With  the  help  of  SOCM  staff,  CATS  began  to  design  a  strategy  to  push  for  govern- 
ment action.  Ferreting  out  the  facts  of  the  government's  complicity  in  GE's  move 
proved  difficult.  CATS  leaders  made  hundreds  of  frustrating  phone  calls  to  Nashville 
and  Washington,  to  every  imaginable  relevant  office.  A  few  traveled  to  Nashville  sev- 
eral times  to  ask  questions  in  person.  After  nine  months  of  research,  they  finally  discov- 
ered that  tax  dollars  had  indeed  been  allocated  to  GE  to  support  its  move  to  Mascot. 
They  tracked  down  the  contract  showing  that  GE  had  been  promised  $200,000  in  Job 
Training  Partnership  Act  (JTRA)  funds  to  train  new  workers  for  the  exact  jobs  from 
which  they  had  been  fired.  CATS  argued  that  this  was  illegal,  because  JTPA  funds  can- 
not be  used  for  jobs  from  which  fully  capable  workers  had  been  laid  off.  GE  argued  that 
it  was  legal  because  the  new  factory  was  operated  by  USCO,  the  labor  contractor,  rather 
than  by  GE.  After  putting  pressure  on  Knox  County  officials  and  state  and  federal  labor 
department  officials,  CATS  won.  It  was  able  to  prove  that  GE  was  directly  responsible 
for  the  warehouse  and  that  the  fully  capable  Morristown  workers  had  not  been  offered 
the  new  jobs  although  many  would  have  been  willing  to  take  them.  CATS  finally 
persuaded  the  Department  of  Labor  to  declare  the  GE/USCO  warehouse  in  Mascot 


35 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


ineligible  for  JTPA  funding  and  withdraw  the  $200,000. 

Toward  the  end  of  1989,  CATS  began  to  push  their  state  legislators  to  set  up  a  study 
committee  to  look  at  the  issue  of  temporary  services.  They  also  lobbied  for  a  study 
committee  on  fair  labor  laws  in  Tennessee.  Both  committees  were  set  up,  and  CATS 
then  demanded  that  they  hold  hearings  in  Morristown.  Finally  a  joint  hearing  was 
scheduled  for  October  at  Walter  State  Community  College.  CATS  once  again  distrib- 
uted leaflets,  wrote  articles  for  the  Trader,  activated  their  telephone  tree,  and  contacted 
labor  unions,  community  groups,  churches,  and  anyone  else  they  could  think  of.  Their 
efforts  paid  off,  as  an  unexpected  seven  hundred  people  showed  up  to  overwhelm  the 
legislators.  Many  testified  movingly  about  the  experiences  they  had  undergone  and  their 
worries  for  the  future  of  their  families  and  children  with  all  the  changes  in  the  work- 
place. CATS  members  were  surprised  and  heartened  by  the  outpouring  of  support  for 
them  and  their  issues  from  all  over  East  Tennessee.  They  heard  horrible  stories  similar 
to  theirs  from  friends  and  allies  they  never  knew  they  had.  Everyone  seemed  to  agree 
that  the  situation  for  factory  workers  was  dire  and  becoming  worse,  and  that  it  was  the 
government's  responsibility  to  take  action.  The  committee  listened  dutifully,  but,  as 
usual  with  study  committees,  no  results  materialized. 

CATS  finally  decided  that  if  Tennessee  were  to  have  any  type  of  fair  labor  laws,  the 
members  themselves  would  have  to  create  them.  In  1990  they  wrote  legislation  that 
would  define  temporary  employees  as  temporary,  regulate  temporary  agencies,  and 
forbid  the  replacement  of  permanent  workers  with  temporary  ones.  This  was  precedent- 
setting  legislation,  since  at  that  time  no  state  or  local  legislation  dealt  with  the  abuse  of 
temporary  services.  With  help  from  TIRN  and  SOCM,  CATS  members  pressed  for  their 
bill  to  be  introduced  in  the  1990  legislative  session.  As  the  date  for  the  vote  approached, 
they  organized  a  delegation  of  about  fifty  citizens  to  drive  four  hours  to  Nashville  to 
lobby  for  themselves.  Although  CATS  had  done  extensive  lobbying  ahead  of  time,  when 
they  arrived  in  Nashville  for  the  vote,  they  found  themselves  outnumbered  and  over- 
powered by  opponents.  Federal  Express,  Eastman  Kodak,  and  other  major  Tennessee 
employers  were  pushing  hard  against  the  CATS  bill.  The  National  Association  of  Tem- 
porary Services  and  its  Tennessee  affiliate  were  also  lobbying  against  it.  Although 
CATS  had  received  promises  of  support  from  a  majority  of  committee  members,  several 
decided  not  to  vote  at  all,  and  the  bill  never  made  it  out  of  committee.  The  following 
year  CATS  presented  a  more  streamlined,  less  ambitious  bill,  for  which  they  again 
lobbied  extensively.  They  believed  they  had  a  good  chance  of  winning,  but  they  were 
outmaneuvered  by  more  politically  powerful  opponents.  After  two  years  of  legislative 
work,  their  only  tangible  result  was  a  bill  requiring  temporary  service  agencies  to  regis- 
ter with  the  state,  a  minimal  requirement  that  contained  no  provisions  for  regulation  or 
enforcement. 

CATS's  Ongoing  Legacy 

CATS  failed  to  accomplish  any  of  its  original  goals.  It  did  not  succeed  in  keeping  the 
GE  jobs  in  Morristown;  it  did  not  get  even  one  worker  rehired.  After  investing  consider- 
able sums  in  attorneys'  fees,  CATS  members  lost  their  lawsuit  against  General  Electric. 
The  time  and  energy  spent  lobbying  elected  representatives  did  not  generate  even  a 
minimal  bill  to  protect  temporary  workers.  The  temporary  service  industry  is  subject  to 
no  more  regulation  than  previously,  and  temporary  jobs  are  still  multiplying  in 
Morristown  as  permanent  ones  disappear.  Yet  despite  these  failures,  CATS  is  an  excel- 
lent example  of  a  successful  organizing  effort.  Members  of  CATS  were  involved  in  a 


36 


sustained  effort  at  social  change  around  economic  issues.  Both  the  individual  partici- 
pants and  the  larger  Morristown  community  —  arguably  even  the  entire  state  of  Tennes- 
see —  were  transformed  by  the  struggles  begun  by  a  small  group  of  women  laid  off 
from  GE. 

CATS  scored  several  points  that  cause  it  to  stand  out  among  community  mobiliza- 
tions around  economic  issues.  One  is  symbolized  by  the  name  of  the  group.  Unlike  the 
two  companies  described  above,  the  Morristown  laid-off  workers  did  not  organize  sim- 
ply around  the  events  at  GE.  They  did  not  call  themselves  the  GE  Workers  Committee, 
or  Morristown  Citizens  Against  GE.  From  the  outset  they  were  Citizens  Against  Tempo- 
rary Services,  representing  a  conscious  decision  to  focus  on  the  cause  of  their  problem 
rather  than  its  symptom.  Moreover,  because  of  its  close  alliance  with  larger  organiza- 
tions in  East  Tennessee,  and  because  of  the  region's  rich  history  of  community  organiz- 
ing struggles,  CATS  was  immediately  encouraged  to  foster  an  understanding  of  its 
members'  experiences  within  a  wider  context.  This  association  with  similar  yet  diverse 
groups  had  many  consequences. 

First  and  probably  most  important  was  the  contribution  of  organizing  expertise.  Bill 
Troy  of  CORA  and  Susan  Williams  of  the  Highlander  Center  worked  closely  with  the 
CATS  group,  helping  them  strategize,  build  a  local  coalition,  plan  events,  and  carry  out 
an  entire  campaign.  The  CATS  activists  credit  Troy  and  Williams  with  inspiring  them, 
helping  them  think  through  their  ideas,  planning  next  steps  after  disappointments,  and 
keeping  them  going  when  they  felt  like  giving  up.  The  chairperson  of  CATS  calls  them 
a  lifeline,  saying  that  she  would  not  have  survived  without  their  aid. 

Second,  other  organizations  provided  people  to  participate  in  CATS  events  and  to 
publicize  their  issues  and  struggles.  CATS  members  spoke  to  a  national  audience  at  the 
TIRN  founding  conference  in  Chattanooga  and  to  statewide  audiences  at  rallies  in 
Knoxville  and  Memphis.  They  joined  TIRN  leaders  to  speak  with  other  displaced  work- 
ers about  practical  issues  like  JTPA  and  other  programs,  but  also  about  the  changes  that 
are  required  to  better  serve  the  needs  of  working  people.  Some  even  attended  a  confer- 
ence in  Washington,  D.C.,  about  women  in  the  changing  workplace. 

Third,  other  organizations  provided  essential  training  in  leadership  skills.  CATS 
members  participated  in  workshops  at  the  Highlander  Center  with  community  activists 
and  organizers  from  all  over  the  South  and  Appalachia,  learning  how  similar  struggles 
were  handled  in  similar  communities.  They  were  encouraged  to  speak  publicly,  to  per- 
suade others  to  get  involved,  to  confront  decision  makers,  all  entirely  new  experiences 
for  the  women  involved. 

Fourth,  CATS  members  were  exposed  to  communities  extremely  different  from  their 
own.  The  most  dramatic  example  was  a  trip  to  the  maquiladora  (free  trade)  zone  in 
Mexico,  sponsored  by  TIRN.  Two  CATS  leaders  participated  in  the  trip,  along  with 
eight  other  women  workers  from  East  Tennessee.  They  visited  a  General  Electric  plant, 
among  others,  and  were  horrified  by  the  living  and  working  conditions  provided  by 
American  corporations.  They  learned  to  make  connections  between  their  own  experi- 
ences and  those  of  Mexican  women  working  in  the  maquiladoras  for  very  low  wages, 
with  no  job  security  or  organizing  rights.  Simply  by  traveling  around  Tennessee  and 
meeting  with  other  groups  in  the  context  of  their  fight  for  fair  labor  laws,  CATS  mem- 
bers were  educated  about  changes  in  the  economy  and  their  effects  on  all  kinds  of 
groups. 

Finally,  even  more  intensely  than  the  Acme  Boot  workers,  the  CATS  participants 
underwent  a  political  education  and  transformation.  Until  1988  they  had  been  very 


37 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


lucky,  holding  some  of  the  best,  most  secure,  and  highest-paying  jobs  in  Hamblen 
County.  Through  a  sudden  management  decision  they  became  not  just  laid-off  factory 
workers  but,  even  worse,  workers  qualified  only  for  the  most  unstable,  poorest-paying 
temporary  service  positions.  This  changed  their  view  not  only  of  themselves  but  of 
others  as  well.  Kathy  Muller,  a  CATS  leader,  described  the  changes  she  saw  in  herself: 

I  must  have  been  a  shallow  person.  Because,  see,  I  was  in  my  own  world.  I  got  up 
every  day,  and  I  went  to  work,  and  I  made  good  money,  and  .  .  .  when  I  went  to  the 
grocery  store  and  I  saw  somebody  that  had  food  stamps,  I  always  thought,  "Oh,  that 
little  kind  of  people,  they  ought  to  get  a  job  and  go  to  work  .  .  ."  Now  I'm  grateful 
that  I'm  able  to  look  and  see  and  have  compassion  for  people,  because  they're 
having  a  hard  time.  I  wrote  Al  Gore  a  letter  and  told  him  that  I  fully  believe  that  98 
percent  of  our  society  would  work,  if  they  could  make  a  decent  wage  to  where  they 
can  survive  ...  I  really  think  if  you  give  people  the  incentive  that  they'll  work.32 

In  addition  to  their  attitudes,  their  political  behavior  changed  as  they  organized 
CATS.  Not  one  member  had  ever  been  to  the  state  capitol  in  Nashville,  and  very  few 
had  ever  so  much  as  written  a  letter  to  a  public  official.  As  Muller  said,  "When  I 
worked  at  GE  I  would've  never  asked  my  government  a  question.  I  would've  never 
challenged  them  on  anything.  Now  I  challenge  them  on  everything.  I  mean,  I  wouldn't 
take  their  word  for  nothing  ...  I  can  see  beyond  what  they  say."  This  was  a  major 
change  for  Muller.  "I  had  all  these  ideas  that  there  was  justice  in  the  Labor  Department. 
Even  when  I  lost  my  job,  I  thought,  Well,  not  to  worry,  I'll  go  out  and  find  another  job, 
and  then  when  reality  started  setting  in  I  thought,  Well,  our  government  won't  let  GE  do 
this.  And  when  you  realize  they  will  let  'em  do  it,  they're  doing  it  every  day,  then  I 
began  to  ask  questions."33 

The  process  of  beginning  to  ask  questions  and  doubting  long-held  beliefs  about  au- 
thority was  extremely  difficult  for  many.  Joe  Perkinson,  a  veteran  of  the  Korean  and 
Vietnam  wars,  who  was  fifty  years  old  when  he  was  laid  off,  seriously  contemplated 
suicide  and  other  types  of  violence.  He  threatened  to  bring  in  a  gun  to  force  GE  manag- 
ers to  give  him  his  job  back,  at  whatever  wage.  Others  in  the  group  convinced  him  to 
use  more  peaceful  means.  He  now  has  a  minimum-wage,  temporary  job  as  a  security 
guard  at  the  Morristown  mall.  He  says  he  understands  why  the  crime  rate  is  so  high  in 
areas  where  there  are  no  good  jobs.34  Kathy  Muller  points  out  that  none  of  the  CATS 
members  had  ever  fought  for  something  like  this  before.  "I  was  the  type  of  person,  I 
guess  that  if  [GE]  had  told  me  to  go  out  in  a  lake  and  jump  in,  I  would've  went  in,  be- 
cause I  thought  they  knew  what  was  best  for  me  ...  I  had  been  brought  up  to  think  that 
if  you  got  a  job  you  did  the  very  best  you  could,  you  worked  as  hard  as  you  could,  you 
did  what  they  said,  because  they  were  boss,  and  you'd  be  okay!  When  I  realized  that 
didn't  work,  it  was  hard,  it  was  really  hard."35 

These  hard-learned  lessons  stuck.  More  than  anyone  in  Greenbrier  or  Acme  Boot,  the 
members  of  CATS  continued  to  participate  in  political  activities.  CATS  became  the 
Hamblen  County  chapter  of  SOCM,  and  Muller  became  a  leader  in  a  new  campaign  to 
get  city  drinking  water  for  people  living  in  a  neighborhood  near  a  polluted  landfill. 
Other  members,  including  several  who  were  previously  virulently  antiunion,  led  and 
worked  in  union  campaigns.  All  the  members  interviewed  were  extremely  knowledge- 
able about  NAFTA,  welfare  reform,  labor  law  reform,  and  other  national  economic 
issues.  They  continued  to  write  letters  and  meet  with  legislators  at  every  opportunity. 
Most  important,  they  have  learned  to  stand  up  for  themselves,  both  individually  and 

38 


collectively.  Each  one  can  tell  stories  of  confronting  authorities,  at  work  and  elsewhere, 
when  injustice  was  being  done.  These  small  demonstrations  of  resistance,  taken  to- 
gether, have  had  an  impact  on  many  lives. 

CATS  also  transformed  Morristown.  Anyone  in  that  town  who  has  a  problem  in  the 
workplace  knows  to  contact  a  CATS  leader.  A  small  group  of  them  now  serve  as  infor- 
mal job  counselors  for  nearly  the  entire  city's  population.  Moreover,  although  it  has 
become  SOCM  and  has  quieted  down  during  the  past  four  years,  public  officials  in 
Morristown  remember  CATS.  The  county  executive  and  Chamber  of  Commerce  offi- 
cials refer  to  it  as  having  instituted  the  strongest  protest  about  jobs  and  the  economy 
Hamblen  County  has  ever  seen.  Although  CATS  may  have  lost  the  immediate  battle,  its 
legacy  can  be  detected  in  the  ongoing  decisions  made  by  local  officials  who  have 
known  the  group's  organized  power  and  will  always,  even  unconsciously,  anticipate 

their  reactions. 

*  *  * 

The  most  striking  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  the  three  cases  of  mobilization 
in  East  Tennessee  is  the  exceptional  potential  of  ordinary  working  people  to  take  on  a 
complicated  issue,  educate  themselves,  fight  for  what  they  deserve,  and  join  with  others 
in  a  common  struggle.  The  crucial  corollary  is  that  in  order  for  this  process  to  take 
place,  enormous  resources  are  necessary.  This  is  true  not  in  the  sense  of  a  traditional 
"resource  mobilization"36  framework,  but  in  terms  of  indigenous  resources  from  within 
a  community:  an  institutionalized  base  with  which  groups  can  affiliate  and  learn  orga- 
nizing skills,  sources  of  publicity  and  information,  and  leadership. 

These  three  examples  show  that  abundant  crises  in  every  community  can  serve  as 
sources  of  mobilization  and  protest,  but  their  consequences  are  more  difficult  to  predict. 
In  all  three  companies,  the  consequence  the  participants  sought  —  to  keep  their  jobs  — 
eluded  them.  The  global  economy  brings  a  widening  gap  in  power  that  has  proved  to  be 
too  severe  for  impoverished  local  groups  to  overcome.  Only  few  such  campaigns  will 
ever  produce  concrete  improvements  in  economic  circumstances,  by  keeping  a  plant 
from  moving  on  or  by  pressuring  local  governmental  entities  to  strengthen  their  eco- 
nomic development  bids.  Yet  even  if  material  benefits  never  appear,  these  organizing 
efforts  are  not  failures.  Where  grassroots  mobilization  has  occurred,  people  have  a 
much  stronger  comprehension  of  fundamental  political  issues  and,  as  important,  a  trans- 
formed understanding  of  themselves  in  relation  to  those  issues.  Organizing  is  likely  to 
increase  political  participation  and  thus  strengthen  local  democracy,  educate  citizens  on 
local  and  national  issues,  nourish  leadership,  and  foster  solidarity  and  collective  respon- 
sibility. Different  types  of  mobilization  lead  to  different  sets  of  experiences,  understand- 
ings, and  resulting  political  behaviors  among  participants. 

Studying  political  mobilization  among  low-income  rural  people  reveals  the  incen- 
tives and  barriers  to  true  local  democracy  in  an  increasingly  global  economy.  This  study 
has  focused  on  the  concern  most  central  to  poor  people's  lives:  their  jobs  and,  more 
generally,  the  condition  of  the  local  economy.  It  shows,  first,  that  the  most  devastating 
economic  changes  result  not  from  an  invisible  hand  within  an  optimizing  free  market, 
but  from  sets  of  national,  state,  and  local  institutions  and  political  decisions.  It  then 
shows  that  local  people  can  have  an  impact  on  these  issues,  although  they  must  contend 
with  formidable  structures  and  opponents.  Although  local  organizing  cannot  compete 
with  the  forces  shaping  national  and  global  economic  policy,  it  can  transform  local 
politics  and  is  an  essential  beginning.  It  is  important  to  note  that  these  local  battles  are 
indeed  only  a  beginning.38 

The  histories  presented  here  prove  that  in  no  way  should  this  type  of  organizing  be 

39 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


seen  as  limited  to  local  groups  and  traditional  neighborhood  issues.  In  every  case, 
people  were  more  than  capable  of  seeing  their  struggles  in  a  national  and  international 
context  and  learning  to  analyze  their  own  towns'  economies  in  this  framework.  The 
transformation  from  the  personal  and  local  to  the  global  remains  the  test  of  successful 
organizing.  Small,  disadvantaged  communities  always  encounter  difficulty  in  mobiliz- 
ing around  economic  issues,  but  if  they  neglect  to  act,  they  are  excluded  from  the  deci- 
sions that  most  affect  their  lives.  Examining  systems  that  enable  excluded  groups  to 
achieve  a  voice  in  such  judgments  is  central  to  debates  about  democracy  and  power  in 
contemporary  American  politics  and  public  policy.  In  an  era  of  downsizing,  deindus- 
trialization,  and  economic  globalization,  these  questions  are  more  important  than  ever.  $* 


Notes 

1.  "Downsizing  and  Its  Discontents"  (masthead  editorial).  New  York  Times,  March  10, 
1996,  E14. 

2.  Yolanda  K.  Kodrzycki,  "The  Costs  of  Defense- related  Layoffs  in  New  England,"  New 
England  Economic  Review,  March/April  1995,  3. 

3.  James  W.  Meehan,  Jr.,  Joe  Peek,  and  Eric  S.  Rosengren,  "Business  Failures  in  New 
England,"  New  England  Economic  Review,  November/December  1993,  33. 

4.  Interview  with  Joanne  James,  December  7,  1993,  Clinton,  Tennessee. 

5.  Interview  with  Ann  Ritter,  LaFollette,  Tennessee,  December  10,  1993. 

6.  Interview  with  Bob  Walker,  Clinton,  Tennessee,  December  6,  1993. 

7.  Ritter  interview. 

8.  Ibid. 

9.  Interview  with  Bobbie  Bishop,  Clinton,  Tennessee,  December  6,  1993. 

10.  James  interview. 

11.  Walker  interview. 

12.  Bishop  interview. 

13.  Douglas  Ray,  "Acme  Plans  Boot  Plant  in  Puerto  Rico,"  Clarksville  (Tennessee)  Leaf- 
Chronicle,  December  27,  1992. 

14.  The  El  Paso  plants  employed  more  than  seven  hundred  employees,  a  number  similarto 
that  of  those  fired  from  the  three  other  closed  Tennessee  plants.  The  company  would 
not  reveal  the  wages  of  workers  in  El  Paso  or  Mexico.  See  Stephen  Franklin,  "Union 
Wants  Puerto  Rico  to  Boot  Acme,"  Chicago  Tribune,  February  1,  1993,  1. 

1 5.  Ray,  "Acme  Plans  Boot  Plant,"  1 . 

16.  Pablo  J.  Trinidad,  "Acme  Bootto  Produce  Footwear  in  Toa  Alta,"  Caribbean  Business, 
December  10,  1992,  1. 

17.  Interview  with  Alan  Buckner,  Clarksville,  Tennessee,  December  14,  1993. 

18.  Franklin,  "Union  Wants  Puerto  Rico  to  Boot  Acme,"  1. 

19.  Harry  Turner,  "Congress  Urged  to  Eliminate  936,"  San  Juan  (Puerto  Rico)  Star,  May  15, 
1992),  1. 

20.  Robert  Friedman,  "Rossello  Urged  to  Deny  Factory  Tax  Benefits,"  San  Juan  Star,  January 
12,1993,  1. 

21.  Terry  Batey,  "Acme  Boot  Workers,  Union  Vow  to  Fight  Closing  to  Bitter  End,"  Nashville 

Tennessean,  January  15,  1993. 

22.  Robert  Friedman,  "Acme  Boot  Company:  A  Runaway  Plant?"  San  Juan  Star,  January  10, 
1993,20. 

23.  Jimmy  Settle,  "Will  Newest  Stitch  Come  in  Time  for  Acme  Workers?"  Clarksville  Leaf- 

Chronicle,  May  18,  1993,  A1. 

24.  San  Juan  Star,  May  7,  1993. 

25.  Interview  with  Sally  Kellam,  Clarksville,  Tennessee,  December  15,  1993. 

26.  Ibid. 

27.  Linda  Yount  and  Susan  Williams,  "Temporary  in  Tennessee:  CATS  for  Stable  Jobs," 
Labor  Research  Review,  no.  15:  74. 


40 


28.  Ibid.,  75. 

29.  Richard  Belous,  The  Contingent  Economy:  The  Growth  of  the  Temporary,  Part-Time,  and 
Subcontracted  Workforce  (Washington,  D.C.:  National  Planning  Association,  1989). 

30.  Nine  to  Five,  "National  Profile  of  Working  Women"  (Washington,  D.C.:  Nine  to  Five, 
1995),   1. 

31 .  By  1994,  Manpower,  Inc.,  a  temporary  help  service,  was  the  largest  employer  in  the 
United  States,  with  nearly  one  million  employees.  See  Robert  E.  Parker,  Flesh  Peddlers 
and  Warm  Bodies:  The  Temporary  Help  Industry  and  Its  Workers  (New  Brunswick,  N.J.: 
Rutgers  University  Press,  1994),  27. 

32.  Interview  with  Kathy  Muller,  Morristown,  Tennessee,  December  10,  1993. 

33.  Ibid. 

34.  Interview  with  Joe  Perkinson,  Morristown,  Tennessee,  December  8,  1993. 

35.  Muller  interview. 

36.  See,  for  example,  John  McCarthy  and  Mayer  Zald,  "Resource  Mobilization  and  Social 
Movements:  A  Partial  Theory,"  American  Journal  of  Sociology  82,  no.  6  (May  1977); 
Anthony  Oberschall,  Social  Conflict  and  Social  Movements  (Englewood  Cliffs,  N.J.: 
Prentice-Hall,  1973);  Charles  Tilly,  From  Mobilization  to  Revolution  (Reading,  Mass.: 
Addison-Wesley,  1978);  and  William  Gamson,  The  Strategy  of  Social  Protest 
(Homewood,  III.:  Dorsey  Press,  1975). 

37.  Here  I  amend  the  arguments  of  Harry  Boyte,  Doug  McAdam,  and  others.  See,  for 
example,  Harry  C.  Boyte,  The  Backyard  Revolution:  Understanding  the  New  Citizen 
Movement  (Philadelphia:  Temple  University  Press,  1980);  Harry  C.  Boyte  and  Sara  M. 
Evans,  Free  Spaces:  The  Sources  of  Democratic  Change  in  America  (New  York:  Harper  & 
Row,  1986);  Doug  McAdam,  Political  Process  and  the  Development  of  Black  Insurgency, 
1930-1970  (Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1982). 


41 


42 


Is  Boston  Becoming  a 
Branch-Plant  Town? 

Lawrence  G.  Franko,  Ph.D. 


A  decade  ago,  Boston  appeared  to  be  emerging  as  a  headquarters  city  for  a  large 
number  of  world-class  enterprises.  Notwithstanding  the  recovery  from  the  early- 
1990s  recession,  and  a  thriving  entrepreneurial  economy  of  business  acorns,  Bos- 
ton today  seems  on  its  way  to  becoming  largely  a  branch-plant  town.  None  of  the 
1980s  Massachusetts  Miracle  saplings  or  the  more  recent  acorns  have  grown  into 
mighty  corporate  oaks  headquartered  here.  This  article  discusses  the  risks  of  hav- 
ing our  current  prosperity  increasingly  based  on  branch  plants  acquired  or  estab- 
lished by  firms  centered  elsewhere.  Its  concern  is  based  on  the  proposition  that 
having  big-business  corporate  headquarters  here  does  matter,  not  only  for  long- 
term  economic  success  and  stability,  but  also  for  the  vitality  and  funding  of  our 
cultural,  art,  philanthropic,  and  community  service  activities. 


When  I  moved  back  to  the  Boston  area  in  the  early  1980s,  part  of  the  excitement 
for  a  then-still-youngish  professor  of  international  business  and  finance  returning 
to  the  hub  of  the  universe  after  a  dozen  years  in  Europe  was  being  close  to  the  head- 
quarters action  of  the  seemingly  world-class  firms  then  emerging  —  DEC,  Wang,  Data 
General,  Apollo,  Prime,  Lotus,  Foxboro,  Fidelity,  State  Street,  BayBanks  —  not  to 
mention  those  institutions  already  "emerged"  —  Raytheon,  Polaroid,  Gillette,  Stride- 
Rite,  Dennison,  Sheraton,  the  First  National  Bank  of  Boston,  and  the  Bank  of  New 
England.  There  was  also  a  myriad  of  small  or  already  medium-size  high-tech  and  other 
firms  in  the  farm  team,  like  ChipCom,  BBN,  Powersoft,  Wellfleet  Communications, 
GCA,  Thinking  Machines,  Kendall  Square,  and  Au  Bon  Pain,  just  waiting  to  burst  upon 
the  world  scene.  Acorns  aplenty,  whether  or  not  nurtured  by  Arthur  D.  Little's  epony- 
mous park,  just  waiting  to  grow  into  mighty  oaks. 

Not  only  did  Massachusetts  have  its  own  headquarters  team,  but  the  Boston  region 
was  attracting  some  non-U.  S.  multinationals  as  a  site  for  their  Stateside  or  North  Ameri- 
can regional  headquarters.  NEC,  Bull,  and  Scitex  looked  to  be  the  leading  edge  of  a 
coming  wave. 

Some  of  these  firms  are  still  going  strong;  quite  a  few  others  clearly  are  not.  Some 
are  no  longer  around,  or  they  survive,  usually  only  partially,  as  divisions  of  the  larger 
firms  that  have  absorbed  them.  In  the  event,  a  forest  of  mighty,  world-class,  locally 
headquartered  oaks  is  not  what  has  emerged  in  the  Massachusetts  economy.  Only  two 
Massachusetts  companies  (Raytheon  and  Digital  Equipment  Corporation  [DEC])  were 
on  the  1995  Fortune  Global  500  list,  which  includes  both  manufacturing  and  service 
companies.  Switzerland,  the  country  from  which  I  returned,  which  coincidentally  has 

Lawrence  Franko,  a  professor  of  finance  and  strategic  management,  College  of  Manage- 
ment, University  of  Massachusetts  Boston,  teaches  the  MBA  course  Massachusetts  in  the 
Global  Economy. 


43 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


roughly  the  same  population  as  Massachusetts,  has  sixteen  on  that  list.  Only  two  Massa- 
chusetts companies,  Gillette  and  Fleet  Financial,  are  on  the  1996  Wall  Street  Journal 
100  Biggest  U.S.  Companies  by  Market  Value  list.1  Of  the  eighteen  Massachusetts  com- 
panies in  the  1989  Fortune  U.S.  500  Industrials,  no  fewer  than  seven  have  subsequently 
disappeared  by  merger,  takeover,  or  bankruptcy.  And  industrials  were  not  the  only  dis- 
appearing companies  once  headquartered  here:  "Jordan  Marsh  is  now  Macy's.  Mergers 
eliminated  other  familiar  names  like  Shawmut  and  BayBank.  The  Boston  Company  is 
owned  by  Pittsburgh-based  Mellon  Bank  Co.  There's  no  more  New  England  Telephone, 
only  Nynex,  soon  to  become  [and  now  is  ]  part  of  Bell  Atlantic.  The  Boston  Globe  is 
now  owned  by  the  New  York  Times  Co."2 

Moreover,  in  spite  of  the  near-euphoric  mood  currently  setting  in  about  the  state  of 
the  Massachusetts  economy,  the  survival  prospects  for  still  others  of  "our"  larger,  lo- 
cally headquartered  firms  are  perhaps  even  more  questionable  than  in  past.  After  earn- 
ing the  dubious  distinction  of  being  on  the  Wall  Street  Journal's  list  of  10  Worst  Per- 
forming Stocks  for  the  past  one,  five,  and  ten  years,  DEC  may  yet  be  sliced  and  diced. 
(On  January  26,  1998,  the  sale  of  DEC  to  Compaq  of  Houston  was  announced.)  Fleet 
Financial,  once  the  great  consolidator  of  regional  banking,  itself  has  become  the  subject 
of  takeover  rumors  after  recent  financial  underperformance.  Even  presumably  impreg- 
nable State  Street  appears  to  be  a  tempting  target  for  the  Bank  of  New  York. 

Indeed,  banking  and  financial  services  constitutes  the  next  cluster  of  the  Massachu- 
setts economy  on  the  list  of  most  likely  takeovers,  consolidations,  and  mergers  —  and 
possible  headquarters  removal.  The  political  dams  preventing  absorption  of  Massachu- 
setts banks  by  more-global,  more-nimble,  more-efficient,  and  lower-cost  (read  bigger 

—  banking  has  become  a  scale  game)  competitors  will  soon  break  down  with  the  arrival 
of  full  interstate  banking.  Insurance  is  also  an  activity  that  hardly  seems  immune  to  the 
threat  of  consolidation,  and  a  shakeout  in  a  mutual  fund  industry  in  which  there  are 
more  funds  competing  than  there  are  stocks  listed  on  the  New  York  Stock  Exchange  is 
but  a  matter  of  time  and  stock  market  fortune.  Even  without  a  stock  market  correction, 
Boston's  concentration  of  high-overhead,  star-system  active  management  funds  makes  it 
vulnerable  to  the  competition  of  no-load,  index-fund  competitors  based  elsewhere. 

After  considerable  uncertainty,  Raytheon  appears  to  have  emerged  as  a  survivor/ 
acquirer  as  the  musical  chairs  stop  in  the  defense  restructuring  game,  although  share- 
holder suits  and  antitrust  queries  concerning  its  recent  spate  of  acquisitions  could  still 
cast  doubt  on  that  outcome.  Although  Gillette  is  currently  the  one  unqualified  Massa- 
chusetts global-large-enterprise  success  story,  it  is  worth  recalling  that  even  Gillette  had 
a  near-death  experience  in  the  not-too-distant  past. 

The  propensity  of  locally  headquartered  institutions  to  underachieve,  fail,  or  be  taken 
over  is  also  no  longer  confined  to  firms.  The  controversy  over  the  (possibly  temporary 

—  or  aborted)  "rescue"  of  nonprofit  Tufts-New  England  Medical  Center  from  the 
clutches  of  Columbia/HCA,  a  giant  for-profit  hospital  management  firm  headquartered 
in  Nashville  (Nashville?),  Tennessee,  has  highlighted  the  existence  of  a  high-cost  Mas- 
sachusetts health  care  system  ripe  for  rationalization  at  the  hands  of  outsiders.   Cigna, 
headquartered  in  Philadelphia,  has  acquired  Healthsource  of  New  Hampshire,  a  move 
that  will  bring  its  HMO  membership  to  nearly  6.5  million,  and  the  number  of  its  total 
HMO-plus-indemnity  customer  base  to  over  12  million  in  twenty-nine  states.3  Whether, 
and  how,  Massachusetts  not-for-profit  HMOs  can  hold  out  against  the  scale  and  access 
to  capital  markets  of  such  rivals  remains  to  be  seen.  The  U.S.  health  care  management 
system  revolution  is  increasingly  being  led  —  or  pushed  —  by  employers,  governments, 

44 


and  organizations  that  see  insurance,  care,  and  hospital  management  as  economic  ac- 
tivities rather  than  as  callings,  and  the  leaders  in  this  cost  revolution  are  not  headquar- 
tered in  Boston. 

Could  even  the  very  bastion  of  Massachusetts's  identity  and  success,  its  universities, 
someday  come  under  competitive  and  takeover  threat?  Could  the  ever  escalating  costs 
and  ever  rising  tuition  fees  someday  call  forth  real  competition?  Could  the  revolution  in 
technology  promote  such  an  unthinkable  revolution?  Could  "our"  students  ever  become 
so  crass  as  to  succumb  to  the  blandishments  of  upstarts  like  the  University  of  Phoenix 
and  its  Wall  Street  Journal  advertisements  for  an  "online  MBA,"  or  to  those  of  the  other 
971  "cyberschools"  in  the  1997  Distance  Learning  guide?4 

Even  without  such  seemingly  remote  risks,  there  are  worries  enough  at  hand. 


Route  128  versus  Silicon  Valley  and  Beyond 


The  most  obvious  and  current  problem  is  on  Route  128.  It  is  also  one  of  the  most  wor- 
rying, since  high  technology  is  one  of  the  key  base  industries  by  which  Massachusetts 
earns  its  keep  in  the  world  via  exports  to  other  regions  and  countries  and  on  which  a 
whole  service-economy  edifice  of  real  estate,  legal  services,  construction,  medical  ser- 
vices, and  state  and  local  government  rests. 

Whether  or  not  Silicon  Valley  has  won  the  high-tech  race  can  be  debated.  The  pessi- 
mistic view  of  Route  128  presented  by  AnnaLee  Saxenian  in  her  1994  Regional  Advan- 
tage: Culture  and  Competition  in  Silicon  Valley  and  Route  128  may  or  may  not  be  too 
stark.5  The  purported  openness  of  Silicon  Valley's  commercial,  market-oriented  culture 
versus  Route  128's  more  closed,  vertically  integrated,  Pentagon-dependent  firms  has  — 
thankfully  —  not  led  to  the  disappearance  of  Massachusetts  high  tech.  Indeed,  Boston 
high-tech  boosters  can  and  do  point  to  the  flourishing  existence  of  some  2,000  software 
firms  in  Massachusetts,  although  most  are  very  small  and  very  new,  to  a  considerable 
amount  of  venture  activity,  and  to  some  continuing  successes  in  computing  and  commu- 
nications hardware.  What  is,  however,  incontrovertible  is  the  fact  that  Route  128  is  not 
the  equal  of  its  former  self.  Many  of  the  great  hopes  of  the  1980s  have  fizzled  or  failed, 
not  just  in  the  realm  of  minicomputers  and  not  just  because  of  the  end  of  the  cold  war. 
One  looks  with  some  nostalgia  at  the  listing  of  "up  and  comers"  in  the  Porter-Monitor 
report  on  the  competitive  advantage  of  Massachusetts.6  Names  such  as  Thinking  Ma- 
chines, Kendall  Square,  and  Symbolics  resound  like  those  of  ancient  cities,  long  disap- 
peared. 

Moreover,  when  Silicon  Valley,  or  Seattle,  has  not  simply  defeated  Massachusetts 
high-tech  firms,  it  has  taken  them  over.  Sometimes  these  are  called  mergers,  but  it  is 
curious  how  frequently  such  "mergers"  are  followed  by  the  rise  to  top  management 
positions  of  people  based  in  places  like  San  Jose.  Apollo  has  become  part  of  Hewlett 
Packard,  ChipCom  was  acquired  by  3Com,  Cisco  (under  the  direction  of  a  Wang  alum- 
nus) has  acquired  a  series  of  Route  128  high-tech  hopes,  and  Wellfleet,  Powersoft,  and 
now  Cascade  have  been  "merged." 

Even  within  firms'  divisions,  somewhat  hidden  from  public  view,  a  tectonic  shift 
toward  California  and  the  West  has  sometimes  been  discernible.  Japan's  NEC  used  to 
view  Boxborough  as  its  center  of  U.S.  personal  computer  operations;  now  a  "merger"  of 
these  into  California's  Packard  Bell  has  displaced  much  of  its  activity  —  and  personnel 
—  westward. 


45 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Why  Worry?  Does  It  Matter? 


Of  course,  one  possible  response  to  this  litany  of  the  inability  of  Massachusetts  to 
spawn  big  businesses  with  large  stock  market  values  is:  Who  needs  large  firms  any- 
way? Small  is  beautiful.  Emerging  entrepreneurship  is  the  wave  of  the  future.  True,  the 
early  nineties  recession  was  scary,  but  we  now  have  a  very  low  unemployment  rate, 
total  nonagricultural  employment  has  finally  recovered  to  its  previous  1988  peak,7  real 
estate  values  and  rentals  are  rising,  and  confidence  is  high.  True,  venture  capitalists 
pour  more  money  into  California,  but  Massachusetts  is  still  the  number  two  recipient  of 
venture  dollars  in  the  nation.  Moreover,  we  have  the  mother  of  all  creators  of  enterprise, 
MIT  —  celebrated  as  godparent  to  the  creation  over  the  past  half  century  of  4,000  cur- 
rently active  enterprises,  1,065  of  which  have  headquarters  in  Massachusetts.8  If  com- 
monwealth firms  are  conspicuous  by  their  (near)  absence  from  the  lists  of  the  largest, 
Massachusetts  companies  are  well  represented  in  the  small  and  medium-size  enterprise 
scoreboards  of  Forbes,  Inc.  Magazine,  and  Business  Week,  albeit  with  one  notable  weak 
spot  that  is  perhaps  the  consumer-marketing  obverse  of  the  state's  strength  in  MIT- 
spawned  producer  technology.  In  Entrepreneur's  list  of  100  Fastest  Growing  Franchises, 
only  one  Massachusetts  firm  is  to  be  found:  Dunkin'  Donuts,  now  British  owned. 

To  the  question  "Who  needs  large  firms  anyway?"  can  be  appended  another,  to  wit: 
"Who  needs  headquarters?"  Boston's  own  former  labor  secretary,  Robert  Reich,  stirred 
this  controversy  a  number  of  years  ago  in  the  context  of  the  (then)  feared  disappearance 
of  corporate  headquarters  in  the  United  States  as  a  result  of  the  (then)  feared  conquest 
of  U.S.  industry  by  foreign  firms,  especially  the  (then)  invincible  Japanese.  In  his  much 
commented  upon  article,  "Who  Is  Us?"  in  the  Harvard  Business  Review  of  January- 
February  1990,  Reich  asserted  that  Americans  should  not  worry  about  whether  or  not 
American  firms  were  headquartered  in  the  United  States,  since  what  was  really  impor- 
tant was  whether  jobs  and  technological  know-how  were  located  in  —  or  transferred  to 
—  America.  Whether  companies  were  identified  as  American  or  Japanese  or  Swiss  or 
whatever  was  irrelevant  because  footloose,  anational  multinational  corporations  run  by 
supranational  cosmopolitans  would  locate  activities  around  the  world  wherever  those 
activities  were  most  productive  or  efficient,  regardless  of  nationality  of  ownership, 
management,  or  headquarters  location.  Thus,  while  one  might  reasonably  worry  about 
the  quality  of  the  American  labor  force,  or  worker  education,  or  economic  infra- 
structure, neither  sleep  nor  sympathy  (nor  public  policy,  aka  subsidies  or  tax  breaks) 
should  be  lost  on  American  companies  or  their  headquarters  personnel  or  headquarters 
locations. 

Of  course,  people  do  worry  about  whether  "their"  firms  have  a  large  or  small  volume 
of  sales,  or  a  large  or  small  total  value  in  the  marketplace,  or  whether  a  Gillette,  DEC, 
Bank  of  New  England,  Shawmut  ("They  were  more  concerned  with  local  customer 
service"),  Blue  Cross,  or  Tufts-New  England  Medical  Center  is  taken  out  of  town,  or 
out  of  existence.  They  worry  so  much  that  Raytheon  and  Fidelity  can  obtain  special  tax 
breaks  in  return  for  not  leaving  town,  and  they  worry  so  much  that  they  try  to  use  the 
political  process  to  subvert  the  notion  that  the  United  States  is  a  single  economy  and  to 
obtain  special  government  protection  for  competitively  threatened  banks,  nonprofits, 
electric  and  telephone  utilities,  and  whatever  else  seems  more  "us"  than  "them." 

Headquarters  location,  in  the  real  world,  still  defines  an  essential  part  of  who  is  us 
versus  who  is  them.  On  a  national  level,  the  Reichian  vision  of  the  unimportance  of 
headquarters  in  a  world  of  footloose  multinationals  quickly  gave  way  to  the  promotion 

46 


of  U.S.  businesses  by  Ron  Brown  and  Laura  Tyson.  Somehow,  Texas  Instruments, 
Boeing,  General  Motors,  Ford,  Chrysler,  and  Caterpillar  did  look  more  like  America 
than  did  Nippon  Electric,  Airbus,  Toyota,  and  Komatsu.  Locally,  whether  State  Street 
will  report  to  New  York  or  Tufts-New  England  to  Nashville  is  treated  as  news,  precisely 
because  something  seems  to  threaten  us  —  namely,  them.  And  the  Wang  of  the  time  of 
The  Doctor  is  still  missed.  Somehow  neither  the  people  of  Lowell  nor  the  aficionados 
of  the  arts  in  Boston  can  feign  indifference  to  that  firm's  demise. 

Still,  while  simple  fear  of  change,  or  of  foreigners,  or  of  New  Yorkers,  or  of  non-New 
Englanders,  or  of  for-profits  or  of  multinationals  may  be  lampoonable  offenses,  both 
self-serving  and  intellectually  challenged,  there  is  significance  lurking  behind  the  pas- 
sion. There  is,  in  fact,  good  reason  for  citizens  of  a  city  or  region  that  has  high  aspira- 
tions to  care  about  whether  there  are  large  firms  and  organizations  headquartered  there. 
The  core  of  the  reason  has  to  do  with  wealth  creation.  Headquarters  is  where  the  money 
tends  to  be.  And,  although  the  Puritan  tradition  would  have  Boston  not  be  too  blatant 
about  it,  being  the  Athens  of  America,  let  alone  the  hub  of  the  universe,  takes  money. 

One  lesson  of  many  centuries  of  history  is  that  great  art,  great  architecture,  great 
public  works,  and  great  institutions  are  built  on  great  fortunes.  In  today's  world,  great 
fortunes  are  built  on  great  business  institutions,  which  in  turn  are  built  on  scale  and 
scope,  according  to  the  title  of  the  seminal  work  on  the  roots  of  long-term  enterprise 
success  and  failure  by  Harvard  Business  School's  Alfred  Chandler.9  It  is  no  accident 
that  Seattle's  opera  is  flourishing  while  Boston's  has  become  next  to  nonexistent.  There 
are  many  Microsoft  and  Boeing  millionaires  to  finance  it.  A  whale  is  a  whale,  and  an 
assemblage  of  minnows  does  not  a  whale  make. 

As  products  and  services  inevitably  mature  and  spread  to  mass  markets,  and  to  glo- 
bal markets,  scale,  or  size,  is  necessary  to  achieve  the  lowest-cost  competitive  positions 
that  are  the  enduring  barriers  to  competitive  entry.  These  in  turn  permit  high  profit 
margins,  high  wages  and  salaries,  high  stock  prices  —  and  wealth.  Invention,  entrepre- 
neurship,  and  flourishing  small  companies  are  a  wonderful  start,  but  if  there  are  no,  or 
exceedingly  few,  second  acts,  prosperity  based  on  such  a  potentially  evanescent  base  is 
fragile  and  unstable.  As  Chandler  and  others  have  shown,  U.S.,  German,  and  Japanese 
firms  led  the  world  in  achieving  corporate  scale  and  scope,  first  within  national  bound- 
aries, then  globally.  This  rise  and  development  of  large  enterprise  enabled  these  nations 
to  become  the  wealthiest  economies  of  the  world.  In  contrast,  much  of  the  decline  in 
Britain's  industrial  position  came  from  an  inability  or  unwillingness  of  small  and  me- 
dium-size enterprises  to  make  the  capital,  management,  and  psychological  commit- 
ments to  become  truly  world  class  and  world  scale. 

Moreover,  in  the  modern  world,  initial  success  in  building  big  business  arguably 
begets  more  success  later.  The  underdog-beats-big-baddie  myth  —  David  upsets 
Goliath,  tiny  mammals  replace  big  dinosaurs,  Apple  vanquishes  IBM,  and  so  on  —  is  so 
deeply  entrenched  in  our  culture  and  consciousness  that  we  hardly  notice  that,  more 
often  than  not,  it  is  the  Apples,  not  the  IBMs,  that  become  the  endangered  species. 
Established  firms,  at  least  those  with  alert  management,  have  learning,  cost,  distribu- 
tion, and  brand-name  advantages  with  which  they  can  "preempt  the  market  by  dispers- 
ing their  models  along  quality  space,"  to  cite  Joanna  Stavins  in  her  study  "Firm  Strate- 
gies in  the  Personal  Computer  Market:  Are  Established  Brands  Better  Off?"10  Chandler 
found  that  in  recent  history,  it  is  Goliath  that  has  usually  bested  David  in  pharmaceuti- 
cals, chemicals,  and  computers,  and  noted  that  "the  ability  of  large  established  firms  to 
use  learned  routines  and  integrated  capabilities  to  enter  related  product  markets  helps  to 


47 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


explain  a  significant  change  in  the  ways  in  which  major  new  industries  are  coming  to  be 
created.  Established  firms  in  recent  years  have  played  a  greater  role  in  the  creation  of 
new  industries  than  entrepreneurial  start-ups  because  the  time  and  cost  of  commercial- 
izing technologically  complex  new  products  and  processes  is  not  in  invention  or  re- 
search. It  is  in  development  —  in  the  long  and  complex  course  required  to  produce 
goods  in  large  enough  quantity  and  with  high  enough  quality  to  be  purchased  by  a  sub- 
stantial number  of  customers  in  national  and  global  markets."11  Such  words  may  ring  in 
our  ears  as  more  local  Lotuses,  and  biotech  startups,  and  hospitals,  and  HMOs,  and 
financial  service  boutiques  disappear  into,  or  on  account  of,  big  business  competitors 
headquartered  elsewhere. 

Furthermore,  to  become  world-scale  in  the  global  market,  it  is  a  distinct  advantage 
for  firms  to  have  already  become  large  at  home:  it  is  large  firms,  dominant  and  com- 
petitive in  home  markets,  that  can  afford  the  often  sizable  overheads  and  investments 
involved  in  seeking  out  foreign  markets,  conducting  lengthy  negotiations  with  prospec- 
tive partners  and  agents,  overcoming  distance,  language,  and  cultural  barriers,  and 
adapting  to  unfamiliar  mores.  Boston  small  business  may  be  doing  well  locally,  but  it 
has  almost  totally  missed  some  key  international  opportunities.  A  case  in  point:  be- 
tween 1991  and  1995,  the  Philippines  moved  from  turtle  to  tiger  in  Asia.  The  turn- 
around in  that  country's  economy  presented  a  major  international  opportunity.  Some 
firms  seized  it:  exports  of  California  companies  to  Manila  trebled.  However,  exports 
from  Massachusetts,  already  tiny,  declined.12  Another:  following  the  fall  of  the  Berlin 
Wall,  hopes  were  high  that  Massachusetts  environmental  firms  would  clean  up,  and 
clean  up  in,  East  Germany,  Poland,  Russia,  and  elsewhere  in  the  ecological  wasteland 
left  by  communist  misrule.  Alas,  they  have  been  bypassed  by  those  countries  and  their 
new  governments,  which  have  sought  out  large  American  and  European  environmental 
services  and  waste  management  firms  (not  headquartered  in  Massachusetts)  with  broad 
systems,  and  financial  and  management  capabilities.13  Moreover,  as  is  often  the  case 
with  small  and  medium-size  firms  in  many  industries,  it  was  not  every  Massachusetts 
environmental  firm  that  even  wanted  to  be  bothered  with  the  cultural  and  currency  com- 
plexities of  doing  business  outside  the  United  States. 


Hosting  Big  Business  Is  Good,  Housing  Its  Headquarters  Better 

Many  states  and  localities  implicitly  acknowledge  the  wealth-creation  effects  of  big 
businesses  through  their  assiduous  efforts  to  court  large  enterprises  to  locate  factories, 
distribution  centers,  R&D  laboratories,  and  the  like  in  "their"  region.  Indeed,  the  rise  of 
the  new  South  and  the  Sun  Belt  is  intimately  bound  up  with  a  redrawing  of  the  U.S.  big 
business  map.  The  success  of  Charlotte,  North  Carolina-based  Nucor  in  many  southern 
locations,  the  Research  Triangle's  attraction  of  major  facilities  from  Canada's  Nortel 
and  Britain's  Glaxo-Wellcome,  BMW's  location  of  its  gleaming  plant  in  South  Caro- 
lina, Motorola's  branch-plants  in  Phoenix,  Intel  in  New  Mexico,  and  Mercedes's  new 
factory  in  Alabama,  are  but  a  few  of  many  examples. 

Whole  countries  have  sometimes  adopted  basing  their  prosperity  on  welcoming 
"others'"  firms.  The  post-World  War  II  prosperity  of  Belgium  is  in  large  measure  a 
testimonial  to  the  benefits  of  hosting  the  branch-plant  activities  of  companies  headquar- 
tered elsewhere.  The  demonstrations  and  protests  triggered  by  the  sudden  closing  of  a 
plant  by  France's  Renault  suggest,  however,  the  potential  instability  of  such  an  eco- 
nomic development  strategy.  When  the  going  gets  tough  for  firms,  the  periphery  some- 


48 


how  seems  to  be  downsized  before  the  headquarters  center.  (Does  anyone  remember 
GM  Framingham?) 

If  plants,  distribution  centers,  and  the  occasional  lab  can  bring  jobs  and  tax  revenues 
to  a  region,  having  companies  locate  their  headquarters  there  is  even  better,  especially 
if,  as  for  Boston  and  Massachusetts,  high  costs  of  energy,  transport,  housing,  and  labor 
limit  or  preclude  any  major  success  in  the  industrial  hospitality  business.  Moreover,  it  is 
at  headquarters  where  the  highest-skill,  highest-income,  and  highest-tax-base  jobs  are 
and  will  remain. 

Headquarters  business  and  organizational  functions  are  extremely  resistant  to  decen- 
tralization and  geographic  dispersion.  Like  it  or  not,  research  and  development,  infor- 
mation gathering  and  information  technology,  financing  and  financial  management, 
accounting  and  control  systems,  logistics  and  purchasing,  not  to  mention  corporate 
legal,  governmental  affairs,  and  human  resources  functions,  and  more,  all  have  central 
roles  to  play  in  the  hub  connecting  the  spokes  of  any  sizable  organization.  In  spite  of 
much  talk  of  decentralization  and  internationalization  in  the  business  literature,  R&D, 
for  example,  remains  largely  a  headquarters  activity.  One  study  of  the  world's  largest 
industrial  enterprises  found  that  44  percent  of  parent  companies  reported  that  they  had 
no  overseas  R&D  expenditure,  and  another  13  percent  reported  that  overseas  R&D 
accounted  for  less  than  5  percent  of  their  total  R&D  expenditure.14 

All  these  functions  are  subject  to  the  need  for  an  agglomeration  of  critical  mass  and 
for  rapid  face-to-face  communication  among  people.  All  the  marvels  of  modern  tele- 
communications, fax  machines,  aviation,  inter-  and  intranets  have  not  and  will  not 
change  the  fact  that  many  more  jobs  in  such  activities  are  found  at  places  that  are  rec- 
ognizable as  headquarters  than  in  branches,  subsidiaries,  factories,  and  service  centers. 

A  disproportionate  number  of  headquarters  hub  jobs  require  high  skills,  which  mean 
high  pay,  high  taxes  paid  by  the  people  who  work  in  headquarters  hubs,  and,  not  least, 
high  contributions  to  the  community.  It  is  not  an  accident  that  the  Bank  of  Boston  has 
been  particularly  involved  in  inner-city  education  and  community  development.  It's  not 
just  that  it  hires  here,  but  its  managers  have  to  live  and  walk  on  the  streets  here  or 
nearby.  When  Wang  and  DEC  were  successful,  they  could  embark  on  inner-city  initia- 
tives that  were  later  unsustainable.  Before  "power  shifted  ...  to  out-of-towners,"  Bos- 
ton had  the  Vault,  the  coordinating  committee  consisting  largely  of  CEOs  of  firms  head- 
quartered here,  which  took  on  missions  of  business  social  responsibility  and  even  politi- 
cal compromise  in  order  to  "make  the  city  work."15 

Headquarters  cities  also  tend  to  be  where  firms' owners  are  concentrated;  owners  are 
not  just  founders,  but  include  their  families  and  descendants,  and  managers  and  em- 
ployees who  earn  or  take  equity  in  their  firm.  And  owners  are  the  sources  of  fortunes 
needed  to  endow  and  invigorate  a  region's  cultural  life.  Boston  got  a  Wang  Center  just 
in  the  nick  of  time.  Could  it  not  use  a  few  more  such  endowments? 


What  Should  Be  Done? 

First  and  foremost,  managers  of  firms  and  other  economic  organizations  who  care  about 
Boston  and  Massachusetts  —  and  there  are  many  who  would  rather  live  here  than  in 
Silicon  Valley  or  New  York  —  should  bestir  themselves  even,  and  perhaps  especially,  if 
they  are  managing  successful  enterprises.  Managers,  consultants,  business  scholars,  and 
gurus  alike  might  ponder  the  phenomenon  of  the  tendency  of  smaller,  successful  Massa- 
chusetts firms  hardly  ever  to  make  it  into  the  league  of  world  scale,  scope,  and  global 


49 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


headquarters.  (Indeed,  it  is  one  of  the  ironies  of  our  situation  that  few  states  are  as  well 
populated  by  business  management  experts,  much  of  whose  expertise  is  supposed  to 
help  acorns  grow  into  oaks,  as  the  commonwealth.) 

Of  course,  one  cause  of  aborted  business  trajectories  is  hardly  new.  Not  long  ago  I 
had  the  occasion  to  ask  Ken  Olsen  an  undiplomatic  question  following  a  talk  he  gave  at 
the  Colonial  Inn  in  Concord:  "What  is  your  diagnosis  of  what  caused  DEC  to  stumble?" 
His  answer  rings  all  too  true:  "Too  much  past  success."  The  ancient  Greeks  called  it 
hubris.  Despite  the  chastening  of  the  recession,  and  especially  because  of  the  recovery, 
a  little  too  much  of  it  still  hovers  around  Boston.  The  attitude  seems  to  be  "Since  we 
have  been  at  it  so  long,  'our  way'  of  doing  medicine,  or  banking,  or  mutual  funds 
(which  we  invented,  after  all),  or  high-tech,  or  indeed  education,  must  be  the  right  way 
to  do  it."  When  I  hear  such  sentiments,  I  am  too  often  reminded  of  the  maps  of  the 
world  that  used  to  be  sold  in  Harvard  Square  when  I  was  an  undergraduate  in  the  1960s: 
the  parody  Mercator  projection  with  Cambridge,  Boston,  the  Cape  and  Islands,  Maine, 
New  York,  and  sometimes  the  Grand  Tour  parts  of  Europe,  portrayed  very  large,  and  the 
rest  of  the  United  States  of  America,  and  the  world,  pictured  very  small. 

Managing  and  making  it  in  Massachusetts  in  the  next  century  will  require  more  than 
a  federally  financed  tunnel  to  the  twenty-first  century.  It  will  require  a  transcontinental 
(California  is  our  main  competitor,  and  not  just  in  high-tech)  and  transnational  vision. 


A  Public  Policy  Response? 


One  thing  the  Massachusetts  economy  does  not  need,  but  is  in  the  process  of  acquiring, 
is  a  public  policy  and  a  political  climate  of  institutional  protectionism  whose  aim  is  to 
keep  out  New  York  bankers,  Tennessee  hospital  managers,  Canadian  electricity  provid- 
ers, and  whoever.  Alas,  the  lesson  of  investment  protectionism  the  world  over  is  that,  at 
best,  it  provides  a  short-term  defense  of  the  status  quo  and,  at  worst,  leads  manage- 
ments to  compound  past  inertia  with  yet  new  inefficiencies  made  possible  by  the  new 
administrative  and  regulatory  barriers  to  competition.  Creating  barriers  behind  which 
local  institutions  can  continue  current  or  create  new  inefficiencies  increases  the  prob- 
ability that  their  demise  will  only  be  more  painful  in  the  future  than  it  would  be  today. 

Not  only  do  governmental  barriers  to  competition  breed  inefficiencies,  but  Massa- 
chusetts protectionism  also  stores  up  the  prospect  of  future  retaliation.  New  York  can 
surely  be  as  creative  at  finding  reasons  why  BankBoston  or  Fleet  or  State  Street  itself 
could  someday  be  denied  an  acquisition  target  there  as  the  commonwealth  is  in  protect- 
ing State  Street  from  "foreign"  predations.  Worse,  building  a  wall  around  one's  garden 
shuts  one  in,  just  as,  or  more  effectively  than,  it  shuts  others  out.  Indeed,  the  demise  of 
the  Bank  of  New  England  was  almost  certainly  partially  the  result  of  earlier  attempts  to 
"ring  fence"  the  home  team.  Protecting  New  England  banking  from  outsiders  encour- 
aged New  England  banks  to  put  all  their  eggs  in  one  regional  basket,  with  the  disastrous 
results  that  are  only  too  well  known. 

What  public  policy  can  do  is  to  keep  us  from  becoming  Taxachusetts  again,  to  make 
the  commonwealth  hospitable  to  enterprises  of  all  sizes  and  from  all  origins,  to  get  rid 
of  the  kind  of  regulation  that  keeps  our  electric  costs  at  four  times  the  kilowatt-hour  rate 
of  electricity  delivered  at  the  Canadian  border,  and  to  make,  and  then  keep,  our  commu- 
nications and  transport  infrastructure  world  class. 

Public  officials  also  need  to  communicate  and  to  persuade  the  public  that  such  steps 
are  useful  and  necessary.  They  must  also  establish  more  open  processes  to  ensure  that 

50 


they  do  not  end  up  in  the  kind  of  unproductive  political  stalemates  in  which  our  region 
seems  to  specialize.  To  take  but  one  example:  headquarters  managers  must  fly  a  great 
deal,  and  getting  to  Logan  Airport  is  less  than  a  joy  for  many.  Hanscom  use  and  expan- 
sion would  be  part  of  a  solution  to  the  problem,  but  community  mistrust  of  Massport  is 
at  such  a  level  that  this  bottleneck  to  world-business  expansion  appears  destined  to 
become  far  worse  before  it  gets  better. 

An  all-out  effort  to  improve  education,  and  to  link  it  to  the  modem,  technological 
business  world  would  be  in  order.  Too  much  of  the  Massachusetts  education  establish- 
ment seems  wedded  to  'sixties  dogma  about  the  desirability  of  "Resisting  the  Corporate 
Agenda  in  Higher  Education"  (the  title  of  a  recent  teachers  union  conference)  rather 
than  to  recognizing  the  real  problem,  which  is  that  Massachusetts  has  too  few  truly 
giant  corporations  and  too  few  students  prepared  to  make  their  way  in  a  capitalist 
world. 

In  addition,  public  officials  might  exercise  leadership  by  attempting  to  inspire  the 
Massachusetts  polity  with  a  desire  for  true  economic  excellence.  This  might  take  politi- 
cal courage.  In  Communist  China,  leaders  can  actually  go  around  saying  things  like  'To 
get  rich  is  glorious."  Here,  such  a  statement  would  likely  be  the  butt  of  media  ridicule 
and  qualify  its  maker  to  be  disinvited  from  speaking  engagements  at  noted  universities. 
Can  one  imagine  politicians  actually  saying  kind  words  about  big  business  and  wanting 
their  headquarters  here,  and  not  only  about  entrepreneurial  start-ups?  This  could  end  up 
going  well  against  the  grain  of  the  commonwealth's  already  abundant  antibusiness, 
populist  attitudes,  attitudes  which  political  leaders  reinforce  not  only  directly  by  their 
attacks  on  "profits"  (as  if  the  state  did  not  get  a  slice  of  those  evil  profits,  with  which  it 
then  pays  politicians'  and  bureaucrats'  and  teachers'  and  professors'  salaries),  but  indi- 
rectly by  their  stoking  popular  cynicism  toward  "capitalism"  via  expedient,  but  ulti- 
mately market-perverting,  corporate-welfare  tax  breaks  and  protections  from  takeovers 
for  specific  firms  and  institutions.  Promoting  Boston  as  a  headquarters  city,  and  Massa- 
chusetts as  a  headquarters  state,  is  not  the  same  thing  as  reflexive  favoritism  toward 
whatever  wheel  squeaks  loudest. 

Indeed,  there  is  little  that  is  more  embarrassing  to  those  who  wish  a  flourishing  of 
business  and  wealth  creation  in  the  commonwealth  than  the  spectacle  of  what 
Theodore  Forstmann  has  called  the  "statist  businessman"  lobbying  government  for 
subsidies  for  his  own  firm  and  for  penalties  and  regulations  for  competitors.16  Such 
sowing  of  the  political  process  to  "game"  the  market  will  reap  the  whirlwind  of  a  more- 
than-understandable  future  backlash  against  "greedy,  self-interested  business,"  even 
when  the  main  victims  of  corporate  welfare  may  be  other  competing  businesses.  Per- 
haps a  modest  proposal  is  in  order:  a  most  favored  nation,  or  company  or  organization 
(for  nonprofits  can  play  this  game  as  well)  clause  which,  every  time  a  tax  break  or  a 
subsidy  is  handed  out  to  a  company  out  of  fear  that  it,  too,  might  disappear  from  Massa- 
chusetts, would  ensure  that  equivalent  benefits  were  made  available  to  all  other  busi- 
nesses and  institutions  in  the  state. 

The  most  important  task  of  the  managers  of  commonwealth  businesses  and  other 
economic  organizations  is  not  to  go  hat  in  hand  to  government  for  protection  from  out- 
siders but  to  demonstrate  the  dynamism  and  success  of  their  enterprises.  To  modify 
slightly  a  famous  statement  by  a  former  governor  of  the  commonwealth,  the  business  of 
business  ought  to  be  business.  Ultimately,  whether  Boston  becomes  a  branch-plant  town 
depends  on  the  vision  and  action  of  Massachusetts  managers.  ** 


51 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Excerpts  from  this  article  appeared  in  Focus,  The  Boston  Globe,  April  13,  1997. 


Notes 

1.  "Shareholder  Scoreboard,"  Wall  Street  Journal,  February  27,  1997. 

2.  Joan  Vennochi,  "Locking  Up  the  Vault,"  Boston  Globe,  April  2,  1997,  C1. 

3.  Ted  Hampton,  "Cigna  Buys  Healthsource  of  N.H.,"  Boston  Globe,  March  1,  1997,  A7. 

4.  Lisa  Gubernickand  Ashlea  Ebeling,  "I  Got  My  Degree  through  E-Mail,"  Forbes,  June  16, 
1997,  84-93. 

5.  AnnaLee  Saxenian,  Regional  Advantage:  Culture  and  Competition  in  Silicon  Valley  and 
Route  128  (Cambridge:  Harvard  University  Press,  1994). 

6.  Michael  E.  Porter  in  collaboration  with  Monitor  Company,  Inc.,  The  Competitive 
Advantage  of  Massachusetts  (Cambridge:  Monitor  Company,  1991). 

7.  Massachusetts  Division  of  Employment  and  Training,  "Employment  Statistics"  (CES- 
790),  at  www.magnet.state.MA.US/det/1MinFo.htm,  December  1997. 

8.  Economics  Department,  BankBoston,  MIT:  Impact  of  Innovation  (Boston:  BankBoston, 
1997),  http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/founders/introduction.html. 

9.  Alfred  Chandler,  Scale  and  Scope:  The  Dynamics  of  Industrial  Capitalism  (Cambridge: 
Harvard  University  Press,  Belknap  Press,  1990). 

1  0 .     Joanna  Stavins,  "Firm  Strategies  in  the  Personal  Computer  Market:  Are  Established 
Brands  Better  Off?"  New  England  Economic  Review,  November/December  1995,  13- 
24. 

1 1 .  Alfred  Chandler,  "Organizational  Capabilities  and  the  Economic  History  of  the  Industrial 
Enterprise,"  Journal  of  Economic  Perspectives  6,  no.  3  (Summer  1992):  97. 

12.  Statistics  from  the  Accelerated  Export  Enhancement  System  (AXES)  of  the  Massachu- 
setts Institute  for  Social  and  Economic  Research,  MISER  Foreign  Trade  Database, 
University  of  Massachusetts  Amherst  (as  cited  in  Jennifer  Sioson,  "Massachusetts 
versus  California  Trade  to  the  Philippines,"  paper  for  the  course  Massachusetts  in  the 
Global  Economy,  December  11,  1996. 

13.  Vincent  Rocco,  "The  Massachusetts  Enviro-tech  and  Enviromental  Services  Industry  in 
Eastern  Europe,"  presentation  in  Massachusetts  in  the  Global  Economy,  November 
1996. 

14.  R.  Pearce  and  S.  Singh,  Globalizing  Research  and  Development  (London:  Macmillan, 
1992). 

15.  Vennochi,  "Locking  Up  the  Vault." 

16.  Theodore  J.  Forstmann,  "The  Paradox  of  the  Statist  Businessman,"  Cafo  Policy  Report, 
March/April  1995. 


52 


Institutional  Design     Rethinking  State 
and  Regulatory  Certificate  of 

Performance  Need  Programs 


Robert  B.  Hackey,  Ph.D. 
Peter  F.  Fuller,  MLS,  MPA 


The  success  of  state  efforts  to  control  rising  health  care  costs  depends  on  the  incen- 
tives contained  in  the  legislative  design  of  regulatory  policies  and  in  the  adminis- 
trative capacity  and  autonomy  of  state  agencies.  States  have  regulated  the  con- 
struction and  expansion  of  health  care  facilities  and  services  for  more  than  two 
decades  through  "certificate  of  need"  (CON)  programs  designed  to  limit  the  diffu- 
sion of  expensive  new  medical  technologies  and  to  avoid  the  duplication  of  health 
care  facilities.  Although  the  cost-control  record  of  state  certificate  of  need  pro- 
grams has  been  widely  criticized,  Rhode  Island's  experience  with  a  reformed  CON 
process  from  1985  to  1995  suggests  that  properly  designed  capital  expenditure 
controls  can  impose  order  on  the  rapid  diffusion  of  new  medical  technologies. 
Staunch  political  opposition  from  health  providers,  however,  raises  serious  ques- 
tions about  the  ability  of  state  officials  to  implement  such  reforms.  In  the  end, 
Rhode  Island's  experience  with  capital  expenditure  regulation  in  thel980s  and 
1990s  underscores  the  importance  of  institutional  design  and  policymaking  capac- 
ity on  regulatory  performance. 


The  1974  passage  of  the  Health  Planning  and  Resource  Development  Act,  Public 
Law  93-641,  marked  the  federal  government's  first  comprehensive  effort  to  regu- 
late the  behavior  of  health  providers.  While  earlier  federal  planning  efforts  in  the  1960s 
lacked  teeth,  PL.  93-641  required  hospitals  to  obtain  a  certificate  of  need  (CON)  from 
state  health  planning  agencies  before  undertaking  significant  capital  projects.  State 
CON  programs  required  applicants  to  demonstrate  both  the  need  for  their  projects  and 
their  consistency  with  goals  of  an  overall  health  system  plan.  Through  the  CON  pro- 
cess, state  planners  sought  to  impose  orderly  development  on  the  health  care  industry, 
expand  access  for  the  poor  and  in  geographically  underserved  regions,  reduce  duplicate 
and  underutilized  services,  and  above  all,  control  health  care  costs.  In  the  eyes  of  their 
critics,  however,  CON  programs  have  stifled  competition,  failed  to  control  costs,  and 
had  little  effect  on  access  to  health  care.1  Opposition  from  health  providers,  coupled 
with  recurring  doubts  about  the  cost-control  record  of  state  and  local  planning  agencies, 
led  to  the  termination  of  federal  support  for  health  planning  in  1986.2  The  end  of  federal 
support  for  health  planning  produced  a  range  of  responses  at  the  state  level.  Although 
some  states  replaced  federal  dollars  with  state  funds,  and  a  few  states  increased  their 

Robert  Hackey,  assistant  professor  of  political  science,  University  of  Massachusetts 
Dartmouth,  is  a  senior  research  associate  at  the  university's  Center  for  Policy  Analysis. 
Peter  Fuller,  former  program  manager,  Trauma  Care  Systems  Development  Project,  Rhode 
Island  Department  of  Health,  is  associate  director  for  operations,  Seekonk  Public  Library. 

53 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


regulatory  efforts  by  strengthening  existing  CON  statutes,  thirteen  states  abandoned 
health  planning  and  certificate  of  need  activities  altogether  after  1986.   The  prevailing 
view  of  state  capital-expenditure  controls  is  summarized  by  Randall  Bovbjerg,  who 
concludes  that  "the  evidence  that  CON  in  practice  has  accomplished  any  useful  social 
objectives  is  very  weak."3 

On  closer  inspection,  however,  certificate  of  need  programs  offer  several  lessons  for 
policymakers.  The  design  of  regulatory  institutions  structures  the  incentives  and  oppor- 
tunities for  state  officials,  industry  groups,  and  other  interested  parties  in  the  regulatory 
process.  In  most  instances,  the  creation  of  CON  programs  represented  a  departure  for 
the  states  from  their  traditional  role  of  licensing  health  providers  to  a  more  active  regu- 
latory mode.  The  development  of  state  CON  programs  required  legislatures  and  health 
bureaucracies  to  rethink  the  limits  of  public  authority  and  to  develop  new  state  capaci- 
ties. As  such,  state  efforts  to  control  health  care  costs  through  capital-expenditure  con- 
trols afford  an  opportunity  to  examine  the  impact  of  institutional  design  on  policy  de- 
velopment and  implementation. 

Beginning  in  1984,  Rhode  Island  established  an  aggregate  ceiling  on  capital  costs 
subject  to  certificate  of  need  review,  known  as  the  CONCAP,  in  an  effort  to  control 
hospital  capital  expenditures  and  rationalize  the  diffusion  of  new  medical  technologies. 
Despite  a  documented  record  of  cost  containment,  a  proposal  to  eliminate  the  state's 
capital  budget  cap  passed  the  General  Assembly  with  broad-based  support  from  the 
executive  branch,  the  hospital  industry,  and  third-party  insurers  a  decade  after  its  intro- 
duction. We  explore  the  political  evolution  and  programmatic  success  of  CON  in  Rhode 
Island  through  the  use  of  data  from  a  series  of  semistructured,  open-ended  interviews 
with  public  and  private  officials  conducted  during  the  summer  and  fall  of  1992. 

All  the  participants  in  the  state's  CON  process,  including  representatives  of  Blue 
Cross,  Ocean  State  Physicians'  Health  Plan,  the  Hospital  Association  of  Rhode  Island, 
the  state  Health  Services  Council,  and  the  state  Department  of  Health  agreed  to  be 
interviewed  for  this  project.  To  assure  their  expression  of  their  candid  opinions,  respon- 
dents were  guaranteed  anonymity.  Data  on  the  performance  of  state  CON  programs 
over  the  past  decade  and  state  and  national  data  on  the  fiscal  health  of  the  hospital  in- 
dustry are  also  included  to  place  Rhode  Island's  cost-control  record  in  both  a  regional 
and  a  national  context.  In  retrospect,  the  rise  and  demise  of  Rhode  Island's  innovative 
controls  on  capital  expenditures  for  health  care  providers  illustrate  the  constraints  fac- 
ing state  regulatory  agencies  in  an  uncertain  political  and  fiscal  environment. 


A  Framework  for  Analyzing  State  Cost-Containment  Programs 

In  recent  years,  the  rediscovery  of  institutions  within  mainstream  political  science  has 
underscored  the  significance  of  program  design  in  structuring  policy  outcomes.4  The 
design  of  the  regulatory  process  and  the  scope  of  state  enabling  legislation  shape  both 
the  politics  and  the  performance  of  state  CON  programs.  As  Lawrence  Brown  notes,  "In 
general  CON  labors  under  heavy  burdens  as  a  cost  constraining  technique,  but .  .  .  un- 
der specific  and  favorable  conditions  it  may  rise  above  its  liabilities."5  Several  condi- 
tions, in  particular,  influence  the  effectiveness  of  state  controls  on  capital  expenditures. 
First,  the  presence,  and  level,  of  threshold  requirements  for  reviewing  capital  projects, 
for  example,  exempting  projects  costing  less  than  $1  million  from  CON  review,  affects 
the  ability  of  state  regulators  to  control  capital-related  costs  by  limiting  the  number  of 
projects  subject  to  regulatory  approval.  Where  review  thresholds  are  high,  only  major 

54 


renovations  or  construction  require  state  review.  Conversely,  if  the  review  threshold  is 
set  too  low,  state  regulators  are  vulnerable  to  charges  of  micromanaging  institutions,  as 
even  minor  repairs  or  service  enhancements,  such  as  upgrading  existing  telephone  sys- 
tems, are  subject  to  regulatory  oversight.  In  1992,  review  thresholds  for  hospital  capital 
projects  in  New  England  ranged  from  $300,000  in  Vermont  to  $8.5  million  in  Massa- 
chusetts.6 While  several  states  required  that  all  new  equipment  purchases  undergo  a 
CON  review,  others  exempted  purchases  of  less  than  SI  million. 

Second,  state  CON  programs  can  also  foster  discipline  by  establishing  a  budget  con- 
straint for  decision  makers;  in  an  open-ended  system,  regulators  have  few  incentives  to 
challenge  the  prerogatives  of  providers  backed  by  supportive  community  groups.7  A 
ceiling  on  capital  costs  forces  decision  makers  to  prioritize  projects  and  approve  only 
those  that  offer  the  highest  relative  benefits.  Unlike  an  open-ended  CON  process,  the 
regulatory  process  under  a  capital  cap  becomes  a  zero-sum  game  for  providers  in  which 
the  approval  of  an  additional  proposal  automatically  reduces  the  pool  of  funds  available 
to  other  institutions.  As  David  Young  argues,  "the  failure  of  CON  programs  to  control 
costs  is  largely  because  of  lack  of  competition  for  a  limited  pool  of  resources."8 

Third,  the  success  or  failure  of  hospital  regulatory  efforts  in  controlling  systemwide 
costs  also  depends  on  the  number  of  payers  or  providers  subject  to  regulatory  review.  If 
only  acute-care  hospitals  are  required  to  participaate  in  certificate  of  need  review, 
nonhospital  providers,  such  as  freestanding  surgical  centers,  dialysis  centers,  diagnostic 
imaging  facilities,  and  similar  ventures,  may  gain  a  competitive  advantage  that  under- 
mines support  for  the  system.  Furthermore,  unless  CON  controls  apply  to  nonhospital 
providers,  states  find  it  impossible  to  control  systemwide  health  care  costs,  for  physi- 
cians and  hospitals  have  an  incentive  to  shift  care  to  unregulated  nonhospital  settings. 
Since  the  scope  of  state  regulatory  powers  is  defined  by  statute,  the  ability  of  policy- 
makers to  contain  costs  through  certificate  of  need  review  is  ultimately  a  political  ques- 
tion. 

Fourth,  the  external  environment  in  which  regulatory  programs  operate  affects  both 
their  performance  and  their  long-term  prospects  for  survival.9  The  continuation  of 
health  planning  and  certificate  of  need  programs  in  more  than  thirty-five  states  after  the 
expiration  of  federal  support  for  health  planning  in  1987  is  a  puzzle,  for  both  state  and 
federal  policymakers  have  increasingly  favored  market-oriented  solutions  rather  than 
regulatory  ones  over  the  past  decade.  State  CON  programs  must  balance  the  competing 
and  often  contradictory  expectations  of  service  consumers  with  the  needs  of  resource 
providers  who  sustain  their  activities.10  This  dependence  on  external  resources  leaves 
public  officials  at  the  mercy  of  potentially  hostile  groups  whose  long-term  interests 
conflict  with  the  state's  desire  to  control  costs.11  The  recurring  fiscal  woes  of  many  state 
governments  in  the  late  1980s  and  early  1990s  produced  an  annual  ritual  in  which  agen- 
cies scrambled  to  cope  with  threatened  (or  actual)  cuts  by  squeezing  out  inefficiencies 
or  identifying  new  revenue  sources.12  Although  the  statutory  recognition  granted  to 
government  agencies,  coupled  with  their  established  relationships  with  legislators  and 
support  from  clientele  groups  interested  in  controlling  health  care  costs,  for  example, 
third-party  insurers,  favor  organizational  survival,  CON  programs  remain  extremely 
vulnerable.13  As  regulatory  programs  that  must  wrestle  with  complex  issues,  state  CON 
controls  are  typically  low  in  salience  for  the  public  at  large.14  Furthermore,  since  capital 
expenditure  regulation  impinges  on  the  managerial  autonomy  of  health  providers,  CON 
programs  often  find  themselves  with  few  supporters  and  many  critics. 

Finally,  the  administrative  capacity  of  state  regulatory  programs  has  a  powerful 


55 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


impact  on  policy  outcomes.15  Specialized  knowledge  and  expertise  have  become 
prerequisites  for  the  development  of  effective  regulatory  policies  in  the  health  care 
industry.  The  complexities  of  the  contemporary  hospital  reimbursement  process, 
coupled  with  the  inherent  difficulty  in  objectively  evaluating  the  "need"  for  new  health 
care  facilities  and  sophisticated  new  medical  technologies,  foster  a  technocratic  deci- 
sion-making process  that  relies  on  data,  forecasts,  and  evidence  of  clinical  outcomes.16 
Many  observers,  however,  remain  openly  skeptical  about  the  ability  of  state  govern- 
ments to  compete  effectively  with  well-financed  interest  groups  and  policy  think  tanks 
in  developing  and  modeling  the  impact  of  various  policy  choices.17  Skeptics  suggest 
that  the  limited  administrative  capacity  of  American  political  institutions,  particularly 
those  at  the  subnational  level,  represents  a  formidable  obstacle  to  effective  policy  mak- 
ing. State  legislatures  and  bureaucracies  were  regarded  for  decades  as  backwaters  of 
cronyism  and  patronage  politics.  While  times  have  changed,  and  state  governments  are 
increasingly  sophisticated  in  their  ability  to  draft,  implement,  and  evaluate  policy 
choices,  the  development  of  state  administrative  capacities  remains  uneven.  In  some 
states,  policy  development  lies  in  the  hands  of  quasi-academic  think  tanks  or  working 
groups  in  which  well-educated,  highly  trained  professional  policy  analysts  apply  the 
tools  of  their  trade  to  developing  and  assessing  various  policy  options.  In  other  states, 
acquiring  professionally  staffed  agencies  remains  a  goal,  not  a  reality,  as  key  appoint- 
ments are  made  without  regard  to  policy  expertise  or  prior  experience  in  the  field. 

The  professionalism  and  expertise  of  state  agencies,  however,  depend  on  the  re- 
sources available  for  hiring  and  retaining  talented  staff.18  In  particular,  the  adequacy  of 
state  compensation  and  the  level  of  staff  support  emerge  as  critical  issues  for  building 
institutional  capacity  over  time.  Unless  they  can  compete  for  talent  with  the  private 
sector  by  paying  comparable  salaries,  regulatory  agencies  find  it  difficult,  if  not  impos- 
sible, to  hire  skilled  employees  with  professional  training  in  law,  public  policy,  and 
health  economics.  Once  hired,  professionally  trained  staff  must  have  sufficient  re- 
sources like  space  and  administrative  and  computing  support  to  compete  with  private- 
sector  lobbying  groups  and  think  tanks.  In  the  absence  of  these  essential  resources,  state 
regulatory  agencies  are  likely  to  serve  as  stepping-stones  to  the  private  sector,  which 
offers  the  most  capable  employees  a  chance  to  hone  their  skills  before  moving  up  to 
more  lucrative  opportunities  outside  state  government.19 

Widespread  departures  from  its  top  management  positions  can  leave  a  regulatory 
agency  without  a  clear  sense  of  direction,  hardly  a  situation  predisposed  to  the  develop- 
ment and  implementation  of  innovative  public  policies.  Sapolsky,  Aisenberg,  and 
Morone's  case  study  of  hospital  rate  setting  in  New  Jersey  concluded  that  "it  is  less 
difficult  to  bring  together  a  talented  group  for  designing  a  new  program  than  to  hold 
one  together  for  the  arduous  task  of  program  implementation  and  refinement.  The  re- 
ward for  even  a  brief  association  with  an  interesting  project  is  often  a  much  better  posi- 
tion elsewhere."20  When  a  state's  resources  are  overwhelmed  by  the  private  sector,  the 
stage  is  set  for  interest  groups  to  dominate  the  regulatory  process.  Leadership  stability 
is  also  vital  for  the  ongoing  success  of  state  regulation.  Effective  leaders  can  energize 
an  organization  by  clearly  defining  a  unifying  sense  of  purpose  and  mission  and  by 
mobilizing  support  for  their  goals  among  significant  external  constituencies.21  Leader- 
ship can  take  many  forms,  from  charismatic  public  salesmanship  to  behind-the-scenes 
efforts  at  coalition  building.  In  either  case,  however,  frequent  changes  in  leadership  can 
create  uncertainty  among  client  groups  concerning  the  agency's  direction  and  policy 
priorities.  Under  such  circumstances,  legislative  leaders  and  interest  group  representa- 

56 


tives  are  reluctant  to  make  long-term  commitments  to  support  the  agency's  agenda,  for 
new  leaders  or  an  interim  administration  may  pursue  a  quite  different  agenda.22  As  a 
result,  short-term  administrators  face  a  credibility  gap  —  if  others  do  not  expect  them  to 
remain  in  their  positions  long  enough  to  carry  out  their  stated  goals,  they  find  it  diffi- 
cult, if  not  impossible,  to  back  new  regulatory  initiatives. 

The  specialization  of  state  policymaking  expertise  includes  both  the  degree  of  insti- 
tutionalization in  a  state  legislature  and  the  division  of  labor  among  distinct  working 
groups  or  units  in  state  government.  State  legislatures  vary  considerably  in  their  degree 
of  institutionalization.  While  legislative  service  is  a  full-time  job  with  possibilities  for 
career  advancement  in  some  states,  in  other  states  legislators  serve  only  part  time  for 
little  pay  and  few  perks.  In  addition,  while  some  state  legislatures  have  developed 
highly  differentiated  committee  systems  that  foster  specialization  among  their  mem- 
bers, others  have  not.23  The  extent  of  staff  support  for  both  committees  and  individual 
members  also  influences  the  ability  of  legislators  to  serve  as  proactive  players  in  policy 
development.24  Part-time  legislatures  with  limited  staff  support  and  few  specialized 
committees  find  it  more  difficult  to  develop  and  oversee  specialized  regulatory  pro- 
grams than  full-time  legislatures  with  narrowly  defined  committee  jurisdictions  and  a 
cadre  of  personal  and  committee  staff. 


The  Political  Evolution  of  Certificate  of  Need  in  Rhode  Island 

Although  many  groups  have  supported  health  facilities  planning  in  Rhode  Island  over 
the  past  three  decades,  each  had  its  own  vision  of  how  the  process  should  work.  As  a 
small  state  with  a  population  of  just  over  one  million  persons,  Rhode  Island  is  home  to 
eleven  acute-care  hospitals,  four  of  which  are  located  in  the  capital  city  of  Providence. 
The  Rhode  Island  Department  of  Employment  Training  and  Security  estimates  that  one 
of  every  nine  workers  in  the  state  is  employed  in  the  health  care  industry.  Rhode 
Island's  hospitals  are  a  major  force  in  the  state's  economy.  Data  provided  by  the  Hospi- 
tal Association  of  Rhode  Island  (HARI)  indicated  that  the  state's  hospitals  employed 
more  than  23,000  people  in  1994;  Rhode  Island  Hospital  (a  founding  member  of  the 
Lifespan  hospital  network)  is  the  state's  largest  private  employer.  Over  the  past  two 
decades,  the  hospital  industry  has  emerged  as  one  of  the  state's  most  influential  lob- 
bying groups  whose  paid  lobbyists  develop  and  track  legislation  affecting  its  member- 
ship, testify  at  hearings,  and  coordinate  grassroots  lobbying  campaigns  with  the 
association's  member  hospitals.  During  the  1980s,  hospitals  grew  displeased  with  the 
CON  process  and  chafed  under  the  state's  strict  capital  expenditure  controls.  HARI's 
political  advantages  were  compounded  by  the  fact  that  until  1994  the  150  members  of 
Rhode  Island's  legislature  served  only  part  time  and  received  only  $5.00  a  day  for  their 
efforts;  with  little  professional  staff  support  available  to  individual  members  and  com- 
mittees, legislators  are  forced  to  rely  heavily  on  testimony  and  information  provided  by 
interested  parties  in  formulating  legislation.25 

During  the  past  decade,  Rhode  Island  hospitals,  like  their  counterparts  in  other 
states,  made  a  difficult  adjustment  from  a  system  of  retrospective,  cost-based  reim- 
bursement to  one  in  which  providers  are  paid  prospectively  or  at  a  steep  discount  from 
quoted  charges.  By  the  end  of  the  1980s,  however,  Rhode  Island  hospitals  were  in  a 
precarious  fiscal  position.  For  example,  they  were  found  to  have  relatively  low  levels  of 
financial  liquidity  when  they  were  compared  with  similar  U.S.  institutions.26  They 
ranked  forty-sixth  in  the  nation  in  days  of  cash  on  hand  and  forty-seventh  in  their 


57 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


overall  operating  margin.27  Capital  spending  particularly  fell  far  behind  both  national 
and  regional  averages,  although  Rhode  Island's  teaching  hospitals  had  the  eighth  high- 
est number  of  medical  residents  per  thousand  members  of  the  population  in  the  United 
States  in  the  late  1980s.28 

Prior  to  the  mid-1980s,  Rhode  Island's  hospital  industry  had  not  witnessed  the  in- 
tense competition  that  accompanied  the  expansion  of  for-profit  hospital  chains,  man- 
aged care,  and  alternative  delivery  systems.  Until  that  time,  the  private  health  insurance 
market  was  dominated  by  Blue  Cross  and  Blue  Shield  of  Rhode  Island,  which  insured 
more  than  85  percent  of  the  population  not  covered  by  government-sponsored  programs 
like  Medicare  and  Medicaid  despite  modest  inroads  by  two  fledgling  HMOs.29  Blue 
Cross,  in  turn,  was  a  key  player  in  the  state's  prospective  rate-setting  program,  which 
determined  both  individual  hospital  budgets  and  an  overall  ceiling  on  hospital  expendi- 
tures each  year.  No  preferred  provider  organizations  operated  in  the  state  during  the 
1970s  and  1980s.  While  four  ambulatory  surgical  centers  were  licensed  during  the 
1980s,  two  were  limited  to  providing  abortion  services  and  gynecological  surgery.  Fur- 
thermore, no  for-profit  hospitals  or  national  hospital  chains  currently  operate  hospitals 
in  Rhode  Island,  although  both  Columbia/HCA  and  Tenet  proposed  to  acquire  nonprofit 
institutions  in  1996  and  1997.  While  Columbia/HCA's  controversial  bid  to  purchase 
Roger  Williams  Medical  Center  failed,  Tenet's  proposed  merger  with  Landmark  Medi- 
cal Center  still  awaits  regulatory  approval. 

Rhode  Island  health  planning  has  a  long  history  dating  back  to  the  mid-1960s;  pri- 
vate planning  efforts  predated  the  passage  of  federal  and  state  certificate  of  need  legis- 
lation. In  general,  hospitals  have  favored  private  planning  initiatives  that  do  not  threaten 
their  autonomy  and  opposed  planning  functions  lodged  within  the  Department  of  Health 
as  unnecessary  intrusions  on  medical  practice.  In  1968,  Rhode  Island  became  the  sec- 
ond state  in  the  nation  to  regulate  hospital  capital  projects.  The  legislature's  decision  to 
regulate  capital  construction  won  the  endorsement  of  the  hospital  industry  and  a  special 
legislative  commission  appointed  to  study  the  rapid  increase  in  hospital  charges  during 
the  1960s.  At  the  time,  hospitals  viewed  CON  as  a  less  onerous  alternative  to  state  rate 
setting  despite  the  inherent  risks  involved  in  ceding  regulatory  authority  to  the  state. 
Hospitals  also  favored  CON  as  a  means  to  limit  competition  in  the  state's  health  care 
system,  for  "providers  have  seen  some  merit  in  entry  barriers  as  a  means  of  turf  protec- 
tion and  therefore  have  generally  given  CON  at  least  their  tacit  support."30  Blue  Cross 
and  Blue  Shield  of  Rhode  Island,  for  its  part,  enthusiastically  supported  facilities  plan- 
ning as  a  means  to  control  its  costs  in  the  past  two  decades.  As  the  state's  dominant 
third-party  health  insurer,  Blue  Cross  continued  to  hold  more  than  70  percent  of  the 
nongovernment  health  insurance  market  in  the  early  1990s  despite  recent  inroads  by  the 
state's  two  largest  health  maintenance  organizations,  United  Health  Care  (formerly 
Ocean  State  Physicians'  Health  Plan)  and  Harvard  Community  Health  Plan  of  New 
England,  formerly  the  Rhode  Island  Group  Health  Association.  Unlike  neighboring 
states  like  Massachusetts,  however,  few  business  groups  and  other  third-party  payers 
played  a  major  role  in  health  care  policy  debates  during  the  1980s  and  1990s.31 

In  the  early  1970s,  Rhode  Island's  fledgling  health  planning  programs  received  a 
significant  boost  as  a  result  of  the  federal  government's  decision  to  embrace  health 
planning  and  certificate  of  need  as  its  principal  cost-control  strategy.  Under  an  amend- 
ment sponsored  by  Senator  Claiborne  Pell,  the  state  was  exempt  from  requirements 
mandating  local  citizen  planning  boards  to  assess  the  need  for  proposed  projects  in  the 
context  of  statewide  health  plans.  As  a  result,  funds  that  were  channeled  to  local  health 


58 


systems  agencies  in  other  states  were  allocated  to  the  Rhode  Island  Department  of 
Health  (DOH),  generating  a  windfall  to  support  its  nascent  planning  activities.  The 
department's  early  initiatives  reflected  a  strong  commitment  to  rational  planning  but 
showed  little  sensitivity  to  the  political  ramifications  of  its  policy  prescriptions.  This 
political  naivete  was  reflected  in  the  development  of  the  state's  first  comprehensive 
health  plan,  which  proposed  a  radical  restructuring  of  health  care  delivery.  The  draft 
health  plan  that  was  released  to  the  public  in  1980  immediately  agitated  providers, 
which  drummed  up  support  in  their  local  communities  to  meet  the  perceived  threat.  The 
plan  proposed,  for  example,  to  eliminate  "excess  capacity"  in  the  state's  hospital  bed 
supply  and  to  restrict  the  number  of  surgeons  who  could  practice  in  the  state.32  Employ- 
ees and  patients  of  hospitals  targeted  for  closure  or  service  reductions  jammed  public 
hearings  across  the  state  to  plead  their  case.33 

The  public  forums  about  the  draft  health  plan  were  raucous  affairs  that  drew  hun- 
dreds of  local  residents;  at  one  meeting  in  southern  Rhode  Island,  local  police  were 
called  to  escort  the  planners  out  of  town  after  a  tumultuous  hearing  during  which  angry 
residents  charged  that  the  state's  proposal  to  close  "surplus"  hospitals  would  result  in 
layoffs  for  hundreds  of  local  residents.  As  one  DOH  senior  planner  recalled,  "In  the 
early  years  we  didn't  know  what  we  were  doing;  we  didn't  look  at  the  political  obsta- 
cles, just  our  rational  models."  After  a  dose  of  political  reality,  subsequent  plans  of  the 
department  backed  away  from  some  of  its  more  controversial  proposals.  Rather  than 
decertifying  beds,  the  DOH  elected  to  promote  competition  among  health  providers  to 
transform  the  state's  hospital  industry  during  the  1980s.  In  the  decade  after  the  publica- 
tion of  the  state's  first  draft  health  plan,  a  combination  of  mergers,  closures,  and  service 
conversions  reduced  the  number  of  licensed  Rhode  Island  hospital  beds  by  nearly  13 
percent,  from  3,461  in  1980  to  3,015  in  1993.34 


Imposing  Competition  from  Above 


By  the  early  1980s,  a  growing  body  of  evidence  suggested  that  "CON  laws  and  health 
planning  [had]  made  little  difference  in  costs,  quality,  or  access  to  health  care."35  Al- 
though the  state's  CON  process  provided  for  a  case  by  case  review  of  proposed  capital 
projects  on  the  basis  of  need,  in  the  absence  of  limitations  on  the  number  of  new  capital 
projects,  CON  controls  had  a  limited  impact  on  systemwide  costs.  The  limitations  of 
Rhode  Island's  existing  CON  legislation  were  readily  apparent  during  the  debate  over 
an  application  from  Women  &  Infants'  Hospital  in  Providence  to  replace  its  aging  facil- 
ity in  the  early  1980s.  As  one  senior  hospital  administrator  recalled,  "No  one  had  ever 
envisioned  the  replacement  of  a  hospital,  but  dropping  out  of  the  sky  was  a  $50  million 
project."  In  response,  officials  at  the  Department  of  Health  called  for  efforts  to 
strengthen  the  CON  process  by  imposing  a  statewide  capital  budget  cap  on  all  new 
construction  projects.36  The  department's  proposal  to  strengthen  the  CON  process  won 
the  endorsement  of  a  special  legislative  commission,  chaired  by  state  representative 
Anthony  Carceri,  to  study  health  care  capital  expenditures.  In  its  1982  report  to  the 
General  Assembly,  the  commission  argued  that  the  "health  care  system,  like  individu- 
als, must  be  held  more  closely  to  the  discipline  of  a  budget."  In  1984,  both  chambers 
endorsed  a  statewide  capital  expenditure  limit  with  unanimous  support  for  the  Health 
Care  System  Affordability  Act  (84-H-7103)  despite  opposition  from  HARI. 

Two  factors  played  a  significant  role  in  the  legislature's  decision  to  expand  the  scope 
of  certificate  of  need  in  Rhode  Island.  The  DOH  enjoyed  unusual  influence  and  prestige 


59 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


within  the  state  bureaucracy  as  an  agency  that  provided  unbiased  and  sophisticated 
analyses.  Federal  planning  funds,  which  exceeded  $1  million  per  year  in  the  late  1970s 
and  early  1980s,  enabled  the  DOH  to  hire  a  cadre  of  planners  and  policy  analysts  to 
develop  a  number  of  innovative  databases  on  health  care  costs,  utilization,  and  out- 
comes. In  addition,  the  department  enjoyed  strong  support  during  the  1980s  from  sev- 
eral prominent  legislators  and  from  the  executive  branch,  which  added  legitimacy  to  its 
policy  recommendations.  As  one  senior  DOH  official  noted,  these  relationships  "helped 
a  great  deal  in  terms  of  support  for  our  budgets  and  proposed  legislation." 

The  Health  Care  System  Affordability  Act  established  a  statewide  ceiling  on  hospital 
capital  expenditure  projects.  Under  the  CONCAP,  each  certificate  of  need  application 
approved  by  the  state's  Health  Services  Council  (HSC)  reduced  the  amount  available 
for  other  projects;  the  cost  of  interest  and  depreciation  for  all  projects  under  review  was 
not  allowed  to  exceed  the  CONCAP  amount  negotiated  annually  by  the  hospital  associ- 
ation, Blue  Cross,  and  the  state  Medicaid  program.  After  1984,  all  CON  applications 
subject  to  CONCAP  review  were  evaluated  in  a  single  batch  each  year  to  foster  a 
comparison  of  each  proposal.  In  addition  to  establishing  a  ceiling  on  total  capital  ex- 
penditures in  1984,  the  enabling  legislation  required  the  HSC  to  review  proposals  for 
(1)  new  facilities  in  excess  of  $600,000,  (2)  increases  of  ten  or  more  acute-care  beds  or 
10  percent  of  existing  capacity,  (3)  the  addition  of  services  that  increase  operating  ex- 
penses by  $250,000  or  more,  and  (4)  the  acquisition  of  health  care  equipment  requiring 
an  expenditure  of  more  than  $400,000.37  Finally,  the  1984  legislation  directed  the  state's 
HSC  to  first  review  applications  on  the  basis  of  need  and  then  rank  order  each  on  the 
basis  of  its  relative  merit.  After  this  priority  ranking  was  completed,  each  project  would 
be  approved  in  order  until  the  annual  CONCAP  budget  was  exhausted.  The  Health  Ser- 
vices Council,  however,  was  not  required  to  fully  deplete  the  CONCAP  negotiated  by 
the  participants  in  the  state's  prospective  reimbursement  program  —  Blue  Cross,  the 
state's  hospital  association,  and  Medicaid.  Each  certificate  of  need  approval  reduced  the 
amount  available  for  other  projects,  thus  creating  a  zero-sum  game  among  applicants. 
The  actual  dollar  limit  of  the  CONCAP  reflects  the  estimated  cost  of  the  annual  capital- 
related  operating  expenditures,  interest,  depreciation,  and  leasehold  expenses  negotiated 
during  the  state's  prospective  rate-setting  process. 

Rhode  Island's  amended  CON  process  was  designed  to  determine  both  the  public 
need  and  the  affordability  for  each  proposal.  The  initial  review  of  a  project  is  usually 
conducted  by  one  of  the  Office  of  Health  System  Development's  two  project  review 
committees,  which  make  written  recommendations  to  the  full  Health  Services  Council. 
The  HSC  has  the  option  of  approving,  rejecting,  or  modifying  a  proposal.  The  HSC 
recommendation  is  then  forwarded  to  the  director  of  HSC  for  a  final  determination. 
Although  the  director  is  free  to  accept  or  reject  the  recommendation,  few  of  the 
council's  decisions  have  been  overturned. 

Two  other  types  of  review  are  designed  to  make  the  CON  process  more  flexible  and 
responsive  to  both  routine  and  unusual  needs.  Applicants  may  apply  for  expeditious 
review  of  projects  that  are  designed  to  meet  emergencies  and  other  urgent  public  health 
needs.  The  CON  statute  also  provides  for  an  accelerated  review  of  projects  that  present 
a  prima  facie  demonstration  of  need  and  affordability,  for  example,  in  the  case  of 
projects  proposing  a  one-for-one  replacement  of  equipment.  Projects  approved  under  an 
accelerated  review  are  not  subject  to  the  CONCAP  priority  listing  procedure,  and  they 
are  allowed  to  draw  first  from  the  amount  budgeted  by  CONCAP.  Both  forms  of  priority 
review  have  been  criticized  by  providers  for  offering  an  unfair  advantage  to  some  appli- 

60 


cants,  for  institutions  able  to  demonstrate  that  their  projects  fit  the  criteria  for  either 
expeditious  or  accelerated  consideration  leapfrog  over  other  projects  on  the  HSC's  pri- 
ority ranking  scale. 


The  Success  of  CON  in  Rhode  Island 


Current  perceptions  of  CON's  failure  as  a  cost-control  strategy  are  largely  based  on 
assessments  of  program  performance  during  the  1970s.  Previous  efforts  to  measure 
CON  program  performance  have  been  criticized  for  their  inability  to  show  that  the 
imposition  of  capital  controls  made  a  difference  in  either  a  state's  level  of  capital  ex- 
penditures or  the  fiscal  condition  of  its  hospitals.38  Most  studies  confined  their  discus- 
sion to  the  percentage  of  projects  that  were  approved,  denied,  modified,  or  withdrawn.39 
Rhode  Island's  CON  process  became  more  stringent  after  the  adoption  of  the  CONCAP; 
the  overall  approval  rate  for  CON  applications  fell  from  84  percent  in  the  five  years 
preceding  1984  to  less  than  70  percent  from  1985  to  1990.40  Between  1990  and  1992, 
the  state  Health  Services  Council  approved  twenty  of  the  twenty-fix  CON  applications 
it  received  from  hospitals,  but  denied  petitions  to  construct  a  bone-marrow  transplant 
facility  and  additional  cardiac  catheterization  laboratories.  Savings  from  hospital 
projects  that  were  either  modified,  denied,  or  withdrawn  exceeded  $68  million  in  capi- 
tal costs  and  $25  million  in  annual  operating  costs  from  1971  to  1986.41 

While  Rhode  Island  compares  favorably  with  other  states  in  this  regard  (see  Table  1), 
measurements  of  process  say  little  about  a  program's  effectiveness.  Other  indicators, 
including  equity  financing  ratios,  occupancy  rates,  and  capital-expense  ratios,  offer 
better  measures  of  the  impact  of  CON  on  hospitals'  capital-related  operating  costs. 
Projects  approved  by  the  Health  Services  Council  from  1984  to  1994  reduced  hospitals' 
interest  expenses  by  increasing  institutions'  equity  participation,  or  "down  payment,"  on 
new  projects  to  nearly  40  percent  of  total  approved  capital  expenditures.42  A  higher 
percentage  of  equity  funding,  in  turn,  constrains  costs  by  reducing  the  expenses  associ- 
ated with  servicing  capital  debts. 

Various  indicators  of  hospitals'  fiscal  health  can  be  used  to  gauge  the  impact  of 
Rhode  Island  capital-expenditure  controls,  for  CON  programs  can  affect  hospital  invest- 
ment patterns  in  several  ways.  First,  CON  review  may  deny  institutions'  applications  to 

Table  1 

CON  Application  Review  Outcomes,  Selected  States 


Withdrawn, 

Denied,  or 

State  (years) 

Approved  (%) 

Modified  (%) 

N 

Maine  (1982-1992) 

295  (81.0) 

69  (19.0) 

364 

New  Hampshire  (1982-1991) 

69  (77.5) 

20  (22.5) 

89 

Rhode  Island  (1 979-1 983)* 

47  (83.9) 

9  (16.1) 

56 

Rhode  Island  (1984-1992) 

47  (72.3) 

18  (27.7) 

65 

Vermont  (1984-1993) 

117  (88.6) 

15  (11.4) 

132 

Sources:  Maine  Department  of  Human  Services;  New  Hampshire  Health  Services; 
Rhode  Island  Office  of  Health  Systems  Development;  Rhode  Island  Department  of 
Health;  and  Vermont  Health  Care  Authority. 


61 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


build  new  facilities,  add  equipment,  or  expand  services,  resulting  in  a  savings  of  both 
capital  costs  and  ongoing  operating  costs  associated  with  the  proposed  project.  Second, 
CON  approval  may  be  conditional,  in  that  hospitals  may  be  required  to  modify  their 
initial  proposal  by  lowering  costs,  meeting  well-defined  national  standards,  guarantee- 
ing access  to  underserved  populations  and  the  uninsured,  and  fulfilling  other  goals  de- 
fined by  the  review  panel.  Furthermore,  "the  very  existence  of  certificate  of  need  acts  as 
a  deterrent  to  frivolous  or  obviously  misdirected  projects.  Few  institutions  are  likely  to 
expend  the  time,  energy,  and  money  to  traverse  the  complex  certificate  of  need  process 
for  a  project  which  cannot  withstand  the  test  of  public  scrutiny."43 

A  comparison  of  various  indicators  of  capital-related  costs  for  New  England  hospi- 
tals is  shown  in  Table  2.  Capital-related  costs  for  Rhode  Island's  eleven  acute-care  hos- 
pitals fell  well  below  national  and  regional  averages  in  the  decade  following  the 
enactment  of  the  CONCAP.  The  capital-expense  ratio  describes  the  cost  of  interest  and 
depreciation  relative  to  an  institution's  total  operating  expenses,  since  higher  values  for 
the  ratio  indicate  a  higher  level  of  indebtedness  and  lower  values  are  indicative  of  both 
fiscal  health  and  fewer  long-term  obligations.  The  median  capital  expense  ratio  for  state 
hospitals  (0.05)  was  the  lowest  in  the  region  and  the  second  lowest  in  the  United  States 
in  1992,  indicating  that  the  state's  hospitals  had  an  unusually  low  level  of  debt  relative 
to  their  counterparts  in  other  states.44  The  second  column  in  Table  2  presents  the  median 
values  of  hospitals'  debt- service-coverage  ratio,  which  measures  institutions'  ability  to 
repay  the  costs  of  both  interest  charges  and  principal  payments.  Higher  values  indicate 
a  greater  ability  to  meet  their  financing  commitments;  the  debt-service  ratio  is  also  the 
single  most  important  indicator  of  debt  capacity  used  by  bond-  rating  agencies.45  While 
the  median  debt-service-coverage  ratio  for  Rhode  Island  hospitals  exceeded  the  national 
median,  the  state  ranked  fourth  among  its  New  England  neighbors.  The  state's  relatively 
poor  performance  on  this  indicator,  however,  is  not  owing  to  high  levels  of  capital 
investment  but  to  the  fact  that  Rhode  Island  hospitals  have  a  low  net  income  relative  to 
institutions  in  other  states  as  a  result  of  the  high  proportion  of  Medicare  and  Medicaid 
patients  served  by  the  state's  nonprofit  institutions. 

The  utilization  rate  of  health  care  facilities  also  provides  insight  into  the  effective- 
ness of  Rhode  Island's  strengthened  capital-expenditure  review  process.  Since  CON 
programs  subject  proposed  capital  investments  and  service  changes  to  a  comprehensive 

Table  2 

Hospital  Capital  Expenditures  in  New  England,  1992 

Equity 

Financing 

Ratio 

0.720 
0.503 
0.316 
0.492 
0.507 
0.589 

0.535 

Source:  W.  Cleverly,  1993  Almanac  of  Hospital  Financial  and  Operating  Indicators 
(Columbus,  Ohio:  Center  for  Healthcare  Industry  Performance  Studies,  1993). 

62 


Capital 

Debt 

Expense 

Service 

State 

Ratio 

Coverage 

Connecticut 

0.057 

5.57 

Maine 

0.071 

2.96 

Massachusetts 

0.084 

2.54 

New  Hampshire 

0.088 

4.40 

Rhode  Island 

0.050 

3.23 

Vermont 

0.074 

4.36 

U.S.  Median 

0.079 

3.16 

review  process,  states  with  effective  CON  programs  would  be  expected  to  have,  on 
average,  a  more  efficient  use  of  existing  facilities.  Despite  growing  competition  in 
Rhode  Island's  health  insurance  marketplace  and  a  national  trend  toward  lower  utiliza- 
tion of  inpatient  services,  the  median  occupancy  rate  for  Rhode  Island's  acute-care 
hospitals  exceeded  both  the  regional  and  national  medians.  The  state's  median  occu- 
pancy rate  of  68.9  percent  was  the  fifth  highest  in  the  nation  in  1992.  The  high  utiliza- 
tion of  existing  health  care  facilities  reflects  the  fact  that  Rhode  Island  did  not  experi- 
ence a  surge  in  the  construction  of  ambulatory  surgical  centers,  freestanding  imaging 
centers,  and  new  hospital  facilities  following  the  termination  of  federal  planning  pro- 
grams in  1987. 

In  addition,  because  projects  must  pass  more  stringent  tests  before  institutions  can 
break  ground  or  add  new  services,  hospitals  in  states  with  aggressive  CON  programs 
should  be  older  than  their  counterparts  in  other  states.  Again,  evidence  indicates  that 
CON  controls  in  Rhode  Island  have  had  a  demonstrable  effect.  The  median  age  of  the 
state's  acute-care  hospitals,  9.51  years,  is  considerably  higher  than  the  national  median 
and  the  median  of  all  other  states  in  the  region  except  Connecticut.  In  1992,  the  average 
age  of  Rhode  Island's  hospitals'  fixed  assets  was  the  third  oldest  in  the  nation.46 

The  effectiveness  of  Rhode  Island's  certificate  of  need  process  can  be  traced  to  a 
steady  expansion  of  the  scope  of  projects  subject  to  regulatory  review.  In  1978  the  law 
was  amended  to  include  most  other  health  providers,  including  freestanding  ambulatory 
and  surgical  centers.  Debates  over  the  construction  of  the  latter  particularly  proved  to 
be  highly  controversial  in  recent  years,  as  the  director  has  rejected  proposals  to  build 
additional  for-profit  centers  in  the  state  because  of  concerns  about  an  existing  overca- 
pacity of  outpatient  surgical  facilities  and  the  potential  impact  of  "cream  skimming"  by 
the  centers  on  the  financial  stability  of  existing  institutions. 


Change  and  Continuity  in  Rhode  Island's  CON  Program 

Rhode  Island's  success  in  controlling  capital  outlays  would  be  expected  to  strengthen 
the  opposition  of  providers  to  the  capital-review  process  and  increase  its  vulnerability  in 
an  uncertain  fiscal  climate.  Although  hospitals  initially  supported  CON  as  a  less  oner- 
ous alternative  to  rate-setting  controls,  by  the  mid-1980s  the  process  significantly  cir- 
cumscribed institutions'  managerial  autonomy.  Hospitals  strongly  objected  to  the 
CONCAP  process  on  the  grounds  that  it  unnecessarily  limited  their  freedom  to  react  to 
a  changing  market  for  health  services.  CONCAP  survived  for  nearly  a  decade  without 
major  revisions  through  strong  support  from  both  the  legislature  and  the  senior  manage- 
ment of  the  Department  of  Health.  From  1987  to  1992,  the  General  Assembly  made 
several  largely  technical  changes  in  the  CON  law.  Health  care  providers  gained  an  im- 
portant concession  in  1991  when  the  length  of  the  review  process  was  capped  at  120 
days  (91-H-6712).  The  legislature  also  limited  the  scope  of  the  CON  program  by  raising 
the  financial  thresholds  for  projects  subject  to  review  (91-H-6652)  and  by  exempting 
certain  nursing  and  home  health  care  providers  from  the  process.  In  1993,  the  legisla- 
ture also  exempted  new  state  health  care  facilities  from  CON  review  (93-S-499).  The 
legislature,  however,  refused  to  approve  wholesale  exemptions  for  cancer  treatment 
facilities  (91-S-1073)  and  for  repeal  of  fees  for  CON  reviews  for  equipment  (91-H- 
5599). 


63 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


One  critical  challenge  facing  organizations  lies  in  managing  the  transition  from  pro- 
gram start-up  to  successful  implementation.47  State  government  bureaucracies  are  par- 
ticularly vulnerable  to  problems  of  program  implementation,  because  budget  cuts,  inter- 
est group  opposition,  and  lucrative  opportunities  in  the  private  sector  often  lead  to  a 
revolving  door  through  which  employees  use  state  employment  as  a  training  ground  for 
better-paying  private- sector  jobs.  Innovative  state  programs  are  often  victims  of  their 
own  success,  for  "the  presentation  of  new  ideas  often  brings  the  designers  widespread 
attention  and  career  opportunities  to  serve  in  a  larger  jurisdiction  .  .  .  The  reward  for 
creativity  draws  talent  away  from  state  government  at  the  point  when  ideas  are  being 
implemented  and  refined."48  The  Department  of  Health's  tendency  to  promote  from 
within  was  a  critical  element  in  preserving  its  commitment  to  CON,  for  it  promoted  the 
development  of  an  institutional  memory  rooted  in  health  planning.  During  the  1980s 
and  1990s,  the  DOH  managed  to  attract  and  retain  talented  administrators  and  analysts 
to  oversee  and  refine  the  CON  process.  Senior  department  officials  drew  upon  the  cadre 
of  health  planners  that  developed  the  state's  health  plans  in  the  1970s  to  assume  leader- 
ship roles.  By  the  early  1990s,  several  officials  in  the  senior  management  team,  includ- 
ing the  deputy  director,  the  associate  director  for  health  services  regulation,  whose 
office  oversees  the  CON  program,  and  the  chief  of  the  Office  of  Health  Systems  Devel- 
opment had  fifteen  or  more  years'  experience  with  health  planning  and  facilities  regula- 
tion. 

Political  support  for  CON,  however,  eroded  in  the  early  1990s.  As  Rhode  Island's 
economy  stumbled  into  a  recession,  state  agencies  were  forced  to  cope  with  successive 
rounds  of  budget  cuts,  personnel  layoffs,  and  furloughs.49  The  Hospital  Association  of 
Rhode  Island,  for  its  part,  had  sought  to  modify  the  CONCAP  law  since  its  passage, 
arguing  that  the  statewide  expenditure  ceiling  "could  constrain  the  retooling  process 
necessary  for  hospitals  to  adjust  to  the  new  [competitive]  environment."  HARI's  1988 
Environmental  Assessment  for  the  Hospitals  of  Rhode  Island  noted  "growing  disillu- 
sionment with  many  aspects  of  certificate  of  need  and  particularly  with  the  CONCAP 
program"  among  its  members.50 

The  ongoing  opposition  of  the  health  care  industry  was  amplified  by  a  growing  anti- 
regulatory  sentiment  in  the  state's  business  community.  Business  leaders  had  been  ex- 
pressing a  concern  over  the  antibusiness  reputation  of  the  state,  which,  it  was  widely 
believed,  adversely  affected  the  state's  ability  to  attract  new  industry  and  investment. 
The  Rhode  Island  Public  Expenditure  Council,  a  watchdog  group  supported  by  several 
of  the  state's  largest  employers,  repeatedly  cited  unwarranted  government  regulation  as 
detrimental  to  the  state  economy.  In  addition,  critics  charged  that  the  CON  process  was 
increasingly  driven  by  political  rather  than  policy  considerations.51  In  1992  and  1993, 
local  hospitals  viewed  proposals  to  build  freestanding  surgical  centers  in  three  cities  as 
a  direct  threat  to  their  survival.  Several  hospital  mergers  and  compacts  contributed  to  a 
climate  of  uncertainty  in  the  hospital  industry  and  brought  the  Health  Services  Council 
into  the  public  limelight. 

The  HSC  had  always  been  a  politically  sensitive  body.  Fifteen  of  its  twenty-two 
members  are  appointed  by  either  the  governor  or  the  leaders  of  the  General  Assembly. 
Although  members  are  not  appointed  for  set  terms  and  can  be  replaced  any  time,  the 
council  was  seldom  subject  to  overt  political  pressure.  One  hospital  vice  president  com- 
mented in  1992  that  "the  process  was  always  political,  but  it  was  discrete.  Now  it  seems 
that  anything  goes."  In  1993,  a  total  of  nine  HSC  members  —  41  percent  of  its  total 
membership  —  were  replaced.  The  timing  of  the  appointments  also  raised  questions.  In 

64 


June  1993,  two  members  were  abruptly  replaced  amid  a  heated  discussion  over  a  pro- 
posal to  build  a  rehabilitation  hospital  in  Warwick.  Less  than  six  months  later,  three 
members  were  replaced  during  an  acrimonious  debate  over  a  proposed  outpatient  surgi- 
cal center  in  the  town  of  Johnston.  The  HSC  itself  may  have  added  to  the  perception  of 
undue  political  influence  by  issuing  decisions  based  on  what  appeared  to  be  incompat- 
ible objectives.  In  approving  one  proposed  surgical  center  in  Providence,  the  HSC 
sought  to  promote  consumer  choice  and  competition.  Several  month  later,  the  council 
rejected  a  proposed  surgical  center  in  Johnston,  citing  concerns  about  the  effects  of 
competition  on  St.  Joseph  Hospital.  This  struggle  was  played  out  before  an  increasingly 
cynical  public  that  had  recently  witnessed  several  major  scandals  involving  highly 
placed  officials,  including  the  former  governor,  the  chief  justice,  and  the  chief  court 
administrator. 

In  1994  Governor  Bruce  Sundlun  asked  the  director  of  DOH  to  prepare  legislation  to 
modify  the  CON  process.  According  to  Peter  Dennehy,  the  governor's  principal  health 
policy  adviser,  the  Sundlun  administration  was  increasingly  concerned  about  the  state's 
slow  rate  of  economic  growth.  In  this  climate,  the  governor  viewed  CON  as  a  burden 
for  one  of  the  few  growth  industries  in  the  state.  After  a  series  of  meetings  between  the 
DOH  staff  and  the  governor's  office,  the  Sundlun  administration  drafted  legislation  that 
significantly  revised  the  CON  process  by  eliminating  the  CONCAP.  The  bill,  94-S- 
2841,  was  introduced  as  part  of  the  governor's  legislative  package  and  passed  the  Sen- 
ate by  a  45  to  0  margin  and  the  House  by  75  to  0  in  June,  ending  Rhode  Island's  experi- 
ment with  global  budgeting  for  hospital  capital  expenditures  ten  years  after  it  began. 
Although  the  types  of  projects  subject  to  review  by  the  Health  Services  Council  remains 
essentially  unchanged,  the  number  of  projects  eligible  for  approval  under  the  revised 
statute  is  unlimited.  In  the  words  of  a  former  DOH  official,  the  General  Assembly's 
action,  at  the  governor's  request,  had  "pulled  the  teeth  of  the  CON  program." 


The  rise  and  demise  of  Rhode  Island's  reformed  CON  process  offers  several  useful 
lessons  for  other  states.  First  and  perhaps  foremost,  Rhode  Island's  CON  program  dem- 
onstrates the  effectiveness,  if  not  the  necessity,  of  a  budget  cap  for  controlling  health 
care  providers'  capital  expenditures.  In  particular,  opportunities  to  "outmaneuver"  the 
Rhode  Island's  CON  process  were  sharply  curtailed  after  the  introduction  of  the 
CONCAP  in  1984.  A  ceiling  on  capital  costs  forces  decision  makers  to  prioritize  pro- 
grams and  choose  the  most  cost-effective  projects.  Since  the  merits  of  each  application 
are  judged  relative  to  others,  capital  caps  place  much  greater  emphasis  on  the  opportu- 
nity costs  of  forgone  projects.  Unlike  an  open-ended  CON  process  in  which  an  unlimit- 
ed number  of  projects  could  be  approved  if  they  demonstrated  need,  the  CONCAP  em- 
phasis on  statewide  affordability  created  a  zero-sum  game  for  providers.  Under  these 
circumstances,  the  approval  of  an  additional  proposal  automatically  reduced  the  funds 
available  for  other  institutions'  projects. 

Second,  although  the  effectiveness  of  CON  programs  can  improve  with  age  as  per- 
sonnel gain  experience  and  sharpen  their  skills,  the  ability  of  any  regulatory  initiative  to 
succeed  in  the  face  of  opposition  from  the  regulated  industry  depends  on  the  institu- 
tional capacity  of  the  implementing  agency.52  In  the  long  run,  the  effectiveness  of  state 
CON  programs  depends  on  their  ability  to  recruit  and  retain  key  personnel.  Building  the 
institutional  capacity  of  state  CON  programs,  however,  requires  a  commitment  from 
policymakers  inside  and  outside  the  implementing  agency.53  The  fiscal  crisis  that  beset 

65 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


the  Rhode  Island  state  government  in  the  early  1990s  buffeted  the  DOH  even  though  the 
program  had  a  stable  source  of  funding  from  providers'  application  fees.  Furloughs, 
wage  and  hiring  freezes,  and  restrictions  on  the  purchase  of  new  equipment  contributed 
to  sagging  morale  among  program  personnel.  In  addition,  turnover  had  a  significant 
impact  on  the  Office  of  Health  Systems  Development  after  the  end  of  federal  support 
for  health  planning.  Although  Rhode  Island  had  assembled  an  impressive  health  plan- 
ning and  regulatory  infrastructure  during  the  1970s  and  1980s,  the  state  did  not  replace 
federal  health  planning  funds  after  the  repeal  of  RL.  93-641.  Without  continued  fund- 
ing, several  experienced  planners  and  regulators  left  for  jobs  in  the  private  sector;  others 
stayed  with  the  department  and  received  promotions  to  senior  management  positions. 
The  CON  program  managed  to  retain  a  core  group  of  experienced  analysts  but  was 
unable  to  replace  those  who  departed.  Simultaneously,  new  productivity  demands 
emerged  after  legislative  changes  in  1991  shortened  the  review  period  from  210  to  120 
days. 

Providers,  for  their  part,  used  their  considerable  resources  to  outlast  the  Department 
of  Health  via  an  incremental  approach  to  the  review  process.  Several  institutions  reap- 
plied successfully  for  CON  approval  after  addressing  the  comments  and  critiques  raised 
by  the  Health  Services  Council  and  program  staff  during  the  review  of  the  initial  appli- 
cation. Rhode  Island  DOH  staffers  do  not  dispute  the  fact  that  those  who  reapply  often 
win  approval,  but  they  nevertheless  defend  the  process.  As  one  senior  policymaker 
noted,  "Sometimes  tenacity  pays  off.  It's  not  necessarily  because  the  CON  process  has 
been  worn  down,  but  because  we're  disseminating  technology  in  a  planned  way."  A 
singular  focus  on  the  rate  of  project  denials  may  be  counterproductive,  for  the  delibera- 
tions that  accompany  the  CON  review  process  often  lead  to  concessions  by  providers 
that  expand  access  to  services  or  lower  program  operating  costs.  Modifications,  not 
merely  rejections  or  withdrawals,  must  be  seen  as  significant  successes  for  CON  pro- 
grams, particularly  if  they  increase  hospitals'  equity  participation  in  proposed  projects 
or  lead  to  reductions  in  staffing  and  operational  costs. 

In  other  cases,  however,  state  officials  were  handicapped  by  the  program  guidelines 
that  had  been  established  through  collaborative  planning  arrangements.  In  1993,  for 
example,  the  DOH  was  forced  to  approve  two  competing  proposals  to  establish  cardiac 
catheterization  laboratories  at  two  Providence  hospitals.  The  approvals  came  despite 
concerns  about  the  duplication  of  facilities  and  the  clinical  appropriateness  of  existing 
procedures  because  both  applicants  had  met  the  formal  criteria  established  by  the  state's 
Cardiac  Care  Advisory  Committee  (CCAC)  in  the  mid-1980s.  Under  the  criteria  estab- 
lished by  the  CCAC,  a  hospital  could  demonstrate  that  a  proposed  catheterization  lab 
was  "needed"  if  the  applicant's  existing  labs  were  operating  at  more  than  90  percent  of 
their  designed  capacity  and  the  utilization  rate  for  all  facilities  in  the  system  exceeded 
80  percent.  The  CCAC,  which  was  heavily  dominated  by  cardiac  surgeons  who  were 
sympathetic  to  calls  for  expanded  capacity,  made  it  impossible  for  the  Health  Services 
Council  to  reject  projects  on  the  basis  of  need,  although  several  design  and  financing 
issues  led  both  institutions  to  reapply  after  the  HSC  rejected  their  initial  proposals  in 
1992. 

The  legislature  and  executive  branch  consistently  supported  CON  in  Rhode  Island 
until  the  mid-1990s  despite  growing  opposition  from  health  providers.  Although 
changes  in  party  control  often  lead  to  policy  shifts,  the  1984  election  of  Rhode  Island's 
first  Republican  governor  in  more  than  a  decade  had  a  negligible  impact  on  DOH's 
activities.  Instead,  department  funding  was  nonideological  and  nonpartisan.  In  addition, 

66 


the  active  participation  of  such  respected  former  legislators  as  Representative  Anthony 
Carceri  on  the  state  Health  Services  Council  provided  CON  with  greater  legitimacy. 
The  retirement  of  several  prominent  legislative  supporters  of  health  planning,  coupled 
with  a  high  rate  of  turnover  among  experienced  members  of  the  HSC  in  the  early  1990s, 
made  the  CON  program  increasingly  vulnerable  to  attacks  from  its  critics.  The  depar- 
ture of  the  program's  legislative  patrons  was  particularly  significant,  for  apart  from 
prominent  party  and  committee  leaders,  individual  legislators  had  no  personal  staff  at 
their  disposal.  In  the  context  of  a  highly  partisan  legislature  in  which  power  was  con- 
centrated in  the  hands  of  the  House  and  Senate  leadership,  members  actively  sought 
advice  from  lobbyists  and  colleagues  with  acknowledged  policy  expertise  on  compli- 
cated issues.54  With  the  retirement  of  several  prominent  CON  supporters  from  the  legis- 
lature and  the  replacement  of  experienced  members  of  the  Health  Services  Council  in 
the  early  1990s,  the  influence  of  the  hospital  industry  grew  steadily. 

Third,  CON  also  fell  victim  to  what  Martha  Derthick  and  Paul  Quirk  have  described 
as  "the  politics  of  ideas."55  During  the  1980s,  both  industry  groups  and  senior  state 
officials  within  the  Department  of  Health  embraced  market-oriented,  competitive  solu- 
tions as  the  most  effective  means  of  controlling  health  care  costs.  Enrollment  in  man- 
aged care  plans  rose  steadily  after  1980;  by  1994,  Rhode  Island,  with  27.6  percent,  had 
the  ninth  highest  rate  of  HMO  penetration  in  the  nation.  Entry  regulation,  by  contrast, 
was  seen  as  a  costly  administrative  burden  on  health  providers  and  as  an  anticompeti- 
tive device  that  hospitals  could  use  to  establish  entry  barriers  for  alternative  delivery 
systems.56  In  contrast  to  other  states,  projects  proposed  by  noninstitutional  providers 
were  also  subject  to  CON  review  in  Rhode  Island;  elsewhere,  hospitals  sought  to  cir- 
cumvent the  process  by  acquiring  equipment  in  stages,  collaborating  with  private  physi- 
cians, and  establishing  parent  corporations.57 

CON  programs,  however,  need  not  play  a  reactive  role  that  stifles  innovation.  The 
Rhode  Island  Department  of  Health  initiated  a  request  for  proposals  (RFP)  process  to 
evaluate  new  submissions  in  identified  areas  of  need  in  the  late  1980s  to  assist  institu- 
tions in  long-range  planning.  RFPs  for  magnetic  resonance  imaging  (MRI),  cardiac 
catheterization  units,  rehabilitation  services,  and  home  health  care  were  issued  during 
the  1980s  to  make  the  state's  CON  process  more  proactive  in  its  orientation.  The  use  of 
RFPs  balanced  the  demand  for  new  technologies  with  the  state's  continuing  emphasis 
on  cost  containment.  In  the  case  of  MRI  facilities,  a  nonprofit  network  emerged  as  a 
cost-effective  solution  to  the  desire  of  community  hospitals  to  obtain  advanced  imaging 
capabilities  in  the  mid-1980s.  A  consortium  of  ten  hospitals  joined  to  share  MRI  tech- 
nology through  a  mobile  network  that  provided  portable  MRI  units  for  each  hospital  at 
least  two  days  per  week.  Participating  hospitals  were  spared  the  full  cost  of  building  a 
permanent  facility  and  hiring  specialized  staff,  since  radiologists  employed  by  the  net- 
work performed  and  analyzed  MRIs  at  each  hospital.  The  result  was  a  compromise 
acceptable  to  all  parties,  as  the  state's  tertiary  care  centers  were  allowed  to  construct 
permanent  MRI  facilities,  and  institutions  in  outlying  communities  were  afforded  ac- 
cess to  the  latest  technology.  The  CON  process  simultaneously  facilitated  the  diffusion 
of  new  technology,  minimized  hospitals'  financial  obligations,  and  avoided  unnecessary 
duplication  of  equipment  and  health  care  personnel. 

While  a  preset  ceiling  on  moneys  available  for  capital  projects  such  as  the  CONCAP 
can  increase  the  effectiveness  of  capital-expenditure  review,  CON  alone  cannot  bring 
hospital  costs  under  control,  as  capital  projects  account  for  only  a  small  portion  of  insti- 
tutions' total  costs.  Furthermore,  as  Arnold  Relman  noted  nearly  a  decade  ago,  "The 

67 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


chief  cause  of  the  cost  crisis  [in  American  medicine]  is  not  so  much  the  price  as  the 
ever  increasing  volume  and  intensity  of  medical  services  being  provided  in  outpatient 
settings  and  hospitals."58  Physicians  exercise  considerable  control  over  the  volume  of 
services  performed  by  hospitals;  economic  analyses  of  physician  and  hospital  behavior 
over  the  past  two  decades  by  Joseph  Newhouse,  Mark  Pauly,  and  others  suggest  that  in 
the  absence  of  well-defined  and  commonly  accepted  protocols  for  treatment,  doctors 
can  essentially  "create  demand"  for  profitable  diagnostic  and  surgical  procedures  to 
maximize  their  incomes.  In  fact,  the  president  of  the  American  College  of  Cardiology 
confirmed  this  suspicion  when  he  noted  that  "important  economic  incentives  are  at 
work  in  some  of  these  increases  in  rate  of  procedure  utilization."59 

In  recognition  of  the  continued  need  for  some  regulation  of  health  care  capital  ex- 
penditures, both  certificate  of  need  programs  and  local  health  planning  regained  popu- 
larity in  the  early  1990s  after  their  more  than  a  decade  under  siege.  While  some  states 
repealed  their  CON  legislation  in  the  late  1980s,  Delaware,  Florida,  and  Georgia  all 
expanded  the  scope  of  their  CON  programs  between  1989  and  1991.60  While  most  ob- 
servers share  Sapolsky's  view  that  "physicians,  and  more  relevantly,  hospital  adminis- 
trators, quickly  discovered  that  the  planning  system  could  be  outmaneuvered  [and  that] 
...  the  system  was  not  much  of  an  obstacle  once  the  consultants  were  called  in  to  ad- 
vise," the  cost-containment  record  of  capital  expenditure  regulation  in  Rhode  Island 
suggests  that  the  prevailing  wisdom  about  certificate  of  need  has  to  be  reexamined.61 
The  principal  historical  shortcoming  of  state  CON  programs  was  the  placing  of  too 
much  hope  on  a  program  with  multiple  objectives  to  control  health  care  costs. 

The  proliferation  of  new  technologies,  from  magnetic  resonance  imaging  facilities  to 
cardiac  catheterization  labs,  provides  a  constant  reminder  that  new,  often  expensive 
procedures  that  offer  institutions  lucrative  opportunities  to  increase  patient  volume  are 
constantly  being  created.  A  number  of  states  imposed  moratoria  on  new  hospital  con- 
struction after  the  end  of  federal  health  planning  subsidies  in  1986.  Such  actions,  how- 
ever, are  blunt  tools  for  controlling  the  diffusion  of  new  technologies  because  they  did 
not  discriminate  between  projects  with  proven  clinical  benefits  and  demonstrated  need 
and  less  essential  proposals.  In  contrast,  CON  imposes  rationality  on  the  diffusion  of 
new  technologies  and  the  introduction  of  new  services  by  providing  an  institutional 
mechanism  to  evaluate  the  demand  for  new  capital.  In  the  absence  of  CON,  hospitals' 
desire  to  increase  their  market  penetration  and  reputation  through  the  acquisition  of 
promising  new  technologies  and  renovations  of  maternity  and  outpatient  surgical  facili- 
ties has  the  potential  to  devolve  into  a  technological  arms  race  between  competing 
institutions. 

Using  recent  studies  as  a  benchmark,  state  regulators  are  beginning  to  apply  the 
guidelines  developed  by  outcome  researchers  in  evaluating  CON  applications  based  on 
the  appropriate  utilization  of  existing  services.  Recent  studies  of  the  appropriate  utiliza- 
tion of  cardiac  catheterization,  coronary  angioplasty,  and  other  specialized  diagnostic 
and  therapeutic  procedures  in  recent  years  have  been  driven,  at  least  partially,  by  reim- 
bursement. In  particular,  payer  status  —  private  insurance,  Medicaid,  self-pay  —  is 
strongly  associated  with  patients'  utilization  of  health  services.  Studies  of  cardiac  cath- 
eterization, carotid  endarterectomy,  and  coronary  angiography  found  that  many  surgical 
procedures  were  either  "inappropriate"  or  of  "uncertain"  clinical  value.62  In  the  absence 
of  evidence  that  proposed  services  have  a  significant  impact  on  patient  outcomes,  the 
state  may  use  the  CON  process  to  identify  potentially  unnecessary  and  costly  facilities 
and  discourage  the  overutilization  of  specialized  and  expensive  procedures. 

68 


Capital-expenditure  review  is  likely  to  play  a  significant  role  in  controlling  costs 
over  the  next  decade,  for  after  the  demise  of  the  Clinton  administration's  health  care 
reform  package,  the  focus  of  attention  has  again  shifted  to  the  states.  Rhode  Island's 
experience  with  CON  provides  evidence  that  a  comprehensive  approach  to  capital - 
expenditure  review,  including  an  ongoing  facilities  planning  process,  "batch"  review  of 
applications,  and  a  cap  on  capital-related  operating  expenditures,  offers  policymakers 
an  effective  institutional  mechanism  to  control  costs.  In  the  wake  of  mounting  evidence 
that  the  adoption  of  new  technologies  has  fueled  health  care  inflation  over  the  past 
decade,  capital-expenditure  review  still  offers  policymakers  one  of  the  few  institutional 
levers  to  shape  the  organization  and  delivery  of  health  care  services.  ** 


We  thank  Bruce  Cryan,  John  Donahue,  Mark  Peterson,  Bill  Waters,  and  Don  Williams  for 
their  helpful  comments.  We  are  indebted  to  John  Dickens  of  the  Maine  Department  of 
Human  Services,  Edmond  Duchesne  of  New  Hampshire 's  Health  Services  Planning  and 
Review  Board,  and  Stan  Lane  of  the  Vermont  Health  Care  Authority  for  providing  much  of 
the  comparative  data  on  state  CON  program  performance. 


Notes 

1 .  F.  A.  Sloan,  "Containing  Health  Expenditures:  Lessons  Learned  from  Certificate  of  Need 
Programs,"  in  Cost,  Quality,  and  Access  in  Health  Care,  edited  by  F.  Sloan,  J. 
Blumstein,  and  J.  Perrin  (San  Francisco:  Jossey-Bass,  1988),  44-70;  D.  Burda, 
"CONspiracies  to  Crush  Competition,"  Modern  Healthcare,  July  8,  1991,  28-29;  M.  E. 
Kaplan,  "An  Economic  Analysis  of  Florida's  Hospital  Certificate  of  Need  Program  and 
Recommendations  for  Change,"    Florida  State  University  Law  Review  19  (1991 ):  475- 
98;  R.  M.  Roos,  "Certificate  of  Need  for  Health  Care  Facilities:  A  Time  or  Re-exami- 
nation," Pace  Law  Review  7  (1987):  491-530. 

2.  K.  J.  Mueller,  "Federal  Programs  to  Expire:  The  Case  of  Health  Planning,"  Public  Ad- 
ministration Review  48  (1988):  719-725. 

3.  R.  R.  Bovbjerg,  "New  Directions  for  Health  Planning,"  in  Cosf,  Quality,  and  Access  in 
Health  Care,  206. 

4.  J.  G.  March  and  J.  P.  Olsen,  "The  New  Institutionalism:  Organizational  Factors  in 
Political  Life,"  American  Political  Science  Review  78  (1984):  734-749. 

5.  L.  D.  Brown,  "Common  Sense  Meets  Implementation:  Certificate  of  Need  Regulation  in 
the  States,"  Journal  of  Health  Politics,  Policy  and  Law  8  (1982):  482. 

6.  American  Health  Planning  Association,  Directory  of  Health  Planning  and  Policy  Agencies 
(Oklahoma  City,  Okla.:  AHPA,  1992). 

7.  D.  W.  Young,  "Planning  and  Controlling  Health  Capital:  Attaining  an  Appropriate 
Balance  between  Regulation  and  Competition,"  Medical  Care  Review 48  (1991):  261- 
293. 

8.  Ibid.,  272. 

9.  H.  Aldrich,  "Environments  of  Organizations,"  Annual  Review  of  Sociology  2  (1976): 
79-105;  J.  Brudney  and  F.  T.  Hebert,  "State  Agencies  and  Their  Environment: 
Examining  the  Influence  of  Important  External  Actors,"  Journal  of  Politics  49  (1987): 
186-206;  C.  Perrow,  Complex  Organizations,  2d  ed.  (Glenview,  III.:  Scott,  Foresman, 
1979). 

10.  W.  R.  Rosengren,  "A  Nutcracker  Theory  of  Modern  Organizations:  A  Conflict  View," 
Sociological  Focus  8  (1975):  271-282;  J.  D.  Thompson,  Organizations  in  Action  (New 
York:  McGraw-Hill,  1967). 

1 1 .  Perrow,  Complex  Organizations. 

12.  S.  D.  Gold,  The  Fiscal  Crisis  of  the  States  (Washington,  D.C.:  Georgetown  University 
Press,  1994);  F.  Leazes  and  R.  Sieczkiewicz,  "Budget  Policy  and  Fiscal  Crisis:  A 
Political  Matrix,"  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy  10  (1994):  71-82. 


69 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


13.  See  R.  D.  Arnold,  The  Logic  of  Congressional  Action  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press, 
1 991 ),  for  a  discussion  of  these  factors  at  the  federal  level. 

14.  See  K.  Meier,  Regulation:  Politics,  Bureaucracy,  and  Economics  (New  York:  St. 
Martin's  Press,  1985),  for  a  discussion  of  the  role  of  complexity  in  regulatory 
policymaking. 

15.  R.  B.  Hackey,  "Trapped  between  State  and  Market:  The  Politics  of  Hospital  Reim- 
bursement in  the  Northeastern  States,"  Medical  Care  Review  49  (1992):  427-455. 

1 6.  L.  D.  Brown,  "Technocratic  Corporatism  and  Administrative  Reform  in  Medicare," 
Journal  of  Health  Politics,  Policy  and  Law  10  (1985):  579-600. 

17.  H.  M.  Sapolsky,  "Prospective  Payment  in  Perspective,"  in  L.  D.  Brown,  ed.,  Health 
Policy  in  Transition  (Durham,  N.C.:  Duke  University  Press,  1987),  65-78;  D.  Stone, 
"Why  States  Can't  Solve  the  Health  Care  Crisis,"  American  Prospect  9  (1992):  51-60; 
and  F.  J.  Thompson,  "New  Federalism  and  Health  Care  Policy:  States  and  the  Old 
Questions,"  in   Brown,  Health  Policy  in  Transition,  79-101. 

18.  H.  M.  Sapolsky,  J.  Aisenberg,  and  J.  A.  Morone,  "The  Call  to  Rome  and  Other  Ob- 
stacles to  State-Level  Innovation,"  Public  Administration  Review  47  (1987):  135-142. 

19.  Hackey,  "Trapped  between  State  and  Market." 

20.  Sapolsky  et  al.,  "The  Call  to  Rome,"  135. 

21 .  J.  W.  Doig  and  E.  C.  Hargrove,  Leadership  and  Innovation  (Baltimore:  Johns  Hopkins 
University  Press,  1987). 

22.  E.  B.  Herzik  and  B.  W.  Brown,  Gubernatorial  Leadership  and  State  Policy  (New  York: 
Greenwood  Press,  1991). 

23.  L.  Fowler  and  R.  McClure,  Political  Ambition  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press, 
1989);  P.  Brace,  State  Government  and  Economic  Performance  (Baltimore:  Johns 
Hopkins  University  Press,  1994);  and  W.  K.  Muir,  Legislature:  California's  School  for 
Politics  (Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1982). 

24.  S.  C.  Patterson,  "State  Legislators  and  the  Legislatures,"  in  Politics  in  the  American 
States,  5th  ed.,  edited  by  V.  Gray,  H.  Jacob,  and  R.  Albritton  (Glenview,  III.:  Scott, 
Foresman,  1990),  161-200. 

25.  M.  Hyde,  "Rhode  Island:  The  Politics  of  Intimacy,"  in  Interest  Group  Politics  in  the 
Northeastern  States,  edited  by  R.  J.  Hrebnar  and  C.  S.  Thomas  (University  Park,  Pa.: 
Pennsylvania  State  University  Press,  1993),  301-321. 

26.  B.  Cryan,  The  Health  of  Rhode  Island's  Hospitals:  A  Financial  Analysis  FY1982  to 

FY1988  (Providence,  R.I.:  Rhode  Island  Department  of  Health,  Office  of  Health 
Systems  Development,  1989). 

27.  W.  O.  Cleverly,  The  7993  Almanac  of  Hospital  Financial  and  Operating  Indicators 
(Columbus,  Ohio:  Center  for  Healthcare  Industry  Performance  Studies,  1993). 

28.  Hospital  Association  of  Rhode  Island,  Environmental  Assessment  for  the  Hospitals  of 
Rhode  Island  (Providence:  HARI,  1988). 

29.  L.  G.  Goldberg  and  W.  Greenberg,  "The  Response  of  the  Dominant  Firm  to  Competi- 
tion: The  Ocean  State  Case,"  Health  Care  Management  Review  20  (1995):  65-74. 

30.  Sloan,  "Containing  Health  Expenditures,"  69. 

31 .  L.  A.  Bergthold,  "Purchasing  Power:  Business  and  Health  Policy  Change  in  Massachu- 
setts," Journal  of  Health  Politics,  Policy  and  Law  13  (1987):  425-451;  Hackey, 
"Trapped  between  State  and  Market." 

32.  D.  A.  Rochefort  and  P.  J.  Pezza,  "Public  Opinion  and  Health  Care  Policy,"  in  Health 
Politics  and  Policy,  2d  ed.,  edited  by  T.  J.  Litman  and  L.  Robins  (Albany,  N.Y.:  Delmar 
Publishers,  1992),  247-270. 

33.  Ibid. 

34.  Three  hospitals  merged  or  consolidated  during  the  1980s  with  approval  from  the  State 
Health  Services  Council.  Woonsocket  Hospital  and  Fogarty  Hospital  merged  to  form 
Landmark  Hospital  Corporation,  resulting  in  the  conversion  of  a  significant  number  of 
beds  from  acute  care  to  long-term  care.  In  Central  Falls,  Notre  Dame  Hospital,  acquired 
by  Memorial  Hospital  of  Rhode  Island,  was  converted  to  an  outpatient  clinic.  Finally, 
acute-care  services  at  the  Providence  unit  of  St.  Joseph's  Hospital  were  closed; 
existing  medical/surgical  beds  were  converted  to  long-term-care  and  rehabilitation 
services,  and  the  hospital's  emergency  department  was  recast  as  an  outpatient  clinic. 
Overall,  the  reduction  in  Rhode  Island  beds  exceeded  the  national  average  over  the 

70 


period  by  approximately  one  percent. 

35.  Bovbjerg,  "New  Directions  for  Health  Planning,"  206. 

36.  J.  T.  Tierney,  W.  J.  Waters,  and  W.  H.  Rosenberg,  "Certificate  of  Need  —  No 
Panacea  but  Not  Without  Merit,"  Journal  of  Public  Health  Policy  3  (1982):  178-181. 

37.  The  Health  Care  Affordability  Act  increased  the  threshold  for  CON  review  from 
$150,000  for  capital  projects  and  $75,000  for  increases  in  operating  costs.  The  CON 
statute  (Rhode  Island  General  Laws,  §  23-15)  currently  requires  the  Department  of 
Health  to  review  a  wide  range  of  capital  expenditures  for  health  care.  These  include 
(1)  health  care  projects  with  total  capital  costs  exceeding  $800,000;  (2)  equipment 
with  total  capital  costs  exceeding  $600,000;  (3)  new  services  with  annual  operating 
expenses  exceeding  $250,000;  (4)  any  new  licensed  facility  or  service  regardless  of 
capital  or  operating  costs;  (5)  certain  tertiary  or  specialty  care,  e.g.,  organ  transplant, 
regardless  of  capital  or  operating  costs;  (6)  any  increases  in  licensed  bed  capacity;  and 
(7)  any  reallocation  of  more  than  ten  beds  or  1 0  percent  of  the  licensed  beds  among 
discrete  services  or  facilities.  These  seven  categories  allow  the  Health  Services  Council 
to  review  every  major  capital  expenditure  for  health  care. 

38.  H.  M.  Sapolsky,  "The  Democratic  Wish:  A  Symposium,"  Journal  of  Health  Politics, 
Policy  and  Law  16  (1991):  821-822. 

39.  Bovbjerg,  "New  Directionsfor  Health  Planning." 

40.  J.  X.  Donahue,  D.  C.  Williams,  W.  J.  Waters,  and  B.  A.  DeBuono,  "Affordability 
Considerations  in  Certificate  of  Need  Hospital  Capital  Expenditure  Review  Determi- 
nations," Rhode  Island  Medicine  75  (1992):  347-350. 

41.  H.  D.  Scott,  J.  T.  Tierney,  W.  J.  Waters,  D.  C.  Williams,  and  J.  X.  Donahue,  "Certifi- 
cate of  Need:   A  State  Perspective,"  Rhode  Island  Medical  Journal  70  (1987):  341-345. 

42.  Donahue  et  al.,  "Affordability  Considerations." 

43.  Tierney  et  al.,  "Certificate  of  Need." 

44.  Cleverly,  The  1993  Almanac  of  Hospital  Financial  and  Operating  Indicators,  93. 

45.  B.  Cryan,  Hospital  Capital  Investment  in  Rhode  Island  (Providence,  R.I.:  Department 
of  Health,  Office  of  Health  Systems  Development,  1993). 

46.  Cleverly,  The  1993  Almanac  of  Hospital  Financial  and  Operating  Indicators. 

47.  F.  J.  Thompson,  Health  Policy  and  the  Bureaucracy  (Cambridge:  MIT  Press,  1981). 

48.  Sapolsky  et  al.,  "The  Call  to  Rome,"  135. 

49.  R.  B.  Hackey  and  D.  C.  Williams,  "Hard  Choices  in  Health  Care  Regulation:  Monitoring 
the  Quality  of  Hospital  Laboratory  Services,"  in  Ethical  Dilemmas  in  Public  Administrat- 
ion, edited  by  L.  Pasquerella,  A.  Killilea,  and  M.  Vocino  (Westport,  Conn.:  Praeger, 
1996). 

50.  Hospital  Association  of  Rhode  Island,  Environmental  Assessment,  4. 

51 .  F.  J.  Freyer,  "Politics  Seen  Affecting  Health  Council,"  Providence  Journal-Bulletin, 
October  26,  1993,  A5. 

52.  See  Brown,  "Common  Sense  Meets  Implementation,"  for  a  discussion  of  the  adminis- 
trative learning  curves  for  CON  programs,  and  Hackey,  "Trapped  between  State  and 
Market,"  for  a  more  thorough  treatment  of  how  institutional  capacity  shapes  policy- 
making. 

53.  D.  Cohodes,  "Interstate  Variation  in  Certificate  of  Need  Programs:  A  Review  and 
Prospectus,"  in  Health  Planning  in  the  United  States:  Selected  Policy  Issues,  edited  by 
the  Institute  of  Medicine,  Committee  on  Health  Planning  Goals  and  Standards  (Washing- 
ton, D.C.:  National  Academy  Press,  1981). 

54.  Hyde,  "Rhode  Island:  The  Politics  of  Intimacy." 

55.  M.  Derthick  and  P.  Quirk,  The  Politics  of  Deregulation  (Washington,  D.C.:  Brookings 
Institution,  1985). 

56.  Burda,  "CONspiracies  to  Crush  Competition." 

57.  Roos,  "Certificate  of  Need  for  Health  Care  Facilities." 

58.  A.  S.  Relman,  "Assessment  and  Accountability:  The  Third  Revolution  in  Medical  Care, 
New  England  Journal  of  Medicine  319  (1988):  1220-1222. 

59.  R.  L.  Frye,  "Does  It  Really  Make  a  Difference?"  Journal  of  the  American  College  of 
Cardiology  19  (1992):  468-470. 

60.  C.  Thomas,  "Certificate  of  Need:  Taking  a  New  Look  at  an  Old  Program,"  Sfafe  Health 
Notes,  no.  114  (1991):  1-6. 

71 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


61 .  Sapolsky,  "The  Democratic  Wish:  A  Symposium,"  822. 

62.  M.  R.  Chassin  et  al.,  "Does  Inappropriate  Use  Explain  Geographic  Variations  in  the  Use 
of  Health  Care  Services?  A  Study  of  Three  Procedures,"  Journal  of the  Am  erica  n 
Medical  Association  258  (1987):  2533-2537;  T.  B.  Graboys  et  al.,  "Results  of  a 
Second  Opinion  Trial  among  Patients  Recommended  for  Coronary  Angiography," 
Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Association  268  (1992):  2537-2540. 


72 


What  Predicts  Test  of  a  Three- 

Success  in  JTPA?       Component  Mode 


Carolyn  Ball,  Ph.D. 


The  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  (JTPA),  an  education  and  training  program  to 
assist  the  economically  disadvantaged,  is  one  of  sixty  or  more  programs  Congress 
is  considering  consolidating.    This  program  had  great  success  in  the  late  1980s 
and  early  1990s,  but  its  value  and  support  have  been  declining.    This  author  exam- 
ines whether  JTPA  should  continue  through  a  test  of  three  employment  theories: 
discrimination,  signaling,  and  human  investment  using  data  from  Maine's  JTPA 
program.  Findings  indicate  that  while  the  program  can  reduce  discriminatory  bar- 
riers and  negative  signals  such  as  welfare  status,  it  does  not  consistently  succeed 
as  a  training  investment.  Enrollment  in  an  educational  training  program  has  a 
negative  effect  on  an  individual's  ability  to  obtain  a  job,  a  particularly  important 
finding,  given  the  changes  in  welfare  law.  If  it  is  to  continue  in  some  form,  JTPA 
must  be  revised  to  better  serve  clients  who  need  education. 


In  1982,  senators  Daniel  Quayle  and  Edward  Kennedy  crafted  the  Job  Training 
Partnership  Act  (JTPA)  (PL  97-300),  which  states  administer  by  contracting  with 
service  providers  to  train  and  place  economically  disadvantaged  individuals.  Ten  years 
later,  Congress  endorsed  JTPA's  continuation,  increasing  the  emphasis  on  literacy  and 
remedial  education. 

To  continue  to  receive  contracts,  providers  must  meet  the  program's  wage  and  place- 
ment performance  standards.  Based  on  its  internal  evaluation,  JTPA  has  had  a  success- 
ful track  record  in  New  England  and  elsewhere  (see  Table  1  in  Appendix  A).  Measured 
in  program  years  that  run  from  July  1  to  June  30,  it  has  consistently  achieved  about  a  70 
percent  placement  rate  nationwide  from  Program  Year  (PY)  '86  to  PY  '89,  dipping 
downward  with  the  recession  in  PY  '90.  This  success  has  led  the  National  Commission 
for  Employment  Policy  to  view  performance  standards  as  driving  JTPA  to  success.1 
Additionally,  many  scholars  view  performance  standards  as  the  best  measure  of  pro- 
grams.2 

Yet  even  with  this  strong  record,  JTPA  may  encounter  difficulty  as  Congress  consid- 
ers merging  more  than  sixty  education  and  training  programs  into  block  grants.3  With 
the  advent  of  the  new  welfare  law,  Temporary  Aid  to  Needy  Families  (TANF),  JTPA  is 
again  under  scrutiny.  Congress  will  undoubtedly  expect  JTPA  to  provide  greater 
assistance  to  welfare  clients,  a  group  it  has  always  served.  Since  TANF  requires  able- 
bodied  individuals  to  work  while  receiving  welfare,  JTPA  will  have  less  flexibility  in 
assisting  individuals,  about  half  of  whom  are  welfare  recipients.  Quick  placement  will 


Carolyn  Ball,  assistant  professor  of  public  administration,  University  of  Maine,  Orono, 
teaches  and  conducts  research  in  labor  and  personnel  issues. 


73 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


be  a  primary  goal  with  education  and  training  a  secondary  goal.  Given  these  new  pres- 
sures, should  JTPA  continue  in  its  present  form  or  be  revised?  To  answer  this  question,  I 
measure  JTPA's  success  through  the  lens  of  three  common  theories  of  employment: 
discrimination,  signaling,  and  human  investment  theory. 

The  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  is  most  closely  associated  with  human  capital  in- 
vestment theory.  According  to  legislative  intent,  training  is  an  investment  in  individuals 
and  in  the  nation's  economy,  not  a  government  expense.4  Signaling  theory,  on  the  other 
hand,  predicts  that  employers  choose  employees  based  on  such  signals  as  education 
level,  which  identify  an  employee's  potential  productivity.  And,  of  course,  discrimina- 
tion theory  suggests  that  employers  judge  individuals  on  overt  unalterable  characteris- 
tics, not  on  ability.  Each  theory  provides  a  different  perspective  on  the  JTPA's  ability  to 
assist  participants. 

To  test  these  theories,  I  build  exploratory  regression  models  to  measure  success 
based  on  JTPA  performance  standards  methodology.  Success  is  measured  by  the  out- 
comes measures  of  placements,  post-training  wages,  and  education  (for  those  lacking  a 
seventh-grade  reading  level  or  a  general  equivalency  diploma)  combined  with  place- 
ment. The  data  set  for  the  models  is  from  Maine's  Title  II- A  adult  program  for  PYs  '  89 
to  '91. 


JTPA  Performance  Standards  Methodology 


What  predicts  success  for  the  Job  Training  Partnership  Act?  The  Department  of  Labor 
(DOL)  measures  it  by  two  general  categories  of  outcomes:  placements  and  post- training 
wages.  The  specific  outcomes  vary,  reflecting  changes  in  the  goals  of  JTPA,  refinements 
in  evaluation,  and  new  data.  For  example,  in  PY  '93  a  new  standard,  placement  com- 
bined with  education,  was  added  to  reflect  a  legislative  mandate  to  increase  the  literacy 
level  of  trainees. 

After  determining  outcome  measures,  DOL  creates  ordinary  least  squares  regression 
models.  Unlike  textbook  models,  which  provide  explanations,  these  models  of  regres- 
sion are  meant  to  be  management  tools  which  do  not  include  all  the  factors  that  might 
affect  outcomes.  Models  "hold  constant  those  factors  over  which  the  service  deliverer 
has  little  or  no  control."5  Therefore,  JTPA  models  control  for  participant  characteristics 
and  area  economic  differences.  JTPA  models  control  for  the  difficulty  of  serving 
women,  minorities,  welfare  recipients,  and  those  who  lack  a  high  school  education, 
groups  that  DOL  has  labeled  "hard  to  serve."6  Success,  then,  occurs  when  service  pro- 
viders meet  or  exceed  standards,  a  numerical  range  of  acceptable  performance. 


Theory 

Discrimination  Theory 

Employment  discrimination  research  tells  us  that  there  are  major  differences  in  wages 
between  men  and  women,  minorities  and  whites,  and  black  and  white  women.7  We  also 
know  that  income  and  job  stability  increase  with  age  although  economists  argue  aboute 
discrimination  through  civil  rights  laws.  On  the  other  hand,  these  same  people  also 
receive  higher  wages. 

Some  studies  emphasize  discrimination  as  an  explanation  for  wage  disparities.  For 
example,  in  his  1991  study,  Clifford  Adelman  traced  high  school  graduates  in  the  years 
1972  to  1984  to  examine  the  achievements  of  men  and  women  in  the  marketplace.9 

74 


Though  women  had  higher  aspirations,  continued  their  education  at  the  same  rate  as 
men,  and  had  higher  grade  point  averages  in  college,  their  pay  was  less  than  that  of 
men.  This  held  true  even  when  men  and  women  with  no  family  responsibilities  were 
compared. 

In  another  study,  a  controlled  experiment  examined  labor-force  disparities.10  Black 
and  white  males  were  coached  on  interviewing,  matched  to  control  for  characteristics 
such  as  age  and  physical  appearance,  and  given  fictitious  indistinguishable  resumes. 
The  results  indicated  that  blacks  received  fewer  interviews  and  job  offers  than  whites. 

Studies  of  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  clients  in  Indiana,  Ohio,  and  Tennessee  also 
confirm  the  effect  of  gender  and  race  on  the  placement  and  wages  of  participants.11  But 
according  to  Kathryn  Anderson,  younger  clients  are  more  difficult  to  place  than  older 
clients,  countering  expectations  of  discrimination  theory.12 

JTPA  performance  standards  models  include  indicators  of  protected  status  age,  race, 
and  gender,  making  data  readily  available  to  put  the  theory  in  operation.  Based  on  this 
brief  review,  we  expect  that  JTPA  clients  would  feel  the  impact  of  discrimination,  af- 
fecting the  success  of  JTPA  to  place  individuals. 

Signaling  Theory 

Signals  of  life  choice  events  are  also  theorized  to  affect  a  participant's  chances  of  em- 
ployment.13 Employers  who  cannot  directly  assess  productivity  consult  a  person's 
record  of  education  or  work  experience  to  reduce  uncertainty  in  the  hiring  decision. 
Race,  gender,  and  age,  which  are  unalterable,  are  distinguished  from  signals.  For  ex- 
ample, an  individual  can  choose  to  invest  in  an  education  but  cannot  choose  her  race. 

Obviously,  research  demonstrates  that  education  is  important  in  determining  jobs  and 
wages,  and  a  few  support  the  applicability  of  signaling.14  In  one  study,  John  Bishop 
found  that  signals,  provided  they  were  conspicuous,  did  have  an  effect.15  High  school 
graduates  with  high-level  skills  did  not  receive  wages  any  higher  than  those  with  low- 
level  skills.  The  diploma  rather  than  skill  served  as  the  signal  of  productivity. 

Work  experience  or  its  lack  because  of  welfare  status  can  serve  as  a  signal  as  well.16 
Those  who  report  their  welfare  status  are  less  likely  to  be  hired.  Employers  prefer  to 
hire  those  who  are  not  welfare  recipients  even  when  government  provides  incentives  for 
hiring  those  who  are. 

JTPA  studies  confirm  a  statistically  significant  effect  of  welfare  status  and  educa- 
tion.17 In  fact,  Anderson  found  that  welfare  status  and  education  had  a  greater  effect  on 
placement  than  gender  or  age.18  Not  surprisingly,  then,  we  hypothesize  greater  success 
for  high  school  graduates  and  those  who  do  not  receive  welfare  than  for  those  who  have 
no  diploma  and  receive  welfare.  JTPA  models  always  include  education  and  welfare 
status  as  control  variables. 

Human  Investment  Theory 

The  mission  of  the  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  is  based  on  human  investment  theory 
more  than  on  discrimination  or  signaling  theory.19  Human  investment  theory  assumes 
that  public  subsidies  for  training  create  higher  incomes,  higher  associated  taxes,  and 
social  spillovers  (reduced  health  care  costs,  reduced  crime)  that  assist  both  society  and 
the  individual.  Government  subsidizes  training  because  employer  and  individual  deci- 
sions lead  to  insufficient  education  and  training.20  Employers  fail  to  provide  general 
training  because  it  is  visible  to  other  employers  and  may  lead  to  turnover.  Individuals 
often  do  not  seek  training  on  their  own  because  they  lack  funds  or  perceive  few  rewards 


75 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


for  doing  so.  Thus,  government- sponsored  training  programs  such  as  JTPA  close  that 
gap  by  providing  training. 

JTPA  research  indicates  that  the  type  of  training  provided  is  critical  to  success  (see 
Glossary  for  definitions).  For  example,  research  has  found  that  on-the-job  training  con- 
sistently yields  high  placement  rates,  but  by  and  large  has  less  impact  on  earnings  than 
other  forms  of  training.21  Nationwide,  however,  more  JTPA  participants  are  enrolled  in 
job  search  instruction,  the  least  effective  type  of  training.22 

It  is  fair,  then,  to  conjecture  that  training  has  an  impact  on  success  but  varies  with 
the  type  of  training.  DOL  performance  models  adjust  for  factors  outside  the  control  of 
service  providers,  so  training  activities  are  normally  excluded.  However,  data  on  enroll- 
ment in  the  most  common  forms  —  on-the-job  training,  occupational  training,  educa- 
tional training,  and  job  search  assistance  —  are  collected  and  available. 


Test  of  a  Three-Component  Model 


To  test  the  ability  of  the  three  theories  to  explain  the  success  of  the  Job  Training  Part- 
nership Act,  I  retain  its  methodology  and  measure  success  as  placement,  wages,  and 
placement  combined  with  educational  training.  Rather  than  assuming  that  one  theory  is 
more  important  than  another,  I  view  the  theories  as  three  components  affecting  success. 
The  probability  of  success  is  estimated  as  a  linear  function  of  (unalterable  characteris- 
tics) +  (signals)  +  (training  investments)  +  e,  where  e  is  a  random  error  term.  For  clarity 
and  simplicity,  I  use  only  the  most  common  factors  and  outcome  measures  found  in 
Department  of  Labor  models  and  employment  theories.  The  variables  are  gender  and 
age  to  measure  discrimination,  education  and  welfare  status  to  measure  signaling,  and 
the  four  types  of  training  to  measure  investment.  I  exclude  race  in  the  exploratory  mod- 
els since  there  are  very  few  nonwhites  in  Maine's  population  or  client  base.  I  use  logit 
regression23  for  the  two  placement  models  and  ordinary  least  squares  regression  for  the 
wage  model. 

To  determine  the  success  of  the  Job  Training  Partnership  Act,  turn  first  to  the  place- 
ment models  in  Table  2,  Appendix  A.  Interpreting  logit  regression  is  straightforward. 
The  chi-square  improvement  indicates  that  each  component  of  the  model  is  statistically 
significant,  improving  the  model's  explanatory  power  as  one  moves  from  entering  unal- 
terable characteristics  to  training  investments.24  One  can  also  examine  the  cases  cor- 
rectly predicted.  For  both  the  placement  and  education/placement  models,  adding  the 
third  component  dramatically  affects  the  explanatory  power  of  the  models.  This  is  par- 
ticularly true  in  the  education/placement  model,  in  which  the  cases  correctly  predicted 
increase  by  8  percent. 

The  logit  regressions,  however,  show  that  JTPA's  success  depends  on  which  theory  or 
component  is  viewed.  First,  as  predicted  by  discrimination  theory,  JTPA  has  more  diffi- 
culty placing  older  participants.  Placements  increase  as  participants  become  older,  ta- 
pering off  for  the  oldest  participants.  But  gender  is  significant  only  in  the  education/ 
placement  model.  The  probability  of  being  placed  and  having  received  educational 
training,  all  other  factors  held  constant,  is  61  percent  for  females  and  73  percent  for 
males.25 

JTPA  has  unexpected  success  overcoming  signal  barriers.  Welfare  recipients  have  a 
greater  probability  of  being  placed  than  non-welfare  recipients.  Being  a  dropout  has 
significance  only  in  the  education/placement  model,  which  one  might  expect.  Even  here 


76 


the  difference  is  relatively  small;  the  probability  of  dropouts  being  placed  amounts  to 
only  3  percent  less  than  that  of  high  school  graduates.  Signals  that  normally  make  it 
difficult  to  find  a  job  have  limited  effect  on  Maine  trainees. 

As  expected,  the  success  of  JTPA  depends  on  the  training.  Since  the  act  is  based  on 
human  investment  theory,  this  result  is  more  troublesome  for  its  future  success  as  a 
stand-alone  program.  The  placement  model  indicates  that  only  on-the-job  training  is  a 
positive  investment.  But  for  those  who  receive  educational  training,  investment  in  any 
additional  training,  whether  job  search  assistance  or  occupational  training,  is  a  positive 
benefit.  This  seems  to  indicate  that  there  are  two  groups  of  trainees  served,  those  who 
can  use  on-the-job  training  and  those  who  need  a  greater  investment  for  their  future. 

How  do  the  three  components  affect  success  measured  by  post-training  wages?  The 
regression  model  in  Table  3,  Appendix  A,  shows  that  with  each  component,  the  R- 
square  increases  by  about  2  percent,  and  all  components  work  in  the  direction  theo- 
rized. The  investment  component's  impact,  again,  is  highly  dependent  on  the  type  of 
training  provided.  Only  occupational  training  increases  wages.  On-the-job  training  has 
a  negative  impact  while  educational  training  is  not  significant.  What  appears  to  be  hap- 
pening is  that  service  providers  can,  for  the  most  part,  overcome  discrimination  and 
negative  signals  when  placing  individuals,  but  wages  are  affected  by  all  three  compo- 
nents. 


Strength  of  Theories 

The  reduced  models  in  Table  4,  Appendix  A,  with  nonsignificant  variables  eliminated, 
give  a  clearer  picture.  If  one  views  the  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  as  a  means  to  over- 
come discrimination  or  signaling  life  events,  the  program  has  been  successful.  For  ex- 
ample, signals  have  no  significance  in  the  education/placement  model;26  wages,  how- 
ever, are  more  difficult  to  equalize.  When  all  other  factors  are  removed  or  partialed, 
indicated  in  the  last  column  of  Table  4,  female  wages  decrease  by  about  .19  and  drop- 
out wages  by  about  .12. 

If  one  views  JTPA  through  the  lens  of  an  investment  strategy,  the  reduced  models 
reveal  greater  problems.  The  probability  of  placement  for  those  who  receive  educational 
training  decreases  by  about  .20  when  all  other  variables  are  removed.  This  is  a  dramatic 
effect:  receiving  educational  training  is  the  most  important  variable  in  explaining  the 
lack  of  success  of  JTPA  as  an  investment.  Only  occupational  training  has  an  effect  on 
increasing  post- training  wages  and  serves  as  an  investment  strategy.. 


The  Relation  of  Theory  and  Practice 


How  do  these  theoretical  results  relate  to  practice?  Before  answering  that  question,  one 
has  to  resolve  a  technical  issue.  Have  the  theories  actually  been  tested?  The  R-square 
and  the  comparable  chi-square  indicate  that  critical  factors  were  left  out  of  the  three- 
component  models,  biasing  the  results.  The  Center  for  Governmental  Studies  at  North- 
ern Illinois  University,  however,  has  found  that  performance  standards  models  routinely 
explain  5  to  7  percent  of  the  variance  regardless  of  the  demographic  or  economic  data 
included.27  Therefore,  given  similar  modeling  results,  the  three-component  models  show 
that  service  providers  have  been  successful  at  overcoming  discrimination  and  negative 
signals  in  their  placement  policies.  In  fact,  Maine  welfare  recipients  have  a  greater 
likelihood  than  non-welfare  recipients  of  being  placed. 

77 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


To  improve  the  success  rate,  however,  JTPA  sendee  providers  must  be  aware  of  cre- 
ating a  human  investment  strategy,  particularly  for  their  welfare  clients.  With  the  Work 
First  philosophy  DOL  is  embracing  to  support  TANF  legislation,  greater  emphasis  has 
to  be  given  to  on-the-job  training.28  In  the  past,  DOL  frowned  on  such  training,  viewing 
it  as  a  subsidy  to  employers  who  would  teach  individuals  anyway.  JTPA  needs  to  in- 
crease its  contacts  with  the  business  community  to  make  on-the-job  training  possible  for 
more  than  a  small  group  of  people.  Job  search  assistance  alone  is  not  likely  to  benefit 
people  even  though  it  is  the  most  common  form  of  training  nationwide. 

The  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  currently  balances  emphasis  on  placements  with 
wage  performance  standards.  Performance  standards  are  expected  to  continue,  but  states 
will  be  receiving  bonuses  for  welfare  placements.  This  will  make  it  more  difficult  for 
JTPA  to  improve  educational  opportunities  and,  hence,  recipients'  future  wages.  In 
Maine,  virtually  no  welfare  recipients  have  received  both  on-the-job  training  and  educa- 
tional training.  Those  entering  JTPA  in  need  of  remedial  education  have  been  difficult 
to  place,  which  is  not  likely  to  change.  But  if  clients  receive  an  additional  investment  in 
other  forms  of  training,  they  will  be  placed  and  their  wages  may  be  comparable. 

Finally,  JTPA  has  to  build  upon  its  success  in  overcoming  signal  barriers  for  welfare 
clients  by  active  involvement  in  helping  individuals  make  decisions  about  their  training 
and  by  obtaining  resources  for  clients  once  they  complete  the  program.  Nationally, 
welfare  recipient  wages  have  risen  steadily  but  only  to  an  average  of  S7.05  per  hour  for 
a  thirty-six-hour  week.  On-the-job  training  can  meet  their  short-term  needs,  but  occupa- 
tional training  has  greater  success  in  increasing  participant  wages.  Considering  the 
Work  First  emphasis,  however,  fewer  JTPA  clients  may  see  occupational  training  as  a 
viable  option.  Welfare  recipients,  with  some  exceptions,  must  work.  States  that  value 
higher  wages  for  JTPA  clients  will  have  to  request  exemptions,  since  the  act  provides 
funding  for  only  two  years  of  schooling  when  many  careers  demand  at  least  four  years  ?* 


78 


Glossary 

Educational  training:  conducted  in  an  institutional  setting,  training  designed  to  enhance 
participants'  employability  by  upgrading  basic  skills,  for  example,  remedial  education, 
basic/GED  education,  literacy,  and  English  as  a  second  language.  Educational  training 
does  not  provide  the  technical  skills  and  knowledge  required  to  perform  a  specific  job 
or  group  of  jobs  nor  does  it  provide  job  search  assistance  such  as  resume  writing,  inter- 
viewing skills,  and  so  forth. 

Job  search  assistance:  activities  designed  to  facilitate  movement  into  the  labor  market 
including  job-seeking  skills,  resume  writing,  interviewing  techniques  and  job  referrals, 
labor-market  information  placement  assistance,  job  clubs,  counseling,  and  help  in  es- 
tablishing and  achieving  employment  goals. 

Occupational  training:  conducted  in  an  institutional  setting,  training  designed  to  pro- 
vide the  technical  skills  and  knowledge  required  to  perform  a  specific  job  or  group  of 
jobs.  Classroom  vocational  training  is  included  in  this  category. 

On-the-job  training:  provides  the  knowledge  and  skills  necessary  for  full  performance 
of  a  job  while  participants  are  engaged  in  productive  work.  Employers  that  provide  on- 
the-job  training  may  be  reimbursed  for  their  services. 

Placement:  includes  only  the  formerly  employed  who  are  placed  in  an  unsubsidized 
job,  enter  the  armed  forces,  become  self-employed,  or  enter  a  registered  apprenticeship 
program. 


79 


o 

E  a> 

o3  °° 

>  >- 


o 

■a  £- 
_co 
_co 
cd 

"2  co 
o   00 


d.> 


c 

to 

X 

CO 

Q. 

o 

5    CO 

CD    00 

z  >■ 

CO 
CO    °?    If)    t-    00 

£i 

Q_ 

CO    CO    CD    CM    CO 

< 

X 

T3 

C 
0) 
Q. 

< 


CO 

a. 

"O 

c 

CO 
CO 

V 

l_ 

3 

CO 
CO 
CD 


CD 

E 
o 
u 

3 

O 

**- 
o 
c 
o 

CO 
CO 

a 

E 
o 
u 


CO    CO 


CO    CO 
^   Q_ 


O 
CO 

*-   > 

o 

t3 
cu 

c  en 
5  °° 
Q  >- 


CD   q[ 


■=    00 


co  9 

If)    CO 


co  in  m  cm  ^ 


co  "*  co  en  ■* 

co  co  ^  r-   CM 


O)  co  co 

«tf    CM    CM 


co  co  r~  co  if) 


>*  co  If) 

CO    CM    'tf 


00    CO    '* 
If)    CM    <tf 


E 

D) 


CO    If)    If)    CM    CO 


c— 

oj 

CO 

r~ 

00 

CD 

r- 

If) 

If) 

CM 

CM 

Q 

CD 

at 

co 

T3 
CD 
O 
CO 

Q. 
CD 

co 

CD 
CO 

E 

"3 
o 
a. 
o 

a) 

CD 

E 
o 

3 
O 

X 

CD 
U- 
CD 

D 

CD 

CD 

H— 
CO 
CD 

en 

O) 

O) 

D) 

Q 

CO 

CD 

CO 

ro 

CO 

CD 

CO 

c 

CD 

CD 

CD 

CD 

o 

CD 

p 

u 

u 

3 

CD 

> 

CD 

CD 

CD 

o 

Q. 

< 

a. 

CL 

Q. 

CO 

80 


Table  2 


Logistic  Regressions  of  Success 

Placed  Placed  with  Educational  Training 


B 


B 


B 


B 


B 


Unalterable 

Characteristics 

Gender 

0.259° 

0.124 

0.089 

0.51 1a 

0.326 

0.562" 

Age 

0.092" 

0.095s 

0.082s 

0.1 1  3a 

0.1178 

0.140" 

Agesq 

-0.001a 

-0.001s 

-0.011s 

-0.001" 

-0.002" 

-0.002" 

Signals 

Welfare 

0.507b 

0.390b 

— 

0.766b 

0.441s 

Dropout 

-0.153 

-0.018 

-0.333 

-0.128" 

Investments 

On-the-job 

training 

— 

— 

1.748a 

— 

— 

— 

Educational 

-1.634s 

— 

— 

— 

Occupational 

— 

— 

-0.382s 

— 

- 

0.033c 

Job  Search 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

0.905c 

Explained 

76.4% 

76.4% 

77.9% 

65.3% 

64.7% 

72.9% 

Correctly 

-  2LL 

2539 

2516 

2377 

644 

629 

570 

Chi-square 

17. 0b 

22. 9C 

139. 0b 

9.9a 

15. 9b 

58. 1c 

improvement 

N  =  2369  for  the  placement  model. 

N  =  504  for  the  placement  with  educational  training  model. 


Source:  Data  files  of  the  Maine  Department  of  Labor,  Augusta,  for  PY  '89  to  PY  91' 


Notes: 

Placed    = 

Gender  = 

Age 

Dropout 

Welfare 

Training 


1  =    Placed;    0  =  Not  placed. 

1  =    Male;    0  =  Female. 

22  through  70. 

1  =  No  GED;  0  =  GED/high  school  diploma. 

1  =  Welfare;  0  =  Not  on  welfare. 

1  =  Received  training;  0  =  Did  not  receive  training. 


"Significant  at  .05  level. 
bSignificant  at  .001  level. 
Significant  at  .0001  level. 


81 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Table  3 


Ordinary  Least  Squares  Regressions  of  Success 


Unalterable 

Characteristics 

Gender 

Age 

Agesq 

Signals 
Welfare 
Dropout 


Wage 
B 


0.6556a 

0.83153 

0.9431a 

0.1391b 

0.1257b 

0.1224b 

-0.0017b 

-0.0015b 

-0.0015° 

-0.2612d 

-0.2758d 

— 

-0.8324d 

-0.8324d 

Investments 
OJT 

Educational 
Occupational 


F 
R-square 

R-squareCh 


— 

— 

-0.2861d 

— 

— 

0.0724 

— 

— 

0.4820a 

15.6700a 

16.2620a 

14.2200a 

0.0282 

0.04788 

0.06584 

0.0282 

0.01966 

0.01796 

N  =  1623 

Source:  Data  files  of  the  Maine  Department  of  Labor,  Augusta,  PY  '86  to  PY  '91. 

"Significant  at  .0001  level. 
bSignificant  at  .001  level. 
Significant  at  .01  level. 
Significant  at  .05  level. 


82 


Table  4 


Final  Models 

Placement 

Placement 

with  Education 

Wages 

B 

Rao 

B 

Rao 

B 

Partial 

Observed 

Characteristics 

Gender 

— 

— 

0.640a 

0.092 

0.942b 

0.189 

Age 

0.083a 

0.045 

— 

— 

0.122b 

0.083 

Agesq 

-o.oor 

-0.052 

— 

— 

-0.002b 

-0.078 

Life  Events 

Welfare 

0.414b 

0.070 

— 

— 

-0.269' 

-0.056 

Dropout 

— 

— 

— 

— 

-0.275b 

-0.118 

Training 

On-the-job 

1.755b 

0.070 

— 

— 

-0.298c 

-0.051 

Educational 

-1.635b 

-0.200 

— 

— 

— 

— 

Occupational 

-0.388a 

-0.044 

0.970d 

0.133 

0.479b 

0.105 

Job  Search 

— 

— 

1.037b 

0.182 

— 

— 

Explained 

Correctly 

77.7% 

- 

73.05% 

- 

— 

— 

-2LL 

2377 

580.59 

— 

F 

16.210 

Chi-square 

178.41 

— 

73.718 

— 

R-sq 

0.066 

Chi-square 

7.04 

— 

7.837 

- 

R-sq  Ch 

0.020 

improvement 

N  =  2369  for  the  placement  model. 

N  =  501  for  the  placement  with  educational  training  model. 

N  =  1623  for  the  wage  model 


Note:  In  the  placement  with  education  model,  job  search  rather  than  on-the-job  training. 
Only  four  individuals  were  enrolled  in  the  latter  and  received  educational  training. 


Significant  at  .01  level. 
"Significant  at  .0001  level. 
'Significant  at  .05  level. 
Significant  at  .001  level. 


83 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Notes 

1.  National  Commission  for  Employment  Policy,  Evaluation  of the  Effects  of JTP 'A  Perfor- 
mance Standards  on  Clients,  Services,  and  Costs,  NCEP  Research  Report  88-16 
(Washington,  D.C.:  NCEP,  1988). 

2.  Joseph  Wholey  and  Harry  Hatry,  "The  Case  for  Performance  Monitoring,"  Public 
Administration  Review  52  (1992):  604-610. 

3.  Johnny  Ray  Youngblood,  "Jobs  for  Nobody,"  New  York  Times,  June  30,  1995,  A19. 

4.  For  a  history,  see  Richard  Fenno,  The  Making  of  a  Senator  (Washington,  D.C.:  CQ 
Press,  1989). 

5.  For  details,  see  U.S.  Department  of  Labor,  Employment  and  Training  Administration, 
Guide  for  Setting  Title  ll-A  and  Title  III  EDWAA  Performance  Standards  for  Program 
Year  (PY)  1990  (Washington,  D.C.:  DOL,  November  1990).  DOL  obtains  aggregate 
data  for  service  deliverers.  At  the  state  level  the  models  are  replicated  with  a  series  of 
dummy  variables. 

6.  Burt  Barnow,  "Government  Training  as  a  Means  of  Reducing  Employment,"  in  Rethink- 
ing Employment  Policy,  edited  by  D.  Lee  Bawden  and  F.  Skidmore  (Lanham,  Md.:  Urban 
Institute,  1 989),  discusses  JTPA  performance  standards  methodology. 

7.  For  a  discussion  of  wage  differentials  between  men  and  women,  see  Elaine  Sorenson, 
"Exploring  the  Reasons  behind  the  Narrowing  Gender  Gap  Earnings,"  Urban  Institute 
Report  91-2  (Washington,  D.C.:  Urban  Institute,  1991),  and  Clifford  Adelman,  Women 
at  Thirtysomething:  Paradoxes  of  Attainment  (Washington,  D.C.:  U.S.  Department  of 
Education,  June  1991).  For  minorities,  see  Jewelle  Taylor  Gibbs,  Young,  Black,  and 
Male  in  America  (Dover,  Mass.:  Auburn  House,  1988);  Norton  Grubb  and  Robert 
Wilson,  "Sources  of  Inequality  in  Earnings,"  Monthly  Labor  Review  112  (1989):  3-13; 
Margery  Turner  et  al..  Opportunities  Denied,  Opportunities  Diminished:  Racial  Discrimi- 
nation in  Hiring  (Washington,  D.C.:  Urban  Institute,  1991);  and  James  Smith  and  Finis- 
Welch,  Closing  the  Gap:  Forty  Years  of  Economic  Progress  for  Blacks  (Santa  Monica: 
Rand  Corporation,  1986).  For  black  and  white  women,  see  James  Cunningham  and 
Nadja  Zalokar,  "The  Economic  Progress  of  Black  Women,"  Industrial  and  Labor  Rela- 
tions Review  45  (1992):  540-555. 

8.  Kevin  Murphy  and  Finis  Welch,  "Empirical  Age-Earnings  Profiles,"  Journal  of  Labor 
Economics  8  (1990):  202-229. 

9.  Adelman,  Women  at  Thirtysomething,  vi,  7,  23. 

10.  Turner  et  al..  Opportunities  Denied,  42-55. 

1 1 .  Carolyn  Ball,  "The  Maine  JTPA  Program  in  the  Workforce,"  paper  prepared  for  the 
Maine  Department  of  Labor,  1993;  Carolyn  Ball,  "Wage  and  Gender  Disparities  in 
JTPA:  A  Response  to  GAO,"  paper  presented  at  the  Partnership  for  Careers  in  Employ- 
ment and  Training  Conference,  New  Orleans,  April  10-15,  1992;  Dennis  Benson  and 
Jackie  Rhoads,  "Disparities  in  JTPA  Services:  Responding  to  Different  Needs,"  paper 
presented  at  the  Conference  of  the  Partnership  for  Training  and  Employment  Careers; 
Kathryn  Anderson,  "The  Effect  of  Creaming  on  Placement  Rates  under  the  Job  Training 
Partnership  Act,"  Industrial  and  Labor  Relations  Review  46  (1993):  619,  did  not  find 
race  disparities  in  placements  in  Tennessee. 

12.  Anderson, "The  Effect  of  Creaming,"  619. 

13.  Michael  Spence,  "Job  Market  Signaling,"  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics87  (1973): 
355-374;  Eugene  Kroch  and  Kriss  Sjoblom,  "Schooling  as  Human  Capital  or  a  Signal," 
Journal  of  Human  Resources  29  (1993):  156-175;  John  Bishop  and  Shani  Carter,  "The 
Worsening  Shortage  of  College-Graduate  Workers,"  Educational  Evaluation  and  Policy 
Analysis  13  (1991):  221-246;   John  Bishop,  "Underinvestment  in  EmployerTraining:  A 
Mandate  to  Spend?"  Human  Resource  Development  Quarterly  4  (1993):  223-246. 

14.  Bishop  and  Carter,  "The  Worsening  Shortage  of  College-Graduate  Workers,"  222. 
Adelman,  Women  at  Thirtysomething,  calls  this  the  screening  hypothesis.  Education 
can  screen  individuals  both  into  and  out  of  jobs. 

15.  John  Bishop,  "Work  Force  Preparedness,"  in  Research  Frontiers  in  Industrial  Relations 
and  Human  Resources,  edited  by  D.  Lewin,  O.  Mitchell,  and  P.  Sherer  (Madison,  Wise: 
Industrial  Relations  Research  Association,  1992):  447-488. 


16.  John  Bishop,  "Toward  More  Valid  Evaluation  of  Training  Programs,"  Journal  of  Policy 
Analysis  and  Management  8  (1989):  209-228. 

17.  For  welfare  status,  see  Benson  and  Rhoads,  "Disparities  in  JTPA  Services,"  and 
Anderson,  "The  Effect  of  Creaming,"  61 9.  For  education,  see  Ball,  "Wage  and  Gender 
Disparities." 

18.  Anderson,  "The  Effect  of  Creaming,"  619. 

19.  Gary  Becker,  Human  Capital,  3d  ed.  (Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1993). 
According  to  David  Hornbeckand  Lester  Solomon,  Human  Capital  and  America's 
Future:  An  Economic  Strategy  for  the  '90s  (Baltimore,  Md.:  Johns  Hopkins  Press, 
1991 ),  human  capital  refers  to  the  acquired  skills,  knowledge,  and  abilities  of  individu- 
als. 

20.  Bishop,  "Underinvestment  in  Employer  Training,"  220. 

21 .  Ball,  "The  Maine  JTPA  program";  Ball,  "Wage  and  Gender  Disparities";  Benson  and 
Rhoads,  "Disparities  in  JTPA  Services";  Stephen  Bell  and  Larry  Orr,  "Is  Subsidized 
Employment  Cost  Effective  for  Welfare  Recipients?"  Journal  of  Human  Resources  29 
(1994):  42-61;  U.S.  General  Accounting  Office  (hereafter  GAO),  Job  Training  Partner- 
ship Act  Racial  and  Gender  Disparities  in  Services,  HRD-91-148  (Washington,  D.C.: 
GAO,  1991),  4;  Howard  Bloom  et  al.,  The  National  JTPA  Study  (Bethesda,  Md.:  Abt 
Associates,  1993). 

22.  GAO,  Job  Training  Partnership  Act  Racial  and  Gender  Disparities,  22. 

23.  The  probability  of  placement  = 

1 
z= 

1+ez 
where: 

z  =  is  a  linear  combination 

z  =  B0  +  e,X,  +  B2X2  +  63X3  +  e 

24.  The  probability  of  the  observed  results  is  measured  mathematically  as  -2  times  the  log 
of  likelihood,  -2LL.  If  the  model  fit  the  data  perfectly,  -2LL  would  be  zero.  The  chi- 
square  improvement  is  the  difference  between  -2LL  as  components  are  added. 

25.  This  is  the  probability  when  the  average  age  is  thirty-four,  the  individual  also  received 
job  search  assistance,  and  the  individual  is  not  a  high  school  dropout.  For  an  explana- 
tion of  logit  modeling,  see  John  Aldrich  and  Forrest  Nelson,  Linear  Probability,  Logit, 
and  Probit  Models,  Sage  University  Paper  Series  on  Quantitative  Applications  in  the 
Social  Sciences,  07-001  (Beverly  Hills:  Sage  Publications,  1984). 

26.  Rao  (R)  serves  a  similar  function  as  the  partial  correlation  in  ordinary  least  squares. 
Small  values  indicate  a  small  contribution  to  the  model.  Like  a  partial,  Rao  is  affected 
by  the  other  variables  in  the  model. 

27.  Correspondence  with  John  Baj,  research  associate,  1988  to  1995,  Center  for  Govern- 
mental Studies,  Normal,  Illinois.  See  also  John  Baj  et  al.,  A  Feasibility  Study  of  the  Use 
of  Unemployment  Insurance  Wage-Record  Data  as  an  Evaluation  Tool  for  JTPA 
(Washington,  D.C.:  National  Commission  for  Employment  Policy  ,  1991). 

28.  U.S.  Department  of  Labor,  Implementation  of  Welfare-to-Work  Grants  (Washington, 
D.C.:  DOL,  October  1997). 


85 


86 


The  Professional 
Decline  of  Physicians 
in  the  Era  of 
Managed  Care 


Aimee  E.  Marlow 


Physicians  have  long  enjoyed  prestige,  power,  and  autonomy,  but  the  rise  of  man- 
aged care  organizations  has  drastically  changed  their  status.  Many  doctors  are  in 
thrall  to  the  financial  well-being  of  the  corporations  that  employ  them,  their 
knowledge  and  expertise  controlled  and  manipulated  in  the  interest  of  profit  maxi- 
mization. This  article  investigates  the  professional  decline  of  physicians,  citing  the 
use  of  gag  clauses,  incentives  to  withhold  care,  and  the  breakdown  of  their  author- 
ity. In  an  effort  to  regain  some  measure  of  control,  physicians  have  taken  their 
concerns  to  the  public,  supporting  state  and  federal  legislation  that  attempts  to 
curb  questionable  managed  care  practices,  but  this  new  alliance  is  unreliable.  The 
author  evaluates  the  history  and  ultimate  failure  of  California 's  propositions  214 
and  216,  both  created  to  protect  patients  and  physicians.  The  results  clearly  sug- 
gest that  physician  influence  alone  can  no  longer  sway  public  opinion. 


Physicians,  facing  deprofessionalization  in  the  new  corporate  structure  of  medicine, 
are  losing  a  tremendous  amount  of  power.  Some  no  longer  control  the  simplest 
medical  decisions,  for  example,  what  they  may  tell  patients  and  what  tests  they  may  or 
may  not  administer.1  The  few  who  downplay  the  importance  of  such  restrictions  fail  to 
recognize  that  "the  fate  of  patients  is  tied  to  the  fate  of  doctors."2  In  other  words,  the 
attenuation  of  medical  practice  is  an  issue  not  only  for  physicians,  but  for  all  who  con- 
sult them.  This  article  examines  several  of  the  myriad  details  regarding  the  state  of  U.S. 
medicine. 


What  Is  a  Profession? 

Sociologists  have  long  studied  the  rise  of  U.S.  professionalization,  a  product  of  the  late 
nineteenth  and  early  twentieth  centuries,  which  increased  dramatically  during  and  after 
the  Industrial  Revolution,  leading  to  growth  of  large  bureaucracies.3  As  society  devel- 
oped more  complex  structures,  institutions  flourished,  and  the  need  for  experts  and 
leaders  quickly  became  evident.4  Technical  training  and  leadership  capabilities  sepa- 
rated the  professional  from  the  lay  person.5  The  literature  of  sociology  acknowledges 
that  in  aspiring  to  professionalization,  an  occupation  generally  "strives  to  attain"  the 
following  characteristics  and  goals: 

Aimee  E.  Marlow,  a  doctoral  candidate,  Department  of  Sociology,  Boston  College,  concen- 
trates on  health  and  medicine,  public  policy,  work,  and  gender  issues. 

87 


.VfH  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


1.  Altruistic  service  to  clients  and  society: 

2.  A  basic  liberal  education  followed  by  professional  and  technical  training; 

3.  Licensure  by  the  state  .  .  .  The  criteria  for  licensure  and  practice  .  .  . 
should  be  drawn  up  [in].  .  .  consultation  [with]  practitioners  representing 
the  profession. 

4.  The  competence  of  professionals  is  judged  by  other  professionals; 

5.  Professional  practices  continually  directed  by  the  body  of  theory  and  re- 
search relevant  to  the  field;  and 

6.  A  code  of  professional  ethics  .  .  .  continually  developed,  corrected,  and 
enforced  by  the  profession  itself.6 

The  link  between  integrity,  service,  and  appreciation  for  knowledge,  evident  in  all 
six  points,  places  a  large  responsibility  on  members  of  an  occupation  to  uphold  its  pro- 
fessional status.  Their  reward  for  achieving  success  is  great,  for  the  professional  gains 
the  right  "[of]  freedom,  not  only  to  do  his  work  according  to  his  own  best  judgment  .  .  . 
but  also  to  choose  his  own  style  of  work  and  economy  of  effort.""  This  model  reflects 
medicine  as  it  should  be  and  what  most  Americans  expect  it  to  be:  an  altruistic  profes- 
sion embodying  integrity,  autonomy,  and  ethical  accountability. 

Professional  knowledge  and  theory  are  particularly  important.  Physicians,  who  tradi- 
tionally rely  on  their  interpretive  wisdom  to  separate  them  from  other  professions,  se- 
cure a  coveted  niche  in  society  as  healers.  Basic  medical  knowledge,  a  touchstone  offer- 
ing them  a  sense  of  the  role  they  should  play,  serves  to  separate  patient  from  physician. 
We  trust  physicians  with  one  of  our  most  valued  possessions,  our  health;  their  role  en- 
compasses strong  "moral  and  social  functions."8  Everett  Hughes  notes  that,  in  general, 
professions  "also  claim  a  broad  legal,  moral,  and  intellectual  mandate."9  He  adds,  "Not 
only  do  the  practitioners,  by  virtue  of  gaining  admission  to  the  charmed  circle  of  the 
profession,  individually  exercise  a  license  to  do  things  that  others  do,  but  collectively 
they  presume  to  tell  society  what  is  good  and  right  for  it  in  a  broad  and  crucial  aspect  of 
life."10  Medicine  fits  this  mold  exactly.  Physicians  and  patients  have  a  give-and-take 
relationship:  patients  give  their  trust  to  doctors,  whose  moral  and  intellectual  obliga- 
tions, they  are  confident,  will  safeguard  them  from  harm. 

In  rising  to  dominance,  physicians  met  all  the  criteria  noted  above,  benefiting  first 
from  structural  changes  in  society  and  later  from  their  collective  power.  Prior  to  gaining 
authority  in  the  late  nineteenth  and  early  twentieth  centuries,  doctors  encountered  a  host 
of  obstacles. ::  Without  a  scientifically  sound  body  of  knowledge  and  a  lack  of  "unity 
.  .  .  and  collective  authority,"  physicians  required  grounding.12  The  traditional  view  of 
illness  that  dominated  society  aggravated  the  issue.  Paul  Starr  writes,  "Many  Americans 
who  already  had  a  rationalist,  activist  orientation  to  disease  refused  to  accept  physicians 
as  authoritative.  They  believed  that  common  sense  and  native  intelligence  could  deal  as 
effectively  with  most  problems  of  health  and  illness:"13 

The  late  nineteenth  century,  a  time  of  great  cultural,  scientific,  and  social  change, 
greatly  influenced  the  state  of  all  professions.  The  United  States  embarked  on  a  "cul- 
tural revolution,"  when  "Americans  became  willing  to  acknowledge  and  institutionalize 
their  dependence  on  professions."1"  In  addition,  the  Industrial  Revolution  brought  about 
the  urbanization  of  life  in  America  and  a  new  reliance  on  complex  organizations  with 
hierarchical  structures,  which  became  comfortable  and  accepted.  The  term  "profes- 
sional" represented  power,  wealth,  and  advanced  education,  all  qualities  revered  in 
societv. 


Concurrently,  physicians  acquired  the  knowledge  that  granted  them  access  to  and 
control  over  grounded  scientific  "evidence/*  Advances  in  "'diagnostic  technology  .  .  . 
strengthened  [their]  powers  ...  in  physical  examination  of  the  patient."  Science  also 
developed  tests  for  "specific  .  .  .  disease,"  and  in  the  1880s,  the  organisms  "responsible 
in  tuberculosis,  cholera,  typhoid,  and  diphtheria  were  isolated";  by  the  1890s,  "labora- 
tory tests  had  been  introduced  to  detect  [them]."15  Thanks  to  science  and  to  society, 
physicians  started  gaining  power. 

But  other  hindrances  remained;  structural  changes  came  from  within  the  profession 
and  physicians  at  first  lacked  a  strong  collective  society  that  could  represent  them. 
More  troublesome  was  the  profession's  lack  of  a  "fixed  track"  for  education;  "whether 
or  not  a  physician  went  to  medical  school  and  if  he  did.  for  how  long  and  with  what 
general  education,  were  all  variable."16  Such  ambiguities  left  plenty  of  room  for  alterna- 
tive forms  of  treatment  like  homeopathy  and  eclectic  medicine  to  enter  the  market. 
Even  as  late  as  1900,  "the  ports  of  entry  into  medicine  were  still  wide  open  and  the 
unwelcome  passed  through  in  great  numbers."17 

The  formation  of  the  American  Medical  Association  fAMA)  in  1847  was  an  attempt 
to  give  physicians  an  organizational  foundation,  but  more  important,  the  AMA  sought 
to  standardize  medical  education  with  a  view  toward  eliminating  alternative  medicine.18 
Initially,  the  organization  suffered  from  internal  conflict  and  lack  of  structure  but  re- 
mained dedicated  -ito  [addressing]  the  problem  that  originally  motivated  its  formation, 
control  of  medical  education."19  In  1904  the  AMA  formed  the  Council  on  Medical  Edu- 
cation, which  set  standards  for  medical  schools,  including  increasing  the  preparation 
time  necessary  to  become  a  doctor  of  medicine  and  mandating  that  all  physicians  pass 
state  licensing  examinations  before  being  allowed  to  practice. 

The  1906  Flexner  committee,  in  a  report  that  investigated  the  country's  160  medical 
schools,  concluded  that  only  82  achieved  adequate  standards  for  medical  education.20 
The  best  were  encouraged  to  remain  open,  while  the  weaker  would  be  closed  or  merge 
with  stronger  institutions.  This  tremendous  overhaul  of  the  educational  system  "greatly 
increased  the  homogeneity  and  cohesiveness  of  the  profession  [and]  instilled  common 
values  and  beliefs  among  doctors  .  .  .  and  .  .  .  discouraged  sectarian  divisions."21 

Standardization  of  medical  education  provided  other  benefits  as  well,  enabling  doc- 
tors to  truly  define  the  role  of  physician.  The  lines  of  distinction  drawn  between  doctors 
and  other  health  care  professionals  were  changed  in  the  twentieth  century.  Hughes  ex- 
trapolates: "The  elaboration  of  the  organization  of  hospitals,  clinics,  and  public-health 
agencies  combined  with  great  technological  change  in  medicine  and  an  immense  in- 
crease in  the  demand  for  medical  services  has  led  to  a  great  reshuffling  in  the  whole 
medical  system."-  The  reshuffling  led  to  more  power  and  autonomy  for  physicians.  The 
profession  simply  passed  along  certain  duties,  such  as  taking  blood  pressure  or  filing 
forms,  to  other  workers.23  This  served  to  set  physicians  even  further  apart,  for  menial, 
time-consuming  tasks  were  no  longer  their  responsibility. 

By  pushing  forward  and  successfully  taking  advantage  of  the  structural  changes 
occurring  on  the  national  level,  physicians  ascended  to  the  professional  ranks,  continu- 
ing through  the  post-World  War  II  era.  The  new  advances  in  scientific  technology  that 
appeared,  "making  [medicine]  more  effective  in  treating  illness."  were  coupled  with 
federal  money  for  new  hospitals  and  "the  explosion  of  private  health  insurance.*'2"  Phy- 
sicians attained  an  unimaginable  level  of  resources  and  wealth. 

The  boom  in  the  medical  industry  presented  people  with  previously  unirnagined 


89 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


prospects  for  making  money;  many  physicians  took  advantage  of  the  potential  bonanza, 
adding  the  role  of  businessman  to  their  persona.25  Investment  opportunities  took  many 
forms,  but  none  was  as  lucrative  as  those  offered  by  pharmaceuticals,  an  industry  which 
by  the  mid-1950s  was  worth  $4.5  billion.26  It  seemed  reasonable  for  physicians  to  in- 
vest in  these  companies,  for  as  Howard  Wolinsky  and  Tom  Brune  noted,  "doctors  knew 
something  about  the  drugs  they  prescribed."27 

But  the  public  did  not  buy  this  explanation.  For  the  first  time,  people  were  forced  to 
realize  that  "doctors'  clinical  judgment  [could  be]  influenced  by  their  business  inter- 
ests."28 Overwhelmingly,  they  rejected  the  physician  as  businessman.  People  were 
clearly  uncomfortable  and  threatened  by  the  thought  that  doctors  could  be  persuaded  to 
prescribe  the  products  of  drug  companies  in  which  they  had  a  financial  interest  rather 
than  more  appropriate  medications.29  Recognizing  the  loss  of  public  trust,  the  AMA 
denounced  doctors'  involvement  with  these  organizations.  In  a  further  effort  to  polish 
the  tarnished  image  of  physicians,  AMA  delegate  Dr.  Edwin  B.  Dunphy  declared  in 
June  1952,  "The  medical  profession  is  not  a  luxury  business  but  a  profession  dedicated 
to  rendering  service  to  humanity.  Reward  or  financial  gain  is  a  subordinate  consider- 
ation. Physicians  should  never  lose  sight  of  this  principle.  If  they  do,  the  medical  pro- 
fession will  certainly  be  government  regulated  eventually  and  [emphasis  added]  with 
public  approval."30  One  might  assume  that  such  bad  publicity  and  public  disapproval 
would  have  deterred  physicians  from  involving  themselves  in  business  ventures,  but  as 
history  tells  us,  it  didn't.  For  the  most  part,  corporate  medicine  found  physicians  to  be 
willing  participants. 


Evolution  of  For-Proflt  HMOs 

Dunphy  had  no  inkling  of  the  future  of  medicine  and  its  business  alliances.  Today,  re- 
flecting on  his  words,  one  questions  how  far  medicine  has  come  and  if  the  lessons  of 
the  past  taught  anything.  The  success  of  physicians  in  their  pursuit  of  professionalism 
involved  luck.  Being  positioned  more  than  once  in  history  to  take  advantage  of  societal 
changes  is  remarkable  for  any  profession;  the  specific  events  noted  above  comprise  a 
few  such  fortuitous  examples  in  the  chronicles  of  physicians.  But  what  is  also  evident 
from  Dunphy  is  that  more  than  forty  years  ago,  doctors,  even  when  they  held  the  upper 
hand,  feared  a  corporate  threat  to  their  integrity. 

Modern  for-profit  HMOs  and  corporate  medicine  do  not  offer  physicians  the  power 
to  reject  or  dispute  the  corporations.  The  managed  care  concept  first  gained  popularity 
in  the  early  1980s.31  Most  HMOs  maintained  a  nonprofit  status  until  1987,  their  main 
theoretical  purpose  for  existence  based  upon  utilitarianism  and  rationalization,  namely, 
to  provide  for  as  many  people  as  possible  quality  health  care  at  the  least  expense.  As 
Wendy  Mariner  stated,  "The  goals  of  managed  care  came  to  be  seen  as  the  efficient  use 
of  health  care  resources  ...  to  provide  quality  care."32  By  1987,  "there  were  650  HMOs 
with  about  29  million  members."33 

Early  nonprofit  HMOs,  seemingly  adhering  to  the  original  purpose,  "encouraged 
coordinate  care,  [including]  preventive  services,  in  long-term  personal  relationships 
between  patients  and  primary  care  providers."34  Moving  managed  care  into  the  competi- 
tive market  and  making  it  a  for-profit  industry  apparently  offered  improved  quality  and 
efficiency  overall  since  "increased  competition  could  achieve  the  goals  [of]  providing 
good  quality  care."35  The  success  of  profit-making  HMOs  depended  largely  on  physi- 
cians' ability  to  keep  a  "foot  in  both  the  medical  and  the  business  camps"  and  its  suc- 
cess in  performing  "both  medical  and  business  functions,  taking  actions  to  provide  or 

90 


withhold  care  that  touches  the  traditional  sphere  of  medicine,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
acting  like  ordinary  business  enterprises  with  no  moral  obligation  or,  at  least,  obliga- 
tions that  have  little  to  do  with  traditional  medical  ethics."36 

In  the  model  under  discussion,  medical  ethics  and  business  concerns  are  accorded 
equal  priority.  Although  this  was  the  intent  of  for-profit  HMOs,  it  was  not  borne  out  in 
reality.  When  faced  with  conflicts  between  providing  "quality  medical  care  and  .  .  . 
obligations  to  preserve  their  assets,"  profit-making  HMOs  favored  the  needs  of  the  cor- 
poration, not  the  profession.37  Business  concerns  that  "put  profits  before  patients"  are 
now  "the  palpable  force  destroying  care."38 


Recent  Voices:  Ignored  but  Prophetic 

The  rise  of  for-profit  HMOs  and  the  subsequent  deprofessionalization  of  physicians 
should  not  surprise  Americans.  Although  many  people  spend  time  and  effort  evaluating 
the  present  state  of  medicine,  they  fail  to  integrate  one  crucial  piece  of  information: 
physicians  and  sociologists  predicted  all  of  today's  events  more  than  ten  years  ago.  The 
most  compelling  prophecies  were  those  of  Paul  Starr  and  Eliot  Freidson,  both  medical 
sociology  experts,  and  George  Lundberg,  longtime  editor  of  the  Journal  of  the  Ameri- 
can Medical  Association. 

In  the  final  chapter  of  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine,  Starr 
painted  a  dreary  picture  of  the  future  of  American  medicine.  He  envisioned  a  time  when 
the  corporation,  or  "private  sector,"  would  step  in  to  "rationalize"  medical  services, 
taking  over  faltering  public  institutions.  As  corporations  appropriated  medicine,  new 
challenges  to  physician  autonomy  and  prestige  would  be  inevitable,  and  in  an  extreme 
case,  "doctors  will  no  longer  have  as  much  power  over  such  basic  issues  as  when  they 
retire."39  One  backlash  of  this  trend  also  brings  to  light  for  Starr  another  obstacle, 
namely,  boundaries.  He  says,  "Another  key  issue  will  be  the  boundary  between  medical 
and  business  decisions;  when  both  medical  and  economic  considerations  are  relevant, 
which  will  prevail  and  who  will  decide?  ...  A  regime  of  medical  austerity  will  test  the 
limits  of  professional  autonomy  in  the  corporate  world."40 

Also  at  issue,  according  to  Starr,  was  the  "different  techniques  for  modifying  the 
behavior  of  physicians,  getting  them  to  accept  the  management's  outlook."41  Physicians 
will  be  "socialized"  not  merely  as  doctors  but  as  corporate  spokesmen,  learning  "to  do 
things  the  way  the  plan  or  the  company  has  them  done."42 

But  his  most  chilling  vision  of  the  future  seemed  to  be  the  most  prophetic.  Starr 
believed  that  the  medical  profession's  and  the  public's  complete  inability  to  control  the 
situation  was  an  invitation  to  corporations  to  turn  medicine  into  a  for-profit  industry. 
"Instead  of  public  financing  for  prepaid  plans,"  he  wrote,  "there  will  be  corporate  fi- 
nancing for  private  plans  .  .  .  whose  interests  will  be  determined  by  the  rate  of  return  on 
investments."43 

Freidson  also  feared  for  the  future  of  medicine.  He  too  recognized  the  emergence  of 
the  corporation  as  the  biggest  threat  to  the  profession  and,  more  specifically,  turned 
attention  to  the  detrimental  role  of  inducements  to  cut  health  care  costs.  Freidson  as- 
serted that  "considerably  less  emphasis  on  economic  incentives  would  greatly  improve 
the  spirit  in  which  practitioners  approach  their  work."44  More  idealistic  than  Starr,  he 
believed  that  a  "greater  emphasis  on  professional  values"  would  be  the  only  way  to 
repair  the  ailing  reputation  of  American  physicians.45 

Freidson  predicted  that  the  medical  community  would  face  a  "critical  choice"  that 


91 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


would  determine  the  future.  "We  can  passively  accept  a  health  care  system  that,  in  the 
interest  of  cost  containment,  slowly  moves  toward  mechanizing  and  bureaucratizing 
services.  Or  we  can  actively  choose  to  struggle  for  a  system  that  .  .  .  [is]  designed  to  do 
everything  it  can  to  improve  the  unique  lots  of  all  those  who  need  help."46  The  first 
choice  has  "physicians  and  health  care  workers  [following]  elaborate  rules  of  proce- 
dure" and  "patients  [as]  standardized  objects,"  while  the  second  focuses  on  "truly  hu- 
man health  services."47 

In  closing,  Freidson  takes  issue  with  the  way  the  industrialization  of  medicine  will 
inevitably  lead  to  "the  loss  of  something  precious"  for  both  physicians  and  patients. 
Within  a  mechanized  health  care  system,  doctors  "will  have  lost  the  opportunity  to  do 
autonomous,  challenging,  and  creative  work"  and  patients  will  "lose  the  opportunity  to 
regain  .  .  .  their  full  potential."48 

Sociologists  were  not  alone  in  addressing  the  problems  facing  the  medical  commu- 
nity and  physicians.  In  a  1985  editorial,  Lundberg  lashed  out  at  his  own  profession, 
focusing  on  how  "we,  the  aggregate  medical  profession,  are  in  big  trouble  with  the 
public  at  large."49  The  problems  he  reports  surround  the  issue  of  trust,  but  not  technical 
or  personal  trust.  Rather,  he  believes  that  the  real  issue  is  patients  who  do  not  trust  phy- 
sicians economically  or  morally.   He  states,  "Never  in  modern  history  has  the  medical 
profession  been  weaker  ...  To  a  great  extent,  physicians  are  becoming  seen  as  highly 
successful  businessmen  who  are  functioning  with  the  business  ethic  rather  than  the 
professional  ethic  .  .  .  We  are  viewed  by  many  as  a  restrictive  cartel."50  Thus,  industrial- 
izing medicine  has  bankrupted  the  profession  of  any  morality.  In  this  scenario,  both 
physicians  and  patients  pay. 

Lundberg  substantiates  this  point  by  citing  longitudinal  data  that  reflected  a  severe 
decline  in  patients'  trust  of  physicians,  specifically  in  the  area  of  money.  "In  1982,  42% 
of  the  public  queried  expressed  the  opinion  that  physician  fees  were  reasonable.  This 
declined  15  points  to  27%  in  1984,  a  shocking  change."51 

As  an  insider  in  the  medical  profession,  Lundberg,  is  critical  of  the  conflict  of  inter- 
est between  the  physician  as  businessperson  and  the  physician  as  healer.  He  offers  vari- 
ous solutions  to  the  problems  at  hand,  calling  on  doctors  to  "reestablish  the  fact  that  .  .  . 
as  physicians,  we  will  represent  the  best  interests  of  our  patients  and  the  public."52 
Changing  their  image  was  not  enough;  Lundberg  challenged  physicians  to  "change 
reality,  thereby  becoming  viewed  as  primarily  proactive  rather  than  reactive  .  .  .  pro- 
moting rather  than  opposing  progress."53 

In  financial  matters,  Lundberg  implored  all  physicians  to  be  aware  of  each  person's 
"financial  circumstances,"  to  adjust  payment  to  need  when  necessary.   He  emphasized 
the  need  for  physicians  to  take  a  "leadership  position"  in  cost  management  and  contain- 
ment and  to  be  "intolerant  of  devious  cost  shifting  and  of  questionable  creative  account- 
ing."54 Above  all,  physicians  "should  promote  openness  and  full  disclosure  of  facts 
because  the  truth  is  more  central  to  medical  science  and  to  the  practice  of  medicine 
than  any  other  human  endeavor."55 

Lundberg's  conclusions  provided  room  for  hope,  positive  change,  and  the  possibility 
of  a  bright  future,  but  it  was  all  contingent  on  physicians'  reverting  to  "caring  for  the 
public,"  choosing  altruism  over  greed,  and  taking  a  stand  against  unethical  practices.56 
So  far  doctors  have  failed  to  rise  to  the  occasion.  Why  is  that  so  important?  From  a 
professional  point  of  view,  it  means  no  more  than  successfully  adhering  to  the  Hippo- 
cratic  oath,  which  asserts  "that  physicians  have  duties  to  (1)  be  loyal  to  patients;  (2)  act 
in  their  patients'  interests;  (3)  make  their  patients  their  first  consideration,  even  when 


92 


their  own  financial  well-being  is  opposed."57  Physicians  are,  more  than  just  technicians, 
accepted  experts  of  the  body  working  in  an  American  society  obsessed  with  life  and 
death.  We  expect  a  social  contract  in  which  the  professional  physician  serves  us  as  ef- 
fectively as  possible. 


Declining  Power  and  Prestige 


The  shifts  in  American  medicine  are  clearly  leading  to  physicians'  losing  power,  which 
results  in  deprofessionalization.  In  the  six  criteria  for  all  professions,  profit-making 
HMOs  rob  physicians  of  their  ability  (1)  to  be  "altruistic  servants,"  as  indicated  by  the 
role  of  monetary  incentives  to  reduce  treatment;  (2)  to  have  their  work  and  competence 
judged  by  other  physicians,  because  the  very  structure  of  managed  care  works  against 
camaraderie  and  collective  activity;  and  most  important,  (3)  to  use  medical  knowledge 
to  its  fullest  in  a  variety  of  contexts,  for  their  authority  and  autonomy  are  tempered  by 
gag  clauses  in  managed  care  contracts,  which  determine  what  physicians  can  and  can- 
not tell  their  patients  and  the  public. 

Altruism  has  long  been  a  tenet  of  the  medical  profession.  Many  who  enter  the  field 
speak  of  "the  call,"  the  need  to  help  others  and  to  save  lives.58  The  ethics  and  mission  of 
medicine  encourage  nothing  less  than  physicians  doing  everything  possible  to  help 
patients,  but  for-profit  HMOs  remove  this  crucial  element  by  establishing  financial 
incentives  for  physicians  to  reduce  services. 

Managed  care  corporations  introduced  incentives  only  a  few  years  ago,  recognizing 
that  "other  approaches,  such  as  administrative  monitoring  and  penalties  for  overuse 
[were]  less  effective"  in  curbing  physicians  from  excessively  offering  or  wasting  re- 
sources.59 There  are  obvious  flaws  in  this  reasoning  according  to  Marc  Rodwin.  "If 
incentives  to  provide  services  cause  physicians  to  use  too  many  resources  and  to  per- 
form unnecessary  procedures,  would  not  incentives  to  reduce  services  result  in  too  few 
services?  .  .  .  How  can  we  be  sure  physicians  will  reduce  only  unnecessary  or  wasteful 
services?"60 

Financial  incentives  are  wrapped  in  various  packages.  In  their  most  blatant  form, 
they  deter  physicians  from  administering  expensive  diagnostic  tests.61  In  another  form, 
HMOs   "significantly  reduce  hospitalization,"  often  forcing  patients  out  the  door  after 
major  surgery.62, 63  A  large  proportion  of  a  physician's  salary  may  be  contingent  on  such 
incentives.  In  1995,  "74%  of  independent-practice  association  HMOs  and  50%  of 
group-model  or  staff-model  HMOs  [based]  physicians'  payment  in  part  on  measures  of 
utilization  and  cost."64  In  doing  so,  such  for-profit  managed  care  organizations  as  US 
Healthcare  bind  "primary  care  physicians'  interests  to  [those  of]  the  [firm]  .  .  .  Income 
is  tethered  to  conduct  that  furthers  corporate  profitability."65  Physicians  are  rewarded, 
"sometimes  quite  directly,  for  doing  less  for  their  patients,"  an  "inherent  conflict  of 
interest."66  This  cuts  to  the  very  heart  of  the  altruistic  nature  of  the  profession,  calling 
into  question  the  moral  and  ethical  implications  of  such  activity. 

The  declining  importance  of  altruism  is  related  to  how  and  by  whom  physicians  are 
judged.  Doctors  have  long  enjoyed  the  ability  to  oversee  their  profession's  educational 
standards,  ethical  codes,  and  the  opportunity  to  rate  one  another's  performance.67  Per- 
formance review  is  of  specific  concern.  Physicians  working  within  the  for-profit  HMO 
structure  find  that  the  quality  of  their  work  is  based  not  on  their  ability  to  be  good  prac- 
titioners, providing  excellent  care  and  developing  trust  with  patients,  but  on  their  ability 
to  cut  costs  and  generate  returns. 


93 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


The  system  of  for-profit  HMO  denies  physicians  the  opportunity  to  foster  relation- 
ships not  only  with  patients  but  with  other  physicians.  The  new  wave  of  corporate  medi- 
cine includes  a  loose  collection  of  physicians  who  work  in  various  locations  for  the 
same  entity.  Thus,  some  HMOs  are  composed  not  of  "a  core  of  dedicated  staff'  but  of 
"networks  and  private  practitioners  linked  by  part-time  contracts."68  Solidarity  among 
physicians  is  impossible  in  an  arrangement  that  has  "forced  practitioners  to  reorganize 
into  larger  units."69  Such  an  elaborate  structure  makes  measuring  performance  and  qual- 
ity of  care  an  intricate,  at  times  frustrating  experience. 

These  issues  are  important  indicators  of  the  deprofessionalization  of  medicine.  Yet 
the  control  of  medical  knowledge  through  the  restrictions  is  the  most  solid,  telling 
gauge  of  the  trend.  The  value  of  medical  knowledge  and  the  public's  trust  in  it  is  a  sig- 
nificant element  in  the  physician-patient  relationship.  Placing  a  high  value  on  knowl- 
edge presumably  upholds  the  "legal,  moral,  and  intellectual  mandate"  of  medicine.70 

But  in  the  new  design  of  managed  care,  expertise  and  knowledge  are  exploited  and 
controlled  for  the  good  of  the  corporation,  perhaps  best  exemplified  by  the  use  of  gag 
clauses  or  rules.  Generally,  these  take  several  forms,  all  of  which  potentially  impose 
constraints  on  the  physician-patient  relationship  and  on  doctors'  overall  autonomy.  The 
clauses,  to  which  physicians  have  to  agree,  are  written  into  their  contracts  with  man- 
aged care  organizations.  Gag  clauses  eliminate  alternative  treatments  that  the  managed 
care  organizations  view  as  unnecessary  or  inappropriate  for  any  number  of  medical 
conditions.  Physicians  who  defy  these  stipulations  face,  at  the  least,  reprimands,  and  at 
the  most,  dismissal. 

Legal  experts  identify  four  types  of  gag  rules,  the  first  of  which  places  "restrictions 
[on]  doctor-patient  discussion  of  treatment  alternatives."71  The  rules  specifically  pro- 
hibit physicians  from  "disclosing  treatment  options  that  the  [managed  care  organiza- 
tion] determines  are  inappropriate."72  This  restriction  declares  that  physicians  may  not 
discuss  alternative  treatments  with  a  patient  "until  the  plan  has  agreed  to  pay  for 
them"73  and  gives  its  approval.  If  the  corporation  deems  them  unsuitable,  physicians 
may  not  reveal  an  alternative  to  the  patients. 

This  type  of  clause  also  prohibits  physicians  from  "making  statements  to  patients 
that  would  undermine  the  patient's  confidence  in  the  [HMO]."74  A  doctor  who  disagrees 
with  an  organization's  actions  may  not  reveal  his  or  her  opinion  to  a  patient.  In  addi- 
tion, "suggesting  that  a  course  of  treatment  may  be  beneficial  or  even  life-saving,  but 
reporting  that  the  plan  will  not  cover  it,  could  be  construed  as  disparaging  or  as  suggest- 
ing that  the  plan  offers  substandard  care."75  The  physician,  unable  to  share  all  treatment 
options  with  the  patient,  may  feel  trapped. 

A  second  type  of  gag  clause  prevents  physicians  from  "discussing  conflicts  of  inter- 
est with  patients."76  A  doctor  may  not  reveal  the  terms  of  his  or  her  agreement  of  asso- 
ciation with  the  managed  care  organization.  Most  important,  physicians  cannot  reveal 
how  they  are  paid,  for  this  is  considered  a  "business  secret  requiring  protection."77  They 
cannot  bare  the  fact  that  the  amount  of  their  paycheck  is,  to  a  large  extent,  contingent 
on  the  treatment  options  they  choose  for  patients  —  less  treatment  translates  to  larger 
salary  —  which  could  negatively  affect  a  patient's  health. 

Another  gag  clause  restricts  doctors'  ability  to  recommend  facilities  where  patients 
can  receive  treatment  outside  their  care  organization.  Physicians  are  forbidden  to  rec- 
ommend "uncovered  treatments"  even  if  they  believe  such  alternatives  could  help  their 
patients"78  This  rule  also  prevents  physicians  from  giving  advice  on  the  nature  of  man- 
aged care  organizations  or  "offering  their  perspective  on  what  plans  are  better  for 

94 


patients  in  general,  or  [one]  patient  in  particular";  therefore,  some  of  their  expertise  is 
denied  to  patients.79 

A  final  gag  rule  precludes  physicians  from  publicly  "making  negative  comments 
about  the  plan"  with  which  they  are  associated.80  It  serves  to  keep  physicians  silent  in 
the  public  debate  on  managed  care,  for  they  are  "unable  to  offer  candidly  their  experi- 
ences and  expertise  to  patients  and  political  debates  alike."81  Public  discussion  is  com- 
promised by  the  denial  of  a  voice  to  these  eminent  actors. 

The  nationwide  debates  on  the  subject  of  gag  clauses  grow  more  heated  as  these 
stipulations  are  gradually  leaked  to  the  public.  Yet  because  of  vague  language  that  "dis- 
guises" them,  the  clauses  are  sometimes  difficult  to  locate  in  managed  care  contracts. 
Additionally,  a  "lack  of  any  [nationwide]  centralized  clearinghouse  for  contract  infor- 
mation" that  monitors  all  managed  care  contracts  makes  the  search  even  more  cumber- 
some.82 This  scarcity  of  information  adds  controversy  to  the  mixture.  Proponents  of 
managed  care  organizations  deny  the  very  existence  of  such  clauses  in  physicians'  con- 
tracts, claiming  that  the  agreements  are  fashioned  with  patient  protection  in  mind.  Op- 
ponents insist  that  these  clauses  are  commonplace,  that  they  blatantly  "violate  the 
physician's  ethical  duties,"  and  that  they  must  be  outlawed  immediately.83 

Controversy  aside,  the  very  notion  of  gag  clauses  leads  to  disturbing  conclusions 
about  this  method  of  cost  cutting.  Such  rules  directly  threaten  the  welfare  of  patients  by 
controlling  the  use  of  medical  knowledge.  They  "threaten  to  erode  the  doctor-patient 
relationship  by  silencing  physicians  and  keeping  patients  uninformed."84  They  raise 
important  legal,  ethical,  and  even  constitutional  questions.  Legally,  they  pose  dilemmas 
specifically  around  the  doctrine  of  informed  consent:  patients  "should  be  autonomous 
over  their  bodies,  which  requires  that  physicians  inform  patients  of  their  conditions  and 
options  for  treatment."85  According  to  the  doctrine,  a  doctor  must  inform  a  patient  of  all 
alternatives.  As  previously  noted,  rules  that  do  not  allow  for  full  disclosure  of  informa- 
tion violate  the  doctrine  of  informed  consent.  "Gag  clauses  that  prohibit  physician  dis- 
closure of  uncovered  treatment  threaten  to  turn  back  the  clock  to  a  time  when  patients 
were  kept  uninformed  of  their  alternatives  and  physicians  made  treatment  decisions 
without  regard  to  the  patient's  concern."86 

Failing  to  adhere  to  the  doctrine  of  informed  consent  suggests  that,  legally,  physi- 
cians are  not  doing  their  job,  which  can  leave  them  wide  open  to  charges  of  malprac- 
tice.87 Ethically,  gag  clauses  place  physicians  in  potentially  difficult  situations,  unable 
to  "advance  the  patient's  health,"  the  overarching  goal  of  medicine.88  Ethics  seems  to 
run  a  distant  second  to  profit  maximization  in  the  new  calling  of  corporate  medicine. 
John  McArthur  and  Francis  Moore  write,  "When  a  corporation  employing  physicians 
seeks  profit  by  selling  [its]  services,  the  physician-employees  cease  to  act  as  free 
agents.  Professional  commitment  to  patient  care  is  now  subordinated  to  new  rules  of 
practice  that  assure  profitability  of  the  corporation."89 

Another  important  consideration  is  the  way  gag  clauses  threaten  constitutional 
rights  of  doctors  by  withdrawing  their  freedom  of  speech.90  Some  forcibly  keep 
physicians'  voices  out  of  the  public  domain  on  health  care  issues,  and  violation  of  these 
terms  is  cause  for  the  dismissal  of  doctors.  Therefore,  "a  gag  rule  is  an  example  of  the 
loss  of  free  speech,  not  by  order  of  public  law,  but  by  the  dictates  of  health  care  corpo- 
rations."91 

US  Healthcare,  one  of  the  nation's  largest  for-profit  HMO  corporations,  provides  an 
excellent  example  of  manipulation  through  gag  rules.  In  1995  it  cared  for  2.4  million 
members,  earning  a  profit  of  $1  million  a  day.92  Steffie  Woolhandler  and  David 


95 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Himmelstein  note  the  following  clauses  from  a  US  Healthcare  contract  with  one  HMO. 
"Physicians  shall  agree  not  to  take  any  action  or  make  any  communication  which  un- 
dermines or  could  undermine  the  confidence  of  enrollees,  potential  enrollees,  their 
employers,  their  unions,  or  the  public  in  US  Healthcare  or  the  quality  of  US  Healthcare 
coverage  .  .  .  Physicians  shall  keep  the  Proprietary  Information  [payment  rates,  utiliza- 
tion-review procedures,  and  so  on]  and  this  Agreement  strictly  confidential."93  Trans- 
lated, these  clauses  state  that  physicians  cannot  openly  disagree  with  US  Healthcare  on 
any  ground  and  that  any  cost  the  HMO  assumes  or  does  not  assume  must  not  be  dis- 
closed to  the  patient. 

In  addition,  releasing  an  employee  who  disagrees  with  company  policy  is  also  part  of 
the  reality.  After  coauthoring  "Extreme  Risk,"  and  speaking  out  against  certain  HMO 
policies  on  national  talk  shows,  David  Himmelstein,  "on  December  1,  1995,  received 
notice  from  US  Healthcare  of  his  termination."94 

Gag  clauses,  which  reduce  the  value  of  a  physician's  knowledge  to  monetary  terms, 
deleting  moral  and  intellectual  components  from  the  picture,  are  only  one  of  several 
questionable  tactics  created  by  managed  care  corporations  whose  primary  concern  is 
profit  realization.  In  an  effort  to  combat  corporate  control,  more  and  more  physicians 
are  turning  to  the  public  for  support,  a  move  that  has  both  positive  and  negative  effects. 
On  the  positive  side,  physicians  and  patients  working  together  represent  increased 
people  power  and  increased  opportunity  for  physicians  to  educate  the  public  about  the 
potential  harm  profit-making  HMO  policy  can  generate.  For  example,  many  profes- 
sional doctors  organizations  have  produced  offspring  in  the  form  of  patient  organiza- 
tions. Physicians  Who  Care,  a  group  of  more  than  30,000  doctors,  is  allied  with  the 
15,000  members  of  Patients  Who  Care. 

Yet  bringing  concerns  to  the  public  and  inviting  citizens  to  join  forces  with  them  has 
not  necessarily  resulted  in  success  for  the  physicians.  They  face  the  fact  that  quality 
health  care  alone  may  not  be  enough  to  sway  public  opinion.  Indeed,  physicians  place 
themselves  in  the  position  of  having  to  deal  with  countervailing  modes  of  influence. 
The  history  of  propositions  214  and  216,  two  proposals  aimed  at  ending  unfair  and 
unethical  managed  care  practices  in  the  state  of  California,  are  prime  examples  of  this 
phenomenon.  Both  propositions,  introduced  as  precursors  to  the  creation  of  the  Health 
Care  Patient  Protection  Act  of  1996,  called  for  the  following  measures,  reported  in  the 
Fall  1996  Physicians  Who  Care  Newsletter. 

A.  Banning  all  written  gag  clauses; 

B.  Outlawing  financial  bonuses  tied  to  the  denial  of  necessary  care; 

C.  [Giving]  patients  the  right  to  [pursue]  a  second  opinion  before  denying 
doctor-recommended  care  and  [publicizing]  HMO  guidelines  for  denying 
treatment; 

D.  Requiring  "just  cause"  for  [terminating  services]  of  physicians  and  other 
professionals.95 

Proposition  216,  the  more  radical  of  the  initiatives,  also  added  clauses  that  included 
establishing  "a  consumer  watchdog  organization,  and  [imposing]  taxes  on  health-care 
mergers  and  acquisitions,  hospital  closures,  and  bed  reductions."96 

The  goals  of  both  propositions  offered  something  for  everyone.  Not  only  would  pa- 
tients be  protected  against  financial  incentives  that  may  influence  a  physician's  quality 
of  care,  but  the  doctors  themselves  would  be  free  from  the  threat  of  the  gag  clauses  that 
silence  them.  Both  measures  gained  huge  support  from  more  than  1 50  interest  groups 

96 


and  individuals  on  the  state  and  national  level.  Activist  Ralph  Nader  proclaimed,  "Pass- 
ing the  Patient  Protection  Act  is  the  single  most  critical  health  care  battle  this  year  for 
California  and  as  an  example  for  the  rest  of  the  nation.  .  .  .  The  denial  of  care,  gag  rules 
for  doctors  and  nurses  ...  are  a  national  scandal."97 

It  is  also  important  to  realize  that  neither  proposition  called  for  "new  taxes,  litiga- 
tion, or  government  agencies."98  Considering  the  propositions'  comprehensive  pro- 
grams, it  was  almost  impossible  to  imagine  the  public's  not  passing  them.  Yet  both 
failed  on  the  ballot,  even  with  the  support  of  thousands  of  physicians  and  ordinary  citi- 
zens nationwide.  In  a  poll  conducted  days  before  the  election,  46  percent  of  the  824 
people  surveyed  indicated  that  they  would  vote  against  both  propositions,  while  an 
additional  25  percent  and  26  percent  remained  undecided  about  214  and  216,  respec- 
tively.99 On  Election  Day,  214  failed  by  a  ratio  of  58  to  42  percent,  and  216  by  61  to  39 
percent.100 

A  perplexing  question  is  central  to  examining  the  failure:  How  could  the  citizens  of 
California,  a  state  with  more  than  30  million  residents,  58  percent  of  whom  are  enrolled 
in  HMOs,  vote  against  propositions  so  clearly  designed  to  protect  them  from  unethical 
managed  care?  Some  groups,  Taxpayers  Against  Higher  Health  Costs,  for  example, 
interpreted  the  defeat  as  an  indication  that  "Californians  [were  saying]  no  to  more  gov- 
ernment involvement  in  health  care,"  which  reflects  today's  probusiness,  promarket, 
antigovernment  sentiment.101  Health  care  reform  appears  to  be  unnecessary  if  the  market 
provides  checks  and  balances  as  it  should.  One  opponent  of  the  propositions  stated, 
"Those  opposed  to  [managed  care]  think  we  will  suffer  as  soulless  bean  counters  deny 
[us]  needed  care  .  .  .  But  free-market  capitalism  creates  a  powerful  check  on  such  ten- 
dencies."102 

Another  explanation  points  to  the  lack  of  voter  understanding  surrounding  the  propo- 
sitions. When  asked  specifics  about  each  proposition  in  a  preelection  poll,  respondents' 
answers  reflected  "confusion  about  what  is  what  and  what  each  would  do"  and  high- 
lighted an  overall  general  confusion  about  managed  care.103 

The  media's  role  in  the  failure  offers  a  further  possibility.  The  proponents  of  these 
proposals,  physicians  included,  were  unsuccessful  in  transmitting  the  message  that  for- 
profit  managed  care  organizations,  through  the  use  of  gag  rules  and  unethical  incen- 
tives, pose  a  legitimate  threat  to  the  health  and  well-being  of  patients.  The  print  media 
opposed  the  propositions.  Editorials  in  fifty  major  newspapers  across  California  recom- 
mended a  no  vote  on  both.104  The  state's  largest  newspaper,  The  Los  Angeles  Times,  held 
nothing  back  in  its  attack.  It  recognized  the  "[legitimate]  problems"of  the  HMO  system 
but  stood  firmly  for  the  rights  of  the  corporation.  In  its  evaluation  of  the  propositions, 
the  Times  concluded,  "They  [are]  fuzzily  worded  provisions.  Both  [for  example]  try  to 
eliminate  gag  rules  by  allowing  caregivers  to  disclose  information  'relevant  to  the  pa- 
tients' health  care.'  While  physicians  are  certainly  entitled  to  freedom  of  speech,  man- 
aged care  companies  should  be  able  to  impose  some  restrictions."  Focusing  on  the  need 
to  contain  costs,  the  editorial  further  declared  that  the  propositions  "would  tie  the 
managed  care  companies,  making  it  difficult  to  effect  the  nimble  balance  between 
quality  and  cost  effectiveness."105 

In  sheer  numbers  and  ability  to  reach  and  educate  the  public,  the  battle  for  power 
between  a  media  supporting  managed  care  organizations  in  California  and  physicians 
desiring  to  change  unethical  policies  is  really  no  contest.  Yet  in  appealing  to  the  public 
for  support,  physicians  must  face  the  media  as  well  as  such  other  forces  as  antigovern- 
ment sentiment  that  sway  opinions.  If  propositions  214  and  216  suggest  anything,  it  is 


97 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


that  physicians  collectively  cannot  overcome  the  many  powers  that  influence  the  public. 
On  the  subject  of  managed  care,  they  are  "pushed  and  pulled  from  all  directions  in  the 
debate  .  .  .  and  are  likely  to  remain  neutralized."106 


Finding  a  Solution  for  the  Future 


Several  issues  emerge  from  the  foregoing.  First,  much  as  physicians  would  like  to  be- 
lieve otherwise,  they  have  for  decades  had  to  grapple  with  finding  a  niche  in  their  pro- 
fessional role  for  the  businessperson.  One  must  realize  that  although  the  public  never 
approved  of  this  new  role  and  was  often  frightened  and  threatened  by  it,  the  profession 
persisted  in  its  attempts  to  embrace  it.  Because  their  professional  status  and  power  al- 
lowed it,  doctors  could  manipulate  the  public  and  control  the  interference  of  corpora- 
tions and  business  in  their  work. 

Now  that  physicians  need  help  in  reclaiming  their  professional  power,  they  appear  to 
have  nowhere  to  turn.  Corporate  takeovers  are  still  rampant  in  medicine,  and  although 
some  state  and  federal  legislation  has  managed  to  ban  a  number  of  unethical  incentives 
and  gag  clauses,  problems  persist.  Americans  should  be  deeply  concerned  about  the 
deprofessionalization  of  medicine  and  the  dangers  associated  with  "bad  managed  care, 
investor-owned,  for-profit  entities  operated  by  insurance  companies  and  managers  with 
little  or  no  experience  in  health  care  delivery,"  but  confusion  and  lack  of  awareness 
distance  them  from  the  issues.107 

Attempting  to  dismantle  managed  care  is  not  an  appropriate  solution  —  the  managed 
care  model  of  medicine  is  apparently  here  to  stay.  The  number  of  people  in  some  sort  of 
managed  care  arrangement  increases  every  year.  For  example,  "In  1995,  54  million 
Americans  were  enrolled  in  health  maintenance  organizations  and  as  many  as  130  mil- 
lion [were]  insured  in  one  or  another  form  of  managed  care."108  This  number  represents 
an  increase  of  13  percent  from  1994.109  Therefore,  abandoning  the  managed  care  con- 
cept is  currently  not  practical  or  possible. 

To  accomplish  anything,  physicians  must  come  to  grips  with  their  position  rather 
than  ignoring  indicators  that  suggest  the  decline  of  their  professional  status.  As  Freidson 
and  Lundberg  asserted  years  ago,  they  must  focus  on  the  original  goals  of  their  profes- 
sion, primarily  patient  advocacy.  Furthermore,  unless  doctors  resist  the  businessperson 
mentality,  which  historically  has  always  undermined  them,  their  autonomy  will  vanish. 
We  will  enter  an  era  in  which  medical  knowledge,  and  its  use  and  distribution,  is  con- 
trolled by  businesspeople.  As  this  occurs,  patients  will  suffer  and  continue  to  lose  faith 
in  physicians,  widening  an  already  large  rift  between  the  two  camps. 

The  success  or  failure  of  physicians  and  patients  in  regaining  control  of  health  care 
will  depend  largely  on  the  degree  of  willingness  of  all  parties  to  be  radical  and  progres- 
sive. Specifically,  physicians  must  be  ready  and  willing  to  work  with  the  public  and 
other  health  care  professionals  to  effect  change.  As  Woolhandler  and  Himmelstein  as- 
sert, "We  must  scale  care  to  a  human  size  .  .  .  Unless  HMO  physicians,  workers,  and 
patients  are  centrally  involved  in  planning  this  transformation,  and  the  movement  for 
reform,  it  will  surely  fail."110 

Glimmers  of  this  mentality  and  its  possible  benefits  are  coming  to  the  surface.  For 
example,  in  June  1996  the  American  Medical  Group  Association  (AMGA)  was  formed 
"from  the  merger  of  the  American  Group  Practice  Association  and  the  Unified  Medical 
Group  Association."111  This  new  confederation  of  more  than  350  group  practice  associa- 
tions, which  brings  together  administrators,  physicians,  and  patients,  states  that  its 


98 


primary  goals  include  serving  as  "an  information  resource  for  group  practice  administra- 
tors and  as  an  advocacy  group  for  physician  decision-making  and  managed  care  re- 
form.""2 The  group  also  plans  to  continue  to  build  upon  a  "patient-centered  outcomes 
database,"  thus  creating  for  patients  a  "sounding  board"  on  which  they  can  voice  their 
concerns  and  rate  their  quality  of  care.113 

The  birth  of  the  AMGA  is  certainly  an  encouraging  sign,  but  for  real  change  to  oc- 
cur, a  more  radical  approach  is  necessary.  I  suggest  that  the  American  Medical  Associa- 
tion become  the  organization  that  unifies  patients,  physicians,  and  other  health  care 
workers  in  their  battle  against  corporate  medicine.  The  AMA  already  identifies  itself  as 
"a  grassroots  organization  [that]  has  served  as  a  national  leader  in  efforts  to  extend 
access,  contain  costs,  and  improve  the  quality  of  the  American  health  care  system.  The 
AMA  is  extremely  active  in  public  health  campaigns,  working  vigorously  for  healthy 
lifestyles."114  If  this  is  indeed  the  mission  of  the  AMA,  it  should  have  no  problem  taking 
a  stand  against  the  corruptive  nature  of  so  many  for-profit  HMOs,  but  as  Howard 
Wolinsky  and  Tom  Brune  report,  the  AMA  has  never  truly  attempted  to  help  patients, 
and  in  fact  billed  itself  as  one  of  the  "most  powerful  political  lobbies  [not]  to  protect 
our  rights  as  patients  .  .  .  Rather,  it  has  worked  hard  to  look  after  physician  income  and 
interest."115 

In  the  health  care  crisis  sweeping  the  nation,  the  AMA  has  the  potential  to  play  a 
tremendous  role.  It  could,  without  much  internal  turmoil,  undertake  the  following: 

1 .  Advocate  socially  responsible  investing  —  encourage  people  to  divest 
their  stock  portfolios  of  profit-making  HMOs  that  use  financial  incen- 
tives and  gag  clauses. 

2.  Support  any  state  or  federal  legislation  that  encourages  increased  patient 
and  physician  protection,  such  as  propositions  214  and  216,  providing 
funds  and  manpower  for  campaigns. 

3.  Launch  a  national  HMO  awareness  campaign  —  flood  the  media  with  in 
formation  concerning  gag  clauses  and  other  pros  and  cons  of  managed 
care. 

4.  Develop  a  code  of  ethics  for  all  managed  care  corporations,  creating  an 
obtainable  balance  between  business  concerns  and  medical  ethics. 

5.  Change  medical  school  curricula  to  include  a  mandatory  internship  in  a 
managed  care  setting  for  all  students.  As  of  now,  only  16  percent  of 
schools  have  this  requirement.116 

6.  Create  a  patient  organization  that  works  closely  with  other  AMA  groups 
in  advocacy  projects. 

7.  Invite  patients  to  serve  on  patient-physician  committees  designed  to 
monitor  activities  of  the  many  large  for-profit  HMOs. 

8.  Provide  financial  support  to  patients  who  rightfully  sue  HMOs  for 
breach  of  contract  or  malpractice. 

More  radically,  the  AMA  could  use  its  vast  resources  to  support  many  grassroots 
organizations,  such  as  Health  Care  for  All  of  Boston,  which  attempt  to  provide  quality 
medical  care  to  those  who  cannot  afford  it.  The  possibilities  are  endless. 

Robert  Larsen  states,  "There  is  a  window  of  opportunity  for  someone  to  step  up  to 
the  plate  and  provide  the  vision  that  can  eliminate  many  of  the  current  [health  care] 
dilemmas."117  I  believe  that  the  AMA  can  accomplish  this  task.  It  comes  down  to  the 


99 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


organization's  willingness  to  change  reality,  not  simply  an  image,  as  Lundberg  sug- 
gested. The  American  Medical  Association  stands  ready  to  deliver,  but  will  it  meet  the 
call  or  retreat?  Only  time  will  tell.  Until  then,  we  have  to  wait,  hoping  that  the  situation 
does  not  become  progressively  worse.  ** 

/  extend  special  thanks  to  Professor  Jeanne  Guillemin  and  Professor  Ritchie  Lowry  for 
their  comments  on  earlier  drafts  of  this  work. 


Notes 

1.  S.  Woolhandlerand  D.  Himmelstein,  Extreme  Risk   The  New  Corporate  Proposition 
for  Physicians,    New  England  Journal  of  Medicine  333,  no.  25  (December  95):1706 — 
1708. 

2.  E.  Freidson,  Medical  Work  in  America:  Essays  on  Health  Care  (New  Haven  and 
London:  Yale  University  Press,  1989). 

3.  P.  Starr,  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine  (New  York:  Basic  Books, 
1982). 

4.  E.  Hughes,  On  Work,  Race,  and  the  Sociological  Imagination  (Chicago:  University  of 
Chicago  Press,  1994). 

5.  Since  it  is  impossible  to  do  justice  here  to  the  vast  sociological  literature  on  profes- 
sions, I  decided  to  use  Cogan  s  breakdown  because  it  seemed  to  be  the  most 
succinct  and  provided  an  excellent  framework  for  the  arguments  posed  later  (M. 
Cogan,  Toward  a  Definition  of  Profession,     Harvard  Educational  Review23  [1953]: 
48—49). 

6.  Cogan  in  R.  Lowry,  A  Guide  to  Sociology  (New  York:  Free  Press,  1972),  464. 

7.  E.  Hughes,  The  Sociological  Eye:  Selected  Papers  (New  Brunswick  and  London: 
Transaction  Books,  1984),  372. 

8.  Ibid.,  288. 

9.  Ibid. 

10.  Ibid. 

1 1 .  Starr,  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine,  17. 

12.  Ibid. 

13.  Ibid. 

14.  Ibid. 

15.  Ibid.,  137. 

16.  Ibid.,  89. 

17.  Ibid.,  117. 

18.  J.  G.  Burrows,  AMA —  Voice  of  American  Medicine^  Baltimore:  Johns  Hopkins  Univer- 
sity Press,  1963). 

19.  Starr,  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine,  112. 

20.  Ibid. 

21.  Ibid.,  123. 

22.  Hughes,  The  Sociological  Eye,  293. 

23.  Ibid. 

24.  H.  Wolinsky  and  T.  Brune,  The  Serpent  on  the  Staff  (New  York:  Tarcher/Putnam 
Books, 1994),  97. 

25.  Ibid. 

26.  Ibid.,  98. 

27.  Ibid. 

28.  D.  Stone,  The  Doctor  as  Businessman:  The  Changing  Politics  of  a  Cultural  Icon, 
Journal  of  Health  Politics,  Policy,  and  Law  22,  no.  2  (April  1997):  545. 

29.  Wolinsky  and  Brune,  The  Serpent  on  the  Staff,  97. 

30.  Ibid.,  98. 

31.  Woolhandlerand  Himmelstein,  Extreme  Risk. 

32.  W.  K.  Mariner,  Business  vs.  Medical  Ethics:  Conflicting  Standards  for  Managed   Care, 


100 


Journal  of  Law,  Medicine,  and  Ethics  23,  no.  3  (Fall  1995):  237. 

33.  D.  Light,  Countervailing  Power:  The  Changing  Character  of  the  Medical  Profession  in 
the  United  States,    Perspectives  in  Medical  Sociology,  ed.  Phil  Brown,  2"-  ed.  (Pros- 
pect Heights,  III.:  Waveland  Press,  1996),  661. 

34.  Mariner,  Business  vs.  Medical  Ethics,  236. 

35.  Ibid.,  237. 

36.  Ibid.,  238. 

37.  Ibid. 

38.  S.  Woolhandlerand  D.  Himmelstein,  Galloping  Toward  Oligopoly:  Giant  HMO  A  or 
Giant  HMO  B  ?  in   Perspectives  in  Medical  Sociology,  491. 

39.  Starr,  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine,  446. 

40.  Ibid.,  447. 

41.  Ibid. 

42.  Ibid.,  448. 

43.  Ibid.,  449. 

44.  Freidson,  Medical  Work  in  America,  260. 

45.  Ibid. 

46.  Ibid.,  264. 

47.  Ibid. 

48.  Ibid. 

49.  G.  D.  Lundberg,  Medicine  —  A  Profession  in  Trouble?  Journal  of  the  American 
Medical  Association  253,  no.  19  (May  1985):  2879. 

50.  Ibid. 

51 .  Lundberg  is  referring  to  statistics  generated  from  data  collected  by  the  American 
Medical  Association  s  Council  on  Long  Range  Planning  and  Development,  1984. 

52.  Lundberg,  Medicine  —  A  Profession  in  Trouble?  2880. 

53.  Ibid. 

54.  Ibid. 

55.  Ibid. 

56.  Ibid. 

57.  M.  Rodwin,  Conflicts  in  Managed  Care,     New  England  Journal  of  Medicine  332,  no. 
9  (March  1995):  607. 

58.  Burrows,  AM  A. 

59.  M.  A.  Rodwin,  Medicine,  Money,  and  Morals:  Physician  s  Conflict  of  Interest  (New 
York  and  Oxford:  Oxford  University  Press  ,1993),  155. 

60.  Ibid. 

61.  Woolhandlerand  Himmelstein,  Extreme  Risk. 

62.  Rodwin,  Medicine,  Money,  and  Morals.  104 

63.  Recently  state  and  federal  legislation  has  attempted  to  put  a  halt  to  this  practice.  See 
a  detailed  account  in  F.  Hellinger,  The  Expanding  Scope  of  State  Legislation, 
Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Association  276,  no.  13  (October  2,  1996):  1065 — 
1069. 

64.  Woolhandlerand  Himmelstein,  Extreme  Risk,  1706. 

65.  Ibid. 

66.  M.  Angell  and  J.  P.  Kassirer,  Quality  and  the  Medical  Marketplace  —  Following 
Elephants,    New  England  Journal  of  Medicine  335,  no.  12  (September  1996),  884. 

67.  Starr,  The  Social  Transformation  of  American  Medicine. 

68.  Light,  Countervailing  Power,  662. 

69.  Ibid. 

70.  Hughes,  The  Sociological  Eye,  288. 

71.  J.  A.  Martin  and  L.  K.  Bjerknes,  The  Legal  and  Ethical  Implications  of  Gag  Clauses  in 
Physician  Contracts,    American  Journal  of  Law  and  Medicine  22,  no.  4  (1996):  443. 

72.  Ibid. 

73.  Ibid. 

74.  Ibid.,  444. 

75.  Ibid. 

76.  Ibid.,  446. 

77.  Ibid. 

101 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


78.  Ibid. 

79.  Ibid. 

80.  Ibid.,  448. 

81.  Ibid. 

82.  H.  Brody  and  E.  Alexander,  Gag  Rules  and  Trade  Secrets  in  Managed  Care  Con- 
tracts: Ethical  and  Legal  Concerns,  Archives  of  Internal  Medicine  157  (October 
1997):   2039. 

83.  N.J.  Picinic,  Physicians,  Bound  and  Gagged:  Federal  Attempts  to  Combat  Managed 
Care  s  Use  of  Gag  Clauses,      Sefon  Hall  Legislative  Journal  21  (Winter  1997):  567 — 
620. 

84.  Martin  and  Bjerknes,  Legal  and  Ethical  Implications,  449. 

85.  Ibid.,  450. 

86.  Ibid. 

87.  Ibid. 

88.  Brody  and  Alexander,  Gag  Rules  and  Trade  Secrets,  2039. 

89.  A.  H.  McArthur  and  F.  D.  Moore,  The  Two  Cultures  and  the  Health  Care  Revolution: 
Commerce  and  Professionalism  in  Medical  Care,    Journal  of  the  American  Medical 
Association  277,  no.  12  (March  1997):  986. 

90.  Ibid. 

91.  Ibid. 

92.  Woolhandlerand  Himmelstein,  Extreme  Risk,  1706. 

93.  Ibid. 

94.  Gag  Rule  Gets  Himmelstein,  He  Says,     Medicine  and  Health  B0  (January  1996). 

95.  Physicians  Who  Care  Newsletter,  Fall  1996,  Comment@pwc.org. 

96.   R.  L.  Rundle  and  L.  Mc  Ginley,  California  Voters  Are  Cool  to   Hot  HMO  Issue,     Wall 
Street  Journal,  October  31,  1996,  B1,  B12. 

97.  G.  D  Andrea,  Patient  Protection  Acts  Evolve  from  AMA  Model,  But  Issues  Endure, 
BNA  s  Managed  Care  Reporter  26  (1996):  426. 

98.  Ibid. 

99.  Rundle  and  Mc  Ginley,  California  Voters  Are  Cool,  B1. 

100.  R.  Sabin,  Propositions  214,  216  Failed  to  Tap  Outrage,     San  Francisco  Chronicle, 

November  7,  1996,  A19. 

101.  Voters  Again  Reject  Reform   Proposals,     BNA  s  Managed  Care  Reporter  26  (Novem- 
ber 12,  1996):   1084. 

102.  S.  Chapman,  Refusing  to  Be  Scared  of  Managed  Care,     Chicago  Tribune,  November 

10,   1996,  23. 

103.  Rundle  and  Mc  Ginley,  California  Voters  Are  Cool,  B12. 

104.  Business  wire,  November  5,  1996. 

1  05.  Los  Angeles  Times,  Metro  section,  November  6,  1996,  B6. 

106.  Sabin,   Propositions  214  and  216  Failed,  A19. 

107.  Mariner,  Business  vs.  Medical  Ethics,  236. 

1  08.  D.  Blumenthal  and  S.  Thier,  Managed  Care  and  Medical  Education  — The  New 

Fundamentals,    Journal  of  the  American  Medical  Association  276,  no.  9  (September 
1996):  726. 

109.  P.  Busowski,  Managed  Care  Enrollment  Up  13  Percent  to  150  Million  in  1995,  AAHP 
Survey  Finds,     BNA  s  Managed  Care  Reporter  26  (June  26,  1996):  776—777. 

110.  Woolhandlerand  Himmelstein,  Galloping  Toward  Oligopoly,  494. 

111.  Group  Practice  Association  Merge  to  Represent  350  Organizations,     BNA  s  Managed 
Care  Reporter  26  (June  26,  1996):  626. 

112.  Ibid. 

113.  Ibid. 

114.  From  the  AMA  home  page,  Membership@Web.ama.assn.org 

115.  Wolinsky  and  Brune,  The  Serpent  on  the  Staff,  3. 

116.  J.  Veloski  et  al.,  Medical  Student  Education  in  Managed  Care  Settings,     Journal  of 
the  American  Medical  Association  276,  no.  9  (September  1996):  661 — 667. 

117.  R.  Larson,   Health  Care:  Whose  Business  Is  It?     Postgraduate  Medicine 99,  no.  2 
(February  1996):  21. 


102 


Cambodian  Political 
Succession  in 
Lowell,  Massachusetts 


Jeffrey  Gerson,  Ph.D. 


This  article  asks,  What  factors  have  in  the  past  affected  and  will  continue  to  af- 
fect the  degree  of  Cambodians'  participation  and  representation  in  Lowell  poli- 
tics? Gerson  argues  that  five  key  factors,  three  internal  —  coming  to  terms  with 
the  legacy  of  mistrust  resulting  from  the  holocaust  wrought  by  Pol  Pot's  murder- 
ous regime;  lacking  a  tradition  of  democratic  participation  in  their  home  country; 
and  generational  differences  between  those  who  regard  themselves  as  Cambodian 
and  the  American-born  —  and  two  external  —  Lowell's  two-tiered  political  sys- 
tem and  the  response  of  the  city's  elected  officials  to  the  influx  of  Southeast 
Asians  that  began  in  the  early  1980s.  The  author  believes  that  oral  history  is  an 
indispensable  tool  for  studying  ethnic  and  urban  politics. 


Since  its  1826  founding  as  an  industrial  city  on  the  banks  of  the  Merrimack  River, 
Lowell,  Massachusetts,  has  continued  to  attract  immigrants.  The  Irish  arrived 
before  the  Civil  War,  the  French  Canadians  during  and  after  it;  from  the  late  1800s 
through  the  early  1920s,  the  Greeks,  Lithuanians,  Portuguese,  Swedes,  Jews,  and  Poles 
came  to  the  city  and  established  ethnic  communities.  In  the  decades  after  World  War  n, 
as  the  once  mighty  Lowell  textile  mills  fell  all  but  silent,  the  most  recent  stream  of 
immigrants  and  migrants  made  their  way  here.  First,  from  the  Hispanic  Caribbean  came 
Puerto  Ricans,  Cubans,  and  Colombians;  following  the  Vietnam  War,  Southeast  Asians, 
mainly  Cambodians,  fleeing  the  horrors  of  civil  war. 


Demography 

The  most  remarkable  change  in  the  mosaic  of  Lowell's  ethnic  population  has  occurred 
over  the  past  fifteen  years.  In  1980  Southeast  Asians  comprised  less  than  one  percent  of 
the  city's  population  (604  of  92,418);  today  that  number  hovers  around  24  percent,  or 
24,148  of  105,000.  Eighty  percent  of  Lowell's  Southeast  Asians  are  of  Cambodian  an- 
cestry. The  only  rapid  demographic  change  comparable  to  the  past  decade  and  a  half 
was  the  growth  in  Lowell's  population  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
thanks  to  the  boom  in  textile  manufacturing  and  Irish  immigration.  The  "city  of 
spindles"  grew  from  2,500  to  33,000  between  1826  and  1850.1 


Jeffrey  Gerson,  assistant  professor  of  political  science,  University  of  Massachusetts 
Lowell,  specializes  in  ethnic  and  urban  politics. 


103 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Theory  and  Literature:  A  Survey 


Succession  as  a  concept  was  first  developed  by  sociologists.  Political  scientists  came 
late  to  the  study  of  ethnic  groups.  In  the  1920s,  the  Chicago  School  of  sociologists,  led 
by  Robert  W.  Park,  argued  that  ethnic  groups  move  through  various  stages  in  their  rela- 
tions with  dominant  ethnic  groups.  Some  of  these  processes  are  described  as  conflict, 
accommodation,  and  assimilation  —  groups  that  have  lived  in  one  area  for  extended 
periods  frequently  become  dispersed  and  are  finally  assimilated.  The  pluralists  believe 
that  ethnic  groups  coexist  peacefully  while  holding  on  to  some  of  their  culture.  While 
Park's  model  considered  conflict  as  part  of  the  succession  process,  it  saw  an  orderly, 
irreversible  sequence  of  change. 

Based  on  models  of  plant  ecology,  Chicago  School  succession  is  defined  in  demo- 
graphic terms.  Michael  J.  White  of  Princeton  University  explains:  "Succession  is  the 
dynamic  process  by  which  the  population  composition  of  small  areas  (neighborhoods) 
within  cities  changes.  We  can  define  succession  as  the  replacement  of  one  identifiable 
population  subgroup  by  another  within  the  boundaries  of  a  given  neighborhood."2  Suc- 
cession is  seen  as  a  basic  process  of  urban  ecological  change. 

White  continues:  "Succession  proceeds  as  the  new  group  (often  newcomers  to  the 
metropolis)  replaces  the  previous  group.  The  rate  of  replacement  and  the  amount  of 
resistance  offered  by  the  original  group  are  elements  of  the  process  that  may  vary  with 
circumstance."3 

Economists  also  use  succession  theory  to  study  urban  housing  and  spatial  location  of 
ethnic  groups  by  income.  Along  with  sociologists  they  see  succession  as  a  series  of 
stages,  beginning  with  initial  penetration,  proceeding  through  invasion  and  consolida- 
tion, and  concluding  with  piling  up.  In  sum,  succession  has  been  useful  to  scholars 
studying  geographic,  socioeconomic,  and  housing  characteristics  as  well  as  the  ethnic 
composition  of  neighborhoods.  However,  few  political  scientists  have  studied  succes- 
sion and  minority  group  relations  together. 

One  of  the  few  works  by  a  political  scientist  to  address  the  phenomenon  of  political 
succession  was  a  book  by  a  sociologist  and  a  sometime  political  scientist  who  doubles 
as  a  U.S.  senator  from  New  York.  In  the  early  1960s  Nathan  Glazer  and  Daniel  Patrick 
Moynihan  collaborated  on  a  study  of  ethnic  groups  in  New  York  City,  Beyond  the  Melt- 
ing Pot.4  In  it  they  argued  that  ethnic  political  succession,  though  not  a  main  theme  of 
the  study,  was  "a  central  dynamic  of  the  city's  organizational  life."5 

In  an  article  reviewing  succession  since  Beyond  the  Melting  Pot,  Moynihan  observed 
that  the  Irish  had  dominated  the  political  life  of  New  York  City  for  decades  but  by  1977 
not  one  Irish  person  served  on  the  city's  major  government  boards.  Succession  by  Jews 
and  Italians  had  been  achieved.  One  of  the  chief  reasons  for  this  accomplishment  was 
the  persistence  of  ethnicity  in  general  and  ethnic  groups'  role  in  American  life  as  inter- 
est groups  making  claims  for  benefits  from  the  state.  The  state  in  turn  found  it  helpful 
to  organize  claims  made  on  it  through  ethnic  fines. 

Succession  is  defined  by  Moynihan  as  a  dynamic  process  consisting  of  "the  displace- 
ment of  established  groups  (established  in  a  neighborhood,  a  profession,  a  church,  a 
sport,  a  trade  union)  by  another  group  and  also  ...  the  attainment  of  one  group  to  the 
condition  of  another."6  By  this  Moynihan  means  that  in  a  mixed  ethnic  group  in  which 
one  faction  is  dominant,  its  norms  appear  to  be  normal  for  everyone.  Attainment  to  the 
condition  of  the  other  means  that  the  designated  inferior  ethnic  group  achieves  the 
norms  of  the  dominant  group.  According  to  Moynihan,  the  latest  wave  of  migrants  and 

104 


immigrants  that  he  and  Glazer  studied,  blacks  and  Puerto  Ricans,  were  acting  according 
to  their  theory  of  political  succession,  by  both  challenging  and  emulating  the  norms  of 
previously  dominant  groups. 

The  glass-half-full  optimism  of  Moynihan's  analysis  is  shared  by  pluralist  theorists. 
The  most  current  example  of  a  theoretical  model  that  views  ethnic  politics  through  a 
pluralist  lens,  one  that  addresses  the  latest  group  of  immigrants  and  refugees  in  America, 
is  Lawrence  Fuchs's  The  American  Kaleidoscope.1  This  brief  review  of  the  literature 
singles  out  Fuchs  because  he  epitomizes  the  pluralist  ethnic  political  model  of  succes- 
sion, which  is  the  underpinning  of  this  article. 

The  debate  of  the  elite  versus  pluralist  models  in  urban  politics  has  centered  on  the 
role  of  the  urban  political  machine.  Did  the  machine  incorporate  or  exclude  new  ethnic 
groups  in  city  politics?  Studies  by  Steven  Erie  and  Diane  Pinderhughes  argue  that  the 
machine  tried  its  best  not  to  share  the  spoils  of  patronage  for  a  number  of  reasons. 

Erie,  who  surveyed  a  dozen  cities  around  the  nation  that  experienced  Irish  control  of 
the  party  apparatus,  found  some  of  the  main  reasons  to  be  the  machine's  limited  re- 
sources as  well  as  pressure  from  middle-class  homeowners  to  keep  property  taxes  low. 
For  Pinderhughes,  who  studied  the  Chicago  machine  under  Daley,  blacks  achieved 
symbolic  or  descriptive  representation  only  because  a  monopoly  of  political  power 
prevented  substantive  issues  such  as  discrimination  in  employment,  housing,  and  educa- 
tion from  reaching  the  political  agenda.8  Generally  speaking,  as  Roger  W.  Lotchin  has 
written,  elite  theorists  find  machine  leaders  partial  to  a  strategy  of  limited  ethnic  mobi- 
lization; a  smaller  electorate,  which  is  more  manageable,  was  preferable.9 

Pluralist  theorists  view  the  role  of  the  machine  more  favorably.  Their  concern  is  the 
rate  of  succession,  not  whether  it  occurs.  They  believe  that  the  speed  at  which  an  ethnic 
group  moves  up  the  ladder  of  political  power  depends  on  a  number  of  factors.  Among 
these  are  the  rate  of  demographic  change  within  a  political  jurisdiction,  the  size  and 
distribution  of  the  group,  the  intensity  of  political  party  competition  for  the  ethnic  vote, 
the  degree  of  independence  of  the  new  ethnic  voters,  the  quality  of  ethnic  group  leader- 
ship, and  legislative  reapportionment.10 


Fuchs's  View  of  Ethnic  Political  Succession 

Lawrence  Fuchs  considers  succession  a  three-stage  process.11  The  first  stage  witnesses 
the  forming  of  associations  for  religious  and  fraternal  solidarity,  the  second  organizing 
for  economic  success,  and  the  third  achieving  political  power.  I  argue  that  the  first  and 
second  parts  of  the  process  are  well  under  way  in  the  Cambodian  community  of  Lowell, 
as  they  have  been  for  other  Southeast  Asians  across  the  country.  For  example,  such 
religious  and  civic  organizations  as  Buddhist  temples  and  mutual  assistance  associa- 
tions, in  addition  to  such  communication  outlets  as  newspapers,  radio  and  cable  TV 
programs,  and  public  ceremonies,  serve  the  same  purpose  they  did  for  earlier  immi- 
grants and  refugees:  to  "express  their  sensibilities,  protect  their  interests,  or  promote 
some  public  good  through  organized  activity."12  Moreover,  they  help  newcomers  to 
"keep  in  touch  with  each  other  and  to  cope  with  loneliness,  vulnerability,  and  fear  that 
immigrants  often  experienced."13  Economically,  newcomers  form  small  businesses  and 
business  associations  that  benefit  the  community,  for  example,  beauty  salons,  auto  re- 
pair shops,  jewelry  stores,  and  so  forth.  Lowell  already  has  a  hundred  small  businesses 
run  by  Southeast  Asians,  most  of  whom  are  Cambodians.  Cambodians  concerned  about 
the  health  of  small  businesses  have  formed  groups  like  the  Cambodian  League  of 


105 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Lowell  to  help  obtain  bank  loans,  mortgages  for  first-time  home  buyers,  and  so  on. 
Interestingly,  Cambodians  in  California  have  found  a  niche  in  the  doughnut  business, 
running  20  percent  of  all  such  shops  there. 

In  the  third  stage  of  succession,  new  ethnic  groups  call  for  greater  ethnic  power, 
which  is  usually  threatening  to  established  groups.  Fuchs  believes  that  those  in  the 
latest  wave  have  joined  the  older  wave  immigrants  in  exercising  their  right  to  express 
themselves.  New  groups  catch  on  to  the  fact  that  public  expressions  of  ethnicity  through 
group  action  are  legitimate  in  the  United  States.  Even  resident  aliens,  without  the  vote, 
are  active  because  they  were  encouraged  to  be  so  by  foundations  and  corporations' 
providing  the  training  ground  for  leadership  development.  "Newcomers  have  [also] 
followed  the  pattern  of  older  groups  ...  in  mobilizing  their  claims  and  defending  their 
interests."1"  Disagreements  about  old  country  politics  occur  among  all  groups,  new  and 
old,  who  are  often  divided  by  class,  region,  ideology,  and  generation. 

In  response  to  the  advocacy  of  immigrant  ethnic  interests,  local  and  state  govern- 
ments create  citizen  advisory  groups  concerned  with  immigrant  affairs,  which,  Fuchs 
writes,  encourages  the  creation  of  immigrant  and  refugee  advocacy  groups  and  their 
participation  in  politics.  Many  of  these  organizations  reach  out  to  newcomers,  which  is 
especially  important  in  places  where  the  political  machine  has  withered. 

Even  such  refugee  groups  as  the  Southeast  Asians,  '"who,  much  more  than  immi- 
grants, tended  to  be  preoccupied  with  old  country  politics,  moved  with  remarkable  ease 
to  participate  in  American  politics/'15  Fuchs  argues  that  refugee  groups  in  particular 
have  great  potential  for  political  mobilization  because  of  their  sheer  numbers  (in  1985 
there  were  634,200  Vietnamese,  218,400  Lao,  and  160,800  Cambodians  in  the  United 
States).  Moreover,  refugees  are  in  a  better  position  to  become  mobilized  than  immi- 
grants because  settlement  programs  organized  by  voluntary  agencies  with  the  assistance 
of  state  and  federal  government  agencies  are  enormously  helpful.  This  argument  is 
supported  by  literature  in  the  field  of  political  socialization.  Gillian  Cohen  notes, 
"'Refugees  experience  a  different  kind  of  political  incorporation  process  than  other  im- 
migrants, have  more  frequent  and  in-depth  interaction  with  government  and  migrate 
involuntarily."16  While  hard  times,  lack  of  language  skills,  and  poverty  have  retarded 
their  political  incorporation  to  a  degree,  like  other  immigrant  ethnic  groups,  they  are 
starting  to  naturalize  in  large  numbers  once  they  realize  they  cannot  return  to  their 
homeland.  "Once  naturalized,  they  feel  empowered  in  American  politics."17  Fuchs  re- 
ports a  burgeoning  of  political  clubs  and  citizen/voter  leagues  within  the  refugee  com- 
munity. 

Finally,  the  latest  wave  of  refugees  also  have  several  other  advantages  over  second 
wave  (1880-1920)  immigrants:  a  higher  proportion  of  persons  with  education  and  fi- 
nancial resources  and  a  larger  proportion  of  people  who  wish  to  reunite  with  close  fam- 
ily members  already  in  the  community. 

Fuchs  concludes  by  taking  note  of  one  of  this  study's  chief  findings:  their  experience 
with  genocide  may  slow  the  succession  progress  of  Cambodians.  Fuchs  writes  that 
among  the  Southeast  Asians,  "the  Cambodians  were  most  passive,  possibly  because  of 
their  persecution  under  the  Khmer  Rouge  dictatorship  in  Cambodia,  but  some  of  them 
became  active  in  local  politics  and  even  in  the  Dukakis  presidential  campaign.  It  was 
only  a  matter  of  time  until  the  Laotians  and  the  Cambodians  became  more  active."18 

My  thesis  is  that  Cambodians  have  begun  the  process  of  political  mobilization.  How- 
ever, while  my  study  of  Cambodians  in  Lowell  concurs  with  Fuchs 's  argument  gener- 
ally, I  am  fully  cognizant  of  the  pitfalls  in  Fuchs's  rosy  analysis  of  ethnic  and  racial 

106 


history.  As  April  Schultz  accurately  points  out,  Fuchs  tends  to  ignore  "the  pain,  the 
ambivalence  and  multiple  identities  of  those  living  at  the  confluence  of  ever-changing 
borders"  of  ethnic  power  in  America.19  Moreover,  adds  Jesus  Salvador  Trevino,  '"in  his 
zeal  to  demonstrate  the  impressive  ways  in  which  Americans  of  all  backgrounds  have 
made  the  American  civic  culture  work  for  them,  he  tends  to  downplay  the  human  price 
paid  for  these  gains."20 

Therefore,  while  I  concur  with  Fuchs  that  the  process  of  succession  is  indeed  under 
way  among  the  Cambodians  in  Lowell,  they  comprehend  that  the  road  is  full  of  in- 
equalities, struggles,  and  contradictions. 


The  Literature  of  Cambodian  Politics  in  America 

A  survey  of  the  literature  about  Cambodian  politics  in  the  United  States  reveals  a  pau- 
city of  research  on  the  subject.  One  reference  work  on  Asians  in  America  describes 
Cambodians  as  inactive  in  U.S.  politics.21  A  work  on  the  political  socialization  of 
Southeast  Asians  in  Lowell,  however,  critiques  this  notion  and  lends  support  to  Fuchs. 
Gillian  Cohen  argues  that  Southeast  Asian  refugees  in  Lowell  quickly  "acquired  the 
political  knowledge  necessary  to  successfully  force  the  Lowell  city  government  to  ac- 
quiesce to  demands  concerning  their  children's  educational  needs."22  She  further  asserts 
that  the  special  resources  Southeast  Asian  refugees  received  from  federal  and  state  gov- 
ernments, as  well  as  the  establishment  of  a  dense  network  of  voluntary  agencies,  inter- 
national, national,  and  local,  which  assisted  particularly  with  the  establishment  of  local 
mutual  aid  associations,  allowed  Southeast  Asian  activists  to  gain  an  important  political 
education  that  may  serve  them  well  in  future  political  activity. 

Cohen  acknowledges  that  the  success  of  the  Southeast  Asians  was  largely  the  result 
of  an  alliance  created  between  Puerto  Rican  activists  in  Lowell  and  an  outside  legal 
advocacy  group,  Multicultural  Education,  Training,  Advocacy,  which  filed  the  federal 
lawsuit  that  was  instrumental  to  a  compromise  settlement  which  ended  discriminatory- 
and  segregated  conditions  in  Lowell's  public  schools. 

Though  political  participation  in  the  schools'  struggle  was  led  by  a  small  group  of 
well-educated  Southeast  Asian  professionals,  nearly  one  hundred  parents  attended  meet- 
ings to  protest  unequal  conditions.  Cohen's  is  a  limited  study,  however,  examining  the 
years  1984—1988.  In  the  years  following  1988,  the  Cambodian  Mutual  Aid  Association 
experienced  internal  upheaval,  and  the  Lao  Mutual  Aid  Association  closed  its  doors. 
These  events  raise  doubts  about  whether  the  skills  Southeast  Asian  activists  learned 
during  the  school  conflict  will  translate  into  "potentially  learned  strategies  and  gained 
knowledge  that  they  can  apply  in  new  political  contexts."23 

Given  the  limited  material  and  the  difficulty  hypothesizing  just  how  active  Cambodi- 
ans are  in  American  local  politics,  I  have  undertaken  an  audio  and  video  oral  history  of 
the  community's  political  experience. 


Research  Methods 

The  lack  of  meaningful  papers,  diaries,  photographs,  memoirs,  and  letters  relating  to 
Lowell  politics,  and  urban  politics  in  general,  requires  that  the  serious  scholar  of  politi- 
cal history  resort  to  oral  history.  Political  leaders  in  particular  rarely  keep  documents 
because  they  conduct  most  of  their  business  in  person  or  on  the  telephone.2"  As  an  oral 
historian,  I  hope  to  give  voice  to  those  whose  stories  have  not  yet  been  told. 

707 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


The  late  labor  historian  Herbert  Gutman  understood  the  value  of  oral  history  and 
argued  that  immigrants  especially  must  be  understood  in  terms  of  how  they  deal  with 
large  social  forces,  making  deliberate  choices  among  perceived  options.  Though  their 
choices  may  be  limited,  they  must  never  be  reduced  to  being  merely  passive  victims.25 
C.  Wright  Mills,  too,  saw  an  important  place  for  oral  history,  stating  that  social  science 
must  be  "the  study  of  biography,  history,  and  of  the  problems  of  their  intersection 
within  the  social  structure.  To  study  these  problems  .  .  .  requires  that  our  work  be  con- 
tinuously and  closely  related  to  the  level  of  historical  reality  —  and  to  the  meanings  of 
this  reality  for  individual  men  and  women."26 

I  believe  that  oral  history  is  the  best  tool  for  capturing  the  human  struggle  of  politi- 
cal life,  intimate  views  of  political  relationships,  and  stages  and  periods  in  the  process 
of  individual  and  political  development.  As  a  method,  it  holds  in  esteem  the  way  people 
view  their  life  and  times.  It  asks  researchers  to  inject  less  of  their  own  perceptions  of  it. 
The  people's  views,  critically  assessed,  provide  the  greatest  understanding  of  history. 

Oral  historians  realize  that  people's  accounts  may  be  several  steps  removed  from 
actual  occurrences.  Impressions  have  their  own  biases;  all  memory  is  selective  and 
fallible.  The  potential  for  fabrication,  prejudice,  and  exaggeration  is  always  present. 
Oral  history  must  be  approached  open-mindedly  and  with  skepticism.  A  scholar  must 
remember  that  nothing  recounted  can  be  cavalierly  dismissed  nor  uncritically  em- 
braced. 

To  prepare  for  the  oral  histories,  I  reviewed  scholarly  articles  on  the  political  history 
of  the  city,  an  oral  history  collection  of  ethnic  group  impressions  of  Lowell,  and  exam- 
ined the  clipping  files  of  the  city's  sole  newspaper,  the  Lowell  Sun,  for  the  years  1985 
through  1995.27 

I  interviewed  eighteen  community  activists  and  scholars,  most  of  them  current  and 
former  city  government  officials  and  social  service  workers.  Language  was  not  a  barrier 
to  these  interviews  with  Cambodian  participants  because  the  community's  activists  have 
a  solid  grasp  of  the  English  language.  There  were,  however,  cultural  hindrances  to  this 
study. 

The  Cambodians  I  interviewed  regarded  me,  a  college  professor  of  non-Cambodian 
heritage,  as  an  outsider,  and  initially  a  few  of  them  were  reticent  about  talking  with  me. 
My  inability  to  speak  Khmer  barred  me  from  employing  a  familiar  and  comfortable 
means  of  communication.  I  considered  hiring  a  Cambodian  research  assistant  to  remedy 
this  condition  but  recognized  that  it  was  important  for  me  to  meet  face  to  face  with 
community  leaders  to  establish  a  rapport.  At  the  start  of  the  interviews,  it  was  tough  to 
pierce  the  Cambodian  community's  inner  workings  partly  because  Cambodian  culture 
places  great  value  on  courtesy  and  indirectness;  individuals  were  always  outwardly 
polite  and  refused  to  be  critical  of  one  another.  I  soon  learned  to  change  my  manner  of 
questioning.  It  is  understandable  that  a  vulnerable  immigrant  group  would  not  wish  to 
reveal  its  internal  divisions  and  tensions  to  a  potentially  hostile  world. 

While  my  outsider  status  at  first  inhibited  me,  it  soon  proved  to  be  an  enhancement 
to  the  study.  My  position  as  a  university  professor  was  a  big  plus,  given  the  Southeast 
Asian  community's  deep  respect  for  education  and  educators.  Furthermore,  the  commu- 
nity leaders  see  the  university  as  one  of  the  city  institutions  that  has  come  to  their  aid. 
For  instance,  the  university,  through  its  faculty,  obtains  grants  that  are  of  some  benefit 
to  community  social  service  agencies.  Several  professors  have  worked  closely  with  the 
community.  For  example,  political  science  professor  Hai  B.  Pho,  an  immigrant  from 
Vietnam,  who  was  instrumental  in  assisting  the  resettlement  of  Southeast  Asian  refugees 


108 


in  Lowell  during  the  early  1980s,  is  well  respected  by  the  community.28 

My  desire  to  win  the  confidence  of  Cambodian  community  leaders  is  evident  in  the 
conditions  I  established  for  the  interviews.  I  offered  the  interviewees  a  cassette  tape  of 
the  interview  along  with  a  written  transcript,  giving  them  the  opportunity  to  negotiate 
any  desired  editing.  Oral  historians  generally  frown  on  allowing  interviewees  the  power 
to  alter  their  initial  conversations.  As  trust  develops  between  the  community  leaders  and 
me,  this  condition  may  no  longer  be  necessary. 

Before  interviewing  the  community  leaders  on  audiocassette,  I  requested  permission 
to  interview  them  on  camera  as  well.  Most  were  pleased  to  learn  that  they  might  appear 
in  a  videocassette  and  may  have  cooperated  to  guarantee  their  participation  in  the  en- 
deavor. This  documentary  film  is  a  complement  to  my  article. 


Cambodian  Political  Succession:  The  Early 
Stages  of  Political  Mobilization 

Throughout  American  history,  ethnic  tension  followed  the  move  of  a  new  immigrant  or 
refugee  group  into  an  established  community.  It  is  only  natural  for  older,  well-rooted 
groups  to  feel  ill  at  ease  when  there  is  an  abrupt  tear  in  their  community's  fabric.  The 
key  question  remains:  How  do  they  manage  the  transition  and  juxtaposition  of  power 
and  culture? 

To  date,  following  a  trend  in  the  immigrant  and  refugee  political  experience,  no 
Southeast  Asians  are  represented  in  Lowell's  elective  institutions,  the  City  Council  and 
the  School  Committee.  Political  succession  takes  time.  Though  the  first  Irish  arrived  in 
Lowell  during  the  1 820s,  the  first  Irish  mayor,  John  J.  Donovan,  was  not  elected  until 
1882.  The  French  Canadians  waited  even  longer  for  one  of  their  own  —  Dewey 
Archambault  became  mayor  in  1936.  Although  20,000  Greeks  immigrated  to  Lowell 
before  World  War  I,  they  waited  until  1951  to  see  George  C.  Eliades  elected  the  first 
mayor  of  Greek  descent  in  Lowell  —  and  in  the  United  States.29 

The  process  of  Cambodian  political  succession  is  under  way  in  Lowell  and  Massa- 
chusetts. More  than  seventy-five  Southeast  Asian-owned  businesses  have  been  estab- 
lished in  Lowell,  and  five  Cambodian  officers  have  been  added  to  its  police  force.  The 
campaign  to  end  school  overcrowding  and  create  well-funded  bilingual  and  multicul- 
tural educational  programs  resulted  in  the  state's  paying  $131  million  to  build  ten  new 
schools,  refurbish  six  others,  and  establish  bilingual  education  programs.  In  the  elec- 
toral arena,  a  Cambodian  community  activist  has  campaigned  for  the  Lowell  School 
Committee.  In  what  can  only  be  viewed  as  a  pioneering  effort,  Sambath  Chey  Fennell 
ran  for  office  in  1995  and  again  in  1997.  His  poor  showing  in  both  races  —  twelfth 
place  finish  in  1995,  eleventh  in  1997  —  reveals  how  long  a  row  Southeast  Asian  candi- 
dates must  hoe  in  the  city.30  An  encouraging  sign  did  appear  in  the  town  of  Randolph, 
where  Daniel  Lam  became  the  first  Cambodian-American  elected  to  a  local  office,  as  a 
selectman,  in  Massachusetts.  Moreover,  Revere's  mayor,  Bob  Hass,  credits  his  283-vote 
margin  of  victory  in  November  1997  to  the  Revere  Cambodian  community  of  3,500. 
Roughly  three  hundred  new  voters  were  registered  by  the  Hass  organization.31 

At  the  national  level,  ironically,  succession  received  a  boost  from  anti-immigrant 
sentiment  in  Washington.  The  Immigration  Reform  Act  of  1995  dramatically  cut  ben- 
efits for  legal  immigrants,  rendering  many  Southeast  Asians  ineligible  for  several  cru- 
cial federally  funded  programs  such  as  food  stamps,  Medicaid,  and  Supplemental  Secu- 
rity Income.  According  to  the  Massachusetts  Immigrant  and  Refugee  Advocacy  Coalition, 


109 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


applications  for  citizenship  in  the  state  skyrocketed  in  1995  and  1996.  Nationally,  in 
1995,  the  Immigration  and  Naturalization  Service  received  nearly  one  million  applica- 
tions for  citizenship,  three  times  the  annual  average  of  300,000.  In  a  survey  conducted 
by  the  Federal  National  Mortgage  Association,  84  per  cent  of  immigrants  who  acquired 
citizenship  cited  the  ability  to  vote  as  a  reason  for  doing  so. 

So  great  was  the  movement  toward  citizenship  that  the  Clinton  administration  was 
repeatedly  taken  to  task  by  the  Republican  Congress  for  making  it  too  easy  for  new- 
comers to  become  citizens.  Evidence  of  the  growing  power  of  immigrant  voters  can  be 
found  in  the  1996  election  of  Congresswoman  Loretta  Sanchez  and  the  defeat  of  incum- 
bent Robert  K.  Dornan  in  California,  the  nearly  break-even  Clinton  vote  in  the  Cuban- 
American  community,  once  a  Republican  stronghold,  and  in  Massachusetts,  which 
witnessed  the  defeat  of  the  state's  only  two  Republican  congressmen. 

Apparently  the  Republican  congressional  leadership  recognized  the  folly  of  its  anti- 
immigration  measures.  On  November  12,  1997,  Congress  undid  two  key  provisions  of 
the  1996  Immigration  Act,  a  law  that  severely  harmed  immigrants'  rights  and  sped  the 
deportation  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  people  who  had  lived  in  the  United  States  for 
many  years.  Likewise,  Clinton  and  the  Congress  agreed  to  ease  the  suffering  caused  by 
the  1996  Welfare  Reform  law,  which  also  spurred  successful  movements  in  the  states, 
most  notably  Massachusetts,  New  York,  and  California,  to  pressure  legislatures  to  par- 
tially restore  funds  for  programs  that  were  cut  at  the  federal  level. 

As  the  result  of  a  complex  set  of  factors,  including  but  not  limited  to  language,  their 
refugee  status,  and  the  brutal  destruction  of  their  culture  at  the  hands  of  the  Khmer 
Rouge,  many  Cambodians  are  not  yet  citizens  and  therefore  cannot  participate  in  local 
elections.  The  exact  number  of  Lowell  Southeast  Asians  who  are  citizens,  and  of  that 
group  the  number  that  are  registered  to  vote,  is  unknown.  One  estimate  was  made  in 
1994,  before  welfare  reform  was  announced,  of  700  citizens  and  300  registered  voters 
—  the  Cambodian  American  Voter  League  (CAVL),  the  only  group  actively  seeking 
such  information,  is  the  source  for  these  figures.32  In  a  city  of  46,000  registered  voters, 
it's  no  wonder  that  their  community  lacks  political  clout.  One  thing  of  which  those  who 
are  active  in  city  politics  are  certain  is  that,  with  a  fifth  of  the  city's  population  South- 
east Asian,  half  of  whom  are  under  18  years  of  age,  and  an  average  family  consisting  of 
5.03  people  as  compared  with  3.06  for  white  families,  this  group's  numbers  will  con- 
tinue to  grow  and  Southeast  Asians  will  be  a  political  force  to  be  reckoned  with  in  the 
coming  years.33 

The  central  question  I  pose  is:  What  factors  have  affected  and  will  affect  the  degree 
of  Cambodian  participation  and  representation  in  Lowell  politics?  My  answer  is  that 
five  key  factors,  three  internal  and  two  external  to  the  community,  help  explain  the 
seeming  absence  of  an  active  local  political  community  as  well  as  elected  or  appointed 
Cambodians  in  Lowell  city  government.  The  first  three,  deemed  internal  because  they 
are  largely  within  the  control  of  the  Cambodian  community,  are  most  crucial  for  under- 
standing the  succession  process.  These  are  (1)  coming  to  terms  with  the  legacy  of  fear 
and  mistrust  that  resulted  from  the  holocaust  wrought  by  Pol  Pot's  murderous  regime; 
(2)  the  lack  of  a  tradition  of  democratic  participation  in  their  home  country  and  there- 
fore little  familiarity  with  American  political  institutions;  and  (3)  one  of  the  key  divi- 
sions within  the  Cambodian  community:  the  problem  of  generational  differences  be- 
tween those  who  consider  themselves  Cambodians,  and  perhaps  speak  only  Khmer,  and 
the  American  born,  who  have  no  recollection  of  Cambodia  and  think  of  themselves  as 
American.  These  factors  make  the  establishment  of  an  organized  political  effort  to  en- 


110 


courage  citizenship,  registration,  and  capturing  elective  office  in  Lowell  very  difficult. 
The  two  relevant  factors  that  are  considered  external,  or  outside  the  immediate  con- 
trol of  Cambodians,  are  (1)  the  structure  of  Lowell's  political  system,  which  has  two 
important  components,  the  city's  political  party  organization  and  the  electoral  system  of 
representation;  and  (2)  the  response  of  the  city's  elected  officials  to  the  influx  of  South- 
east Asians  that  began  in  the  early  1980s. 


Internal  Factors 

The  Legacy  of  Fear 

On  April  17,  1975,  the  Khmer  Rouge  invaded  the  Cambodian  capital  of  Phnom  Penh 
and  Lon  Nol's  five-year  government  fell.  Hours  later  a  forced  evacuation  and  relocation 
of  the  city's  residents  to  the  countryside  began.  Former  members  of  the  Nol  regime 
were  executed.  Reeducation  labor  camps  were  established  to  wipe  out  any  remnants  of 
Cambodian  culture  and  ancient  traditions,  including  religion.  Resisters  were  killed. 

Not  enough  can  be  said  about  the  impact  of  the  next  four  years  of  Khmer  Rouge 
"killing  fields"  on  the  lives  of  Cambodians.  It  is  estimated  that  between  two  and  four 
million  Cambodian  men,  women,  and  children  were  killed,  the  reason  Cambodians 
have  come  to  the  United  States.  They  see  it  as  the  time  that  has  changed  all  time. 

Two  interviewees  describe  how  they  believe  Cambodia's  history  of  regime  change, 
civil  war,  and  the  tragic  events  that  followed  created  a  deep  distrust  of  politics  and  poli- 
ticians.34 

Samkhann  C.  Khoeun,  the  executive  director  of  Lowell's  Cambodian  Mutual  Aid 
Association,  had  served  in  that  capacity  for  a  year  and  a  half  at  the  time  of  the  inter- 
views. He  addressed  the  issue  of  grave  mistrust  and  fear  in  the  Cambodian  community. 

In  Cambodian  history,  there  have  been  a  lot  of  invasions  from  neighboring  coun- 
tries. Cambodian  leadership  itself  has  been  completely  neglected.  If  we  don't  train 
our  leaders,  someone  else  will  train  mem.  The  same  problem  will  befall  us  here  as 
happened  in  Cambodia.  A  history  of  Cambodian  politics  reveals  that  in  1970  we  had 
a  change  in  government  to  a  republic  under  Lon  Nol  from  the  royal  government 
under  Prince  Sihanouk;  in  1975  another  change:  the  Khmer  Rouge  came  to  power; 
in  1978  the  Vietnamese  military  invaded  Cambodia  and  took  control.  Connections 
to  former  governments  was  a  liability;  death  under  the  Khmer  Rouge.  It  was  not 
safe  to  be  active  in  politics.  It  is  hard  to  take  sides,  to  know  who  to  believe.  It  is 
dangerous  to  be  educated. 

In  Cambodia,  Cambodians  were  taught  mat  education  was  the  key.  Then  the 
Khmer  Rouge  came  to  power  and  sentenced  the  educated  to  death.  A  mixed  mes- 
sage. To  be  a  better  person,  education  is  still  believed  important  but  mere  is  ambiva- 
lence about  it.  Education  was  a  weapon  to  kill  you.  Mistrust  exists. 

There  is  a  real  fear  of  death,  real  concern;  they  don't  want  to  jeopardize  their 
family;  they've  lost  so  much,  family  members,  village,  homeland.  They're  not  ready 
to  lose  another  member  of  the  family;  if  they  can  do  without  confronting  anything 
they  will  choose  to  be  in  the  back  seat,  to  be  outside,  as  long  as  they  survive.  Maybe 
their  children  can  do  something  to  change  that .  .  .  They  are  most  likely  not  to  trust 
someone  just  because  they  claim  to  do  something  for  them.  They  have  to  see  for 
real  that  that  person  or  those  persons  will  really  do  something  for  them.  They  are 
also  interested  in  benefits,  if  they  help  them  right  away.  They  can't  wait  for  the  next 
five  to  ten  years.35 


Ill 


.\Vh  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Khoeun  is  echoed  by  Michael  Ben  Ho.  cofounder  of  the  Cambodian  Mutual  Aid 
Association  (CMAA)  in  1984.  the  area's  first  Cambodian  Buddhist  temple  in  1985,  and 
the  Cambodian  American  Voter  League  in  1990.  Trust.  Ho  says,  is  the  key  to  commu- 
nity empowerment. 

Who  would  want  to  teach  them  to  become  involved,  given  the  past?  They  are  afraid 
that  the  leaders  draw  you  to  the  river,  to  the  hole,  again.  The  people  feel  the  leaders 
just  use  them  to  get  the  power  for  themselves.  Suppose  I  try  to  educate  the  people  to 
do  something,  they  will  say  that  I  want  the  power  for  myself.  They  don't  trust  any- 
more, even  their  own  people.  .  .  .  You  have  to  build  the  trust  and  the  relationship 
back.36 

In  sum,  it  appears  that  one  legacy  of  the  Cambodian  holocaust  is  that  Cambodians  in 
America  are  reluctant  to  engage  in  local  political  activity  until  they  are  able  to  trust 
leaders  from  within  and  without  their  community7.3"  There  is  little  to  indicate  that  suffi- 
cient trust  has  been  forged  between  the  community7  and  its  leaders  to  build  an  electoral 
movement  in  Lowell.  If  anything,  the  lack  of  trust  has  grown,  in  light  of  School  Com- 
mittee candidate  Sambath  Chey  Fennell's  political  blunders.3*  Still,  even  with  their 
reservations.  many  Cambodians  backed  Fennell  for  the  same  reason  previous  newcom- 
ers have  given:  he  was  the  first  of  their  people  to  seek  office. 

Another  result  of  the  brutality  of  the  Pol  Pot  regime  is  the  mental  health  problems 
that  have  been  diagnosed  among  Cambodians  who  lived  under  the  Khmer  Rouge. 
Michael  Ben  Ho,  who  is  still  enduring  nightmares,  is  not  alone.  Khoeun  said  many  have 
nightmares,  bad  memories,  post-traumatic  stress  syndrome,  and  other  emotional  prob- 
lems. Some  social  service  workers  refer  generally  to  these  illnesses  as  Pol  Pot  syn- 
drome. 

[It]  includes  insomnia,  difficulty  in  breathing,  loss  of  appetite,  and  pains  in  various 
parts  of  the  body.  ...  84  percent  of  Cambodian  households  in  California  have  re- 
ported that  at  least  one  household  member  was  under  the  care  of  a  medical  doctor, 
compared  to  45  percent  of  Vietnamese  households  and  24  percent  of  Hmong  and 
Lao  households. 

Post-traumatic  stress  disorder,  a  delayed  reaction  to  extreme  emotional  stress,  has 
also  been  found  among  Cambodians  in  the  United  States.  It  is  a  malady  that  plagues 
numerous  Vietnam  veterans.39 

Cambodia's  Lack  of  a  Democratic  Tradition 

Activists  and  scholars  have  noted  that  Asian- Americans  have  roots  in  societies  with 
little  tradition  of  political  participation.  Daphne  Kwok,  executive  director  of  the  Orga- 
nization of  Chinese  Americans,  a  Washington-based  lobbying  organization,  states  that 
political  participation  in  America  "is  a  very  new  concept  for  most  Asians  who  are  immi- 
grants. In  their  home  countries,  political  participation  was  not  done  or  was  looked  on 
with  skepticism  and  sometimes  fear."40 

David  Chandler,  a  scholar  of  Cambodian  history,  has  written  that  whether  it  was  the 
colonial  French  or  Cambodian  Prince  Norodom  Sihanouk's  government,  Cambodia's 
time-honored  political  practice  was  paternalism  between  patrons  and  client,  government 
and  the  masses,  with  "the  one  providing  protection  and  cash,  the  other  delivering  loy- 
alty and  votes."  After  1945,  the  'Trench  and  high-ranking  Cambodian  officials  shared 
the  view  that  Cambodia's  'little  people'  were  not  ready  for  self-government  or  for  civil 

112 


rights."  Moreover,  when  efforts  were  made,  through  a  small  but  growing  democracy 
movement  in  the  legislature,  to  allow  for  greater  political  participation,  the  French  and 
royal  governments  cracked  down  hard  on  them.41 

Another  student  of  Southeast  Asian  politics  and  history,  Hai  B.  Pho,  argues  that  this 
is  a  crucial  point  for  understanding  Cambodian  participation  in  Lowell.  He  believes 
that,  unlike  Western  nations,  Southeast  Asian  countries  have  no  experience  with  demo- 
cratic institutions.  Southeast  Asian  power  was  centralized  either  in  the  nation's  capital 
or  in  regional  centers.  Village  life  did  not  train  or  socialize  the  people  for  decision  mak- 
ing in  government.42 

The  following  interviewees  confirm  the  experts'  opinion  regarding  the  importance  of 
one's  political  heritage  for  local  participation.  Vesna  Nuon  has  worked  for  the  Middle- 
sex County  district  attorney's  office  as  victim  advocate  and  cultural  consultant  since 
1990.  He  also  is  a  member  of  the  CMAA  Board  of  Directors. 

There  was  little  political  participation  in  Cambodia  and  that  might  be  responsible 
for  the  tendency  to  believe  we  are  here  in  the  U.S.  for  survival  purposes  only;  that 
we  shouldn't  ask  for  more  than  basics.  We  learned  from  the  Khmer  Rouge  [that]  we 
have  to  accept  what  is  given  to  us.  Say  yes,  don't  ask  for  more;  mat  is  the  legacy 
from  the  king  and  his  puppet,  to  go  along;  we  can't  use  mat  as  an  excuse  as  to  why 
we  are  not  politically  active  here  in  the  U.S.;  even  back  home  there  were  a  lot  of 
educated  students  who  were  ready  at  the  moment  to  voice  their  concerns,  knowing 
that  voicing  that  concern  could  affect  their  and  their  family^  welfare/3 

Michael  Ben  Ho  agrees 

Yes,  we  believe  in  Cambodia  [that  the  person]  who  is  born  king  is  a  gift  from  God 
to  manage  the  whole  population.  .  .  .  We  feel  evemhing  belongs  to  him  and  believe 
that  he  should  direct  the  country.  We  need  to  teach  people  how  to  make  decisions 
for  themselves  and  not  expect  people  to  do  [it]  on  [your]  behalf.  .  .  .  We  need  to 
organ-ize  with  the  middle-age  generation,  age  thirty-  to  fifty,  because  they  can  still 
learn.44 

Cambodians  have  been  in  the  United  States  a  relatively  short  time.  One  should  not 
assume  that  individuals  whose  political  socialization  process  did  not  include  learning 
about  the  fundamentals  of  representative  government  and  civil  liberties  and  civil  rights 
can  step  easily  into  the  American  political  process.  Millions  of  Americans  have  not 
been  socialized  to  political  efficacy,  the  notion  that  what  they  think  and  do  really  mat- 
ters in  public  life.  Political  efficacy  is  tied  to  class,  education,  race,  and  many  other 
important  factors. 

Generational  Differences 

Political  activity  is  less  likely  in  those  who  view  themselves  as  Cambodian,  not  Ameri- 
can —  usually  the  older  Cambodian  population.  As  Tern  Chea  sees  it.  these  people  are 
more  interested  in  the  politics  of  their  homeland  than  their  younger  counterparts.  Mean- 
while, the  younger,  American-oriented  generation,  who  may  find  politics  a  route  to 
social  mobility  as  past  immigrant  and  refugee  groups  have,  show  little  interest.  Vesna 
Nuon  asserts  that  the  younger  folk  are  hesitant  to  participate  in  community  organiza- 
tions because  they  feel  that  the  older  generation  does  not  treat  them  with  respect  and  is 
out  of  step  with  American  cultural  and  political  traditions. 


113 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


In  Tern  Chea's  opinion,  two-thirds  of  Cambodians  think  that  Cambodian  homeland 
politics  is  their  first  priority,  which  makes  it  very  hard  to  organize  and  interest  Cambo- 
dians in  Lowell  politics.  Factions  fiercely  debate  Cambodian  politics. 

[One  group]  have  in  their  own  mind  to  go  back  to  Cambodia  to  help  establish  and 
rebuild  the  country.  The  other  group  would  like  to  do  that  but  feel  it  is  beyond  their 
capacity,  so  they  think  it  is  better  to  organize  and  survive  in  this  country  by  being 
involved  in  politics  at  this  time.  If  we  are  strong  here,  we  may  contribute  that  to 
help  rebuild  our  country  back  home,  they  believe.  .  .  I  should  say  that  we  as  a  com- 
munity are  not  divided  by  age  or  education  or  financial  background  as  much  as  we 
are  divided  into  two  groups  by  the  issue  of  Cambodia.45 

The  divisions  over  Cambodia  have  boiled  to  the  surface  over  the  local  Cambodian- 
language  newspaper,  the  Cambodian  Press,  which  is  published  twice  a  month  and  dis- 
tributed free  of  charge  in  stores  and  restaurants  around  the  country.  The  paper's  pub- 
Usher,  Eang  Bunthan,  has  been  severely  criticized  by  Lowell  refugees  for  supporting  the 
Khmer  Rouge,  whom  he  calls  nationalists,  as  he  characterizes  himself.46 

Noun  believes  that  there  is  a  genuine  cultural  divide  between  the  old  and  the  young. 

It  leads  back  to  Cambodia  where  the  belief  is  that  [because]  they  are  older  than  you 
.  .  .  you  have  to  bow  to  them.  You  have  to  listen  to  their  advice  and  oftentimes  you 
have  to  accept  it.  Which  is  not  true.  We  came  here  and  we  went  to  Western  schools 
and  we  learned  the  importance  of  it  is  that  each  one  of  us  has  a  voice.  If  the  other 
voice  did  not  really  apply  in  this  case  you  just  reject  it  or  somehow  reject  it  in  a 
polite  and  constructive  way.  I  ran  into  that  a  couple  of  years  ago  when  I  first  be- 
came involved  in  the  community  ...  A  lot  of  young  people  are  not  involved  in  the 
community.  I  was  told,  "You  are  too  young,"  "You  were  just  born  yesterday." 
"You're  too  young,  you  don't  know  what  you're  talking  about  and  not  mature 
enough  to  give  your  own  voice  or  to  run  this  organization  or  to  do  this  or  that."  My 
question  to  them  is:  How  long  do  I  have  to  listen  to  you?  It's  a  compromise,  so  to 
speak. 

That  same  thing  happened  in  the  community,  the  old  versus  the  young.  An  ex- 
ample of  mat  is  when  parents  pull  their  kids  in  one  direction,  to  come  home  and  be 
Cambodian  kids.  You  have  to  be  polite,  nice.  If  you  are  a  girl,  you  have  to  be  shy, 
timid.  If  you  like  a  guy,  don't  show  him  that.  You  are  shy,  stay  in  your  room.  When 
the  kids  go  to  school,  their  peers  then  would  say  to  them,  "Why  are  you  so  shy?" 
Their  teacher  would  say,  "You  have  to  raise  your  voice  up,  I  cannot  hear  you."  All 
of  those  things  confuse  the  kid.  Should  I  stay  in  school  and  act  like  my  mother  said 
at  home  or  stay  at  home  and  act  like  what  my  teacher  said  to  me?47 

Khoeun  adds  supports  to  Nuon. 

The  older  generation  hope  to  go  home.  Stronger  feelings  among  older  adults,  forty 
years  and  older,  that  they  want  to  go  back.  But  they  also  have  the  feeling,  after 
visiting,  that  their  homeland  is  not  theirs  anymore.  Parents  gone,  children  gone  .  .  . 
to  find  out  their  environment  is  just  not  suitable  for  them.  The  weather.  Living 
conditions.  They  are  used  to  living  in  an  apartment.  Running  water.  TV.  Electricity. 
Gas  to  cook  their  meals.  Everything  is  within  reach.  In  Cambodia  it's  not.  There  is 
insecurity.  Corruption.  No  running  water.  No  phone.  It's  hard  for  them.  They're 
older.  They  don't  have  the  energy  to  farm,  to  gather  water.  It's  not  a  life  that's  pos- 
sible to  them.  The  people  there  are  completely  different  people.  Their  mentality  is 


114 


different  from  before  the  war.  People  don't  look  each  other  straight  in  the  eye. 
They're  more  dishonest.  They  only  care  about  today.  Some  want  to  go  for  a  month 
but  come  back  in  a  week.  Can't  eat  the  food  there.  No  clean  water.  Even  food  that 
was  cooked  still  makes  them  sick  in  Cambodia.  If  forced  to  go  back,  they  will  go. 
And  they  will  adapt,  but  it  will  be  hard.48 

Furthermore,  young  people  are  confused  about  their  role  in  society.  Dr.  Sam-Ang 
Sam,  a  Cambodian  musician,  scholar,  and  activist,  currently  director  of  the  Cambodian 
Network  Council  in  Washington,  D.C.,  believes  that  "many  young  people  are  plagued 
by  identity  problems,  leading  them  to  discard  their  Cambodian  first  names  in  favor  of 
English  first  names,  and  they  must  often  deal  with  racism  from  classmates  and  with 
being  teased  about  their  foreignness."49 

Additionally,  many  young  men  have  lost  their  fathers  to  the  civil  war,  and  some  of  them 
have  found  that  gangs  are  an  attractive  means  of  acquiring  a  sense  of  belonging  that 
they  cannot  develop  at  home.  Will  many  of  these  youngsters  who  are  leading  troubled 
lives  find  a  way  out  of  despair  through  participation  in  the  political  arena?50 


External  Factors 


Political  Structure:  Party  Organization 

During  the  early  part  of  the  century,  immigrant  groups  who  settled  in  northeastern 
American  cities  were  often  greeted  by  a  local  political  party  organization,  which  came 
to  be  known  as  a  political  machine.  The  name  has  both  a  negative  and  a  positive  conno- 
tation. Those  who  were  critical  of  the  "machine,"  the  self-labeled  reformers,  were  un- 
happy with  the  party  organization's  mechanical  efficiency  in  winning  the  immigrant 
vote  in  exchange  for  support  to  the  fledgling  immigrant  community,  usually  in  the  form 
of  much  appreciated  jobs,  contracts,  and  city  services.  Political  machine  supporters, 
known  as  regulars,  took  pride  in  their  helpful  relationship  with  the  newcomers,  who 
would  surely  fall  prey  to  powerful  business  interests,  among  other  hostile  city  institu- 
tions. Machines  were  created  in  large  and  small  cities  by  members  of  both  the  Republi- 
can and  the  Democratic  parties. 

The  once  potent  political  machines  are  largely  a  thing  of  the  past.  The  latest  wave  of 
immigrants  has  arrived  in  cities  with  no  strong  political  party  present  to  assist  their 
succession  into  local  office,  and  as  a  result,  they  are  worse  off  than  their  historical 
counterparts.  Boston-based  political  consultant  Michael  Goldman  believes: 

Political  power  is  harder  for  new  ethnic  groups  to  gain  than  it  was  at  the  turn  of  the 
century,  when  Irish  and  then  Greeks  and  French  moved  up  the  ranks  in  government. 
It's  totally  different  since  there  are  no  parties  out  there  the  way  there  used  to  be.  In 
the  past,  in  cities  like  Lowell,  the  Democratic  party  bosses  came  from  the  ethnic 
groups  in  their  neighborhood,  making  sure  their  group  got  a  piece  of  the  govern- 
ment jobs.  The  party  system  bred  competitors  for  political  office  that  kept  whole 
neighborhoods  politically  active.  But  that  system  has  been  replaced  by  TV  ads  and 
primaries.  Either  of  two  things  could  get  minority  voters  into  the  booth  and  convert 
population  strength  into  political  strength:  a  charismatic  leader  or  a  coalescing 
issue.51 

It's  interesting  that  there  is  a  parallel  to  the  Russian  Jews  when  they  first  came  to  this 
country  .  They  were  terrified  of  the  political  process  and  thought  that  being  invisible 


775 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


was  the  way  to  stay  out  of  trouble.  In  fact,  after  a  short  period  of  time  in  America,  they 
realized  that  the  way  to  gain  power  was  to  use  the  political  parties  that  were  then  in 
play.  In  particular  the  large  ethnic  communities  such  as  Italians,  Greeks,  Jews,  Irish. 
They  all  understood  that  by  controlling  neighborhoods,  controlling  votes,  they  would 
access  government  jobs  which  were  plentiful.52 

The  absence  of  political  parties  in  Lowell  is  in  part  attributable  to  the  turn  of  the 
century  municipal  reformer's  success  in  creating  local  nonpartisan  elections  —  or  elec- 
tions in  which  party  labels  do  not  appear  alongside  candidates'  names.  Instead,  reform 
Lowell  style  has  given  birth  to  elections  dominated  by  family  and  friendship  networks 
organized  along  ethnic  lines.  To  win  a  local  election  in  Lowell  a  candidate  must  de- 
velop a  personal  following  of  family  members,  friends,  and  acquaintances,  who  then 
carry  out  the  numerous  laborious  tasks  that  are  required  in  campaigns,  from  stuffing 
envelopes  to  raising  money.  In  return,  the  candidates  reward  the  faithful,  just  as  the 
political  machine  did,  with  jobs,  contracts,  and  municipal  services.  It  is  reported  that 
the  Lowell  School  Department  is  rife  with  political  appointees.53 

An  important  difference  between  partisan  and  nonpartisan  elections  is  that,  tradition- 
ally, parties  were  decentralized.  Organized  through  ward  or  district  boundaries,  new 
immigrants  were  often  able  to  capture  pieces  of  patronage  commensurate  with  their 
organized  voting  strength.  These  "submachines"  allowed  immigrants  to  bargain  votes 
for  symbolic  and  substantive  rewards.  According  to  those  who  are  in  a  position  to  know, 
the  nature  of  Lowell's  familial  political  system  closes  the  door  to  newcomers  and  has 
entrenched  certain  ethnic  groups,  such  as  the  Irish,  French,  and  Greeks,  in  a  seemingly 
impenetrable  wall  of  protection  from  Hispanics  and  now  Southeast  Asians  desirous  of 
acquiring  greater  political  clout. 

Michael  Conway,  who  owns  an  insurance  company  in  Lowell,  has  run  for  Congress 
and  the  state  Senate  as  a  Republican.  His  family  owns  one  of  the  oldest  continuously 
operating  businesses  in  the  commonwealth.  Conway  might  be  the  last  person  likely  to 
claim  that  Lowell's  political  scene  is  closed,  even  to  those  with  connections  like  his. 

When  I  first  got  involved  in  politics  back  here  in  Lowell  in  1979,  the  Democratic 
Party  was  very  much  in  control  and  it  was  stifling.  There  was  no  room  for  anyone 
else  to  participate  in  the  system  unless  you  were  a  Democrat,  and  then  only  if  you 
were  part  of  the  machinery  that  was  in  place  at  the  time.  In  a  sense  you  could  al- 
most make  the  case  that  Lowell  is  a  feudal  society.  There  are  only  certain  groups 
and  certain  people  who  participate  in  politics,  social  circles,  different  things,  and 
then  everybody  else  who  is  excluded  from  that  is  angry  or  doesn't  participate  in  the 
system  and  that  is  what  a  feudal  system  is.  There  is  a  certain  segment  of  the  popula- 
tion who  are  very  politically  involved  .  .  .  make  sure  that  it  runs  to  their  benefit. 
Those  who  are  excluded  become  very  angry.  They're  motivated  eventually  to  do 
something.  At  what  point  and  what  event  sparks  that  motivation  always  remains  to 
be  seen. 

When  the  Cambodians  started  becoming  politically  involved  in  the  community, 
they  found  that  there  really  wasn't  much  room  for  them  in  the  Democratic  structure 
because  the  Democrats  didn't  need  the  votes.  .  .  .  One  of  the  stories  is  that  South- 
east Asians  definitely  feel  excluded  from  a  lot  of  things  here,  and  I  think  at  some 
point  the  city  is  going  to  have  to  accept  them  and  open  up  the  doors  because  it's  like 
a  banquet  hall  and  there  is  a  banquet  going  on  inside  and  the  Southeast  Asians  are 
banging  on  the  door  trying  to  get  in.  And  they're  mad  and  they  want  to  get  in.  Once 
they  get  in  they  are  going  to  knock  that  banquet  table  over  because  they're  so  mad. 

116 


It's  a  good  story  and  I  think  that  people  ought  to  pay  attention  to  it  and  let  them  get 
involved  and  help  them  along  their  way.54 

Traditionally,  there  are  a  handful  of  older,  ethnic  group  leaders  who  are  wise  enough 
to  see  the  handwriting  on  the  wall  and  make  efforts  to  reach  out  to  the  newest  immi- 
grant group.  Conway  stands  all  alone  in  this  category,  one  reason  being  the  perception 
among  elected  city  officials  that  their  constituency  would  be  extremely  angry  with  them 
if  they  sought  out  Southeast  Asian  votes.  Those  constituents  understand  that  there  are 
only  so  many  patronage  positions  to  go  around.  Sharing  the  spoils  of  victory  with 
Southeast  Asians  means  fewer  resources  for  the  incumbents  and  their  faithful,  needy 
communities.55 

Political  Structure:  At-Large  versus  District  Elections 

I  believe  that  Lowell's  at-large  election  system  also  makes  it  difficult  for  Southeast 
Asians  to  move  swiftly  into  elective  office.  Political  scientists  and  federal  courts  have 
long  found  that  district-based  elections  enhance  immigrant  opportunities  to  win  office 
while  at-large  systems  limit  chances  for  capturing  elections.56 

Another  feature  of  machine  rule  was  a  decentralized  electoral  system.  Voters  chose 
candidates  for  local  office  from  district  or  ward  boundaries,  often  created  during  reap- 
portionment to  fit  the  contours  of  the  latest  immigrant  group  population.  Ward-based 
elections  allowed  immigrants  to  parlay  their  population  density  into  electing  local  eth- 
nic leaders  to  party  posts  and,  soon  after,  city  councils  and  school  boards.57 

During  the  Progressive  era  of  the  early  1900s,  reformers  successfully  implemented 
changes  in  electoral  systems  of  representation.  To  weaken  machine  rule,  reformers 
made  it  harder  for  immigrant  groups,  largely  working  class,  whom  they  viewed  as  the 
grease  that  made  the  machine  run  smoothly,  to  win  office.  District-based  electoral 
schemes  were  overturned  in  favor  of  at-large  or  citywide  districts.  To  capture  local 
political  office,  immigrant  group  leaders  would  have  to  campaign  citywide.  Reformers 
felt  that  this  would  shift  the  machine  politicians'  focus  away  from  caring  for  their  own 
ethnic  group  first,  to  the  detriment  to  the  public  good  of  the  city  as  a  whole.  In  effect, 
established  groups,  with  many  resources  to  draw  on,  such  as  money,  education,  and 
professional  qualifications,  and  with  allies  throughout  the  city,  would  be  favored  to  win. 
Not  surprisingly,  it  was  the  reformers,  largely  middle-  and  upper-class  Republican  Yan- 
kee Protestants  who  were  well  placed  to  take  full  advantage  of  the  at-large  plan.  Today, 
Lowell's  entrenched  old  guard,  the  Irish,  Greek,  and  French  groups,  are  the  beneficia- 
ries of  the  system.58 

Federal  courts  have  thrown  out  the  at-large  system  in  numerous  cities,  ruling  it  an 
unconstitutional  form  of  government  violating  the  one-person,  one- vote  standard  of  the 
U.S.  Constitution.  The  courts  have  recognized  the  effect  of  at-large  electoral  systems  in 
reducing  the  representation  of  geographically  concentrated  minority  populations.  They 
argue  that  smaller  districts  within  cities  ease  access  to  elective  office  and  increase  rep- 
resentation for  minority  ethnic  groups. 

The  most  recent  Massachusetts  case  involved  the  city  of  Holyoke,  in  the  western  part 
of  the  state,  where  an  underrepresented  Hispanic  population  won  a  federal  lawsuit  to 
overturn  the  city's  at-large  electoral  system.59  Daniel  J.  Gleason  of  the  Boston  firm 
Nutter  McClennen  and  Fish  argued  the  complaint  of  the  city's  Puerto  Ricans. 

The  eight  at-large  seats  were  used  as  a  permanent  majority  for  the  white  establish- 
ment, and  ward  lines  were  drawn  to  dilute  the  voting  strength  of  Hispanics  .  .  .  We 

117 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


sought  a  compromise  with  the  city,  but  they  refused  to  acknowledge  there  is  a  corre- 
lation between  the  city's  political  structures  and  the  dramatic  underrepresentation  of 
Hispanics  in  local  government.  .  .  .  Hispanics  in  Holyoke  can't  win  citywide  elec- 
tions because  Hispanics  account  for  20  percent  of  the  voting-age  population,  and 
they  don't  vote.  Yes,  there  is  Hispanic  voter  apathy;  in  1993,  only  2  percent  of  the 
Hispanic  voting-age  population  voted,  but  that  apathy  is  the  by-product  of  exclusion 
from  public  life.  Moreover,  whites  as  a  bloc  haven't  voted  for  Hispanic  candidates 
under  any  circumstances  .  .  .  The  real  fear  of  old-line  ethnic  leaders  is  that  district- 
based  elections  will  open  politics  to  new  groups,  meaning  patronage,  in  the  form  of 
municipal  jobs,  a  valuable  commodity  in  a  city  stuck  in  economic  decline,  will  have 
to  be  shared.60 

Politicians '  Response  to  the  Southeast  Asian  Migration 

Another  key  ingredient  for  an  effective  succession  is  assistance  from  leaders  of  the 
city's  older,  established  ethnic  groups.  The  response  of  those  in  power  can  run  the 
gamut  of  possibilities:  at  one  end,  they  have  the  ability  to  welcome  and  accommodate 
new  groups;  at  the  other,  they  can  exhibit  hostility  and  attempt  to  exclude  them  from 
political  participation. 

In  Lowell,  the  response  has  been  mixed.  During  the  middle  to  late  1980s,  some  lead- 
ers, albeit  a  vociferous  minority  on  the  School  Committee,  expressed  open  disdain  for 
the  migration  of  Southeast  Asians  to  the  city  and  through  school  board  policy  exerted 
every  effort  to  make  the  newcomers  unwelcome.  During  this  time  the  schools  were  the 
scene  of  great  ethnic  conflict  over  the  still  controversial  issues  of  bilingual  education 
and  school  busing.  A  group,  dubbed  the  gang  of  four  by  the  Lowell  Sun,  was  hostile  to 
Southeast  Asians  in  the  city  and  refused  to  act  quickly  to  remedy  the  overcrowding  that 
developed  in  the  Lowell  public  school  system. 

Granted,  by  all  accounts  the  city  was  overwhelmed  by  the  massive  influx  into  the 
schools.  Still,  the  schools'  leaders  were  unprepared  and  inflexible  to  change.  Moreover, 
they  felt  that  the  city  was  unfairly  being  asked  to  take  in  the  Southeast  Asian  refugees, 
while  neighboring  communities  were  not  asked  to  share  the  burden,  and  the  city's  al- 
ready poorly  funded  school  system  was  strapped  for  resources. 

Paul  Sullivan,  host  of  a  morning  talk  show  on  Lowell's  WLLH  radio  station,  echoes 
what  many  social  service  workers  and  Cambodian  leaders  have  reported:  that  succes- 
sion is  proceeding  apace,  and  that  several  city  leaders,  particularly  city  manager  Jim 
Campbell,  mayors  Richard  Howe  and  Robert  Kennedy,  and  district  attorney  Tom  Reilly, 
did  reach  out  to  the  Southeast  Asian  community  and  helped  them  settle  into  Lowell. 
The  near  absence  of  hate  crimes  and  the  hiring  of  four  Cambodian  police  officers  are 
two  prominent  achievements  of  the  city  to  date.  Moreover,  the  defeat  of  one  of  the  more 
vociferous  gang  of  four  School  Committee  members,  Sean  Sullivan,  was  a  sign  to  many 
that  the  city,  at  the  very  least,  felt  uncomfortable  with  bigoted  officials  representing 
them. 

We're  talking  about  the  largest  influx  of  change  in  a  community,  probably  in  the 
history  of  this  nation,  and  in  three  to  four  years,  30  percent  of  the  city's  ethnic 
population  changed.  And  [the  city]  absorbed  it  without  riots,  no  fights,  very  little 
discord,  and  still  were  criticized  by  the  liberal  press  .  .  .  and  it  wasn't  fair. 
People  were  thrilled,  in  my  opinion,  to  have  youngsters  of  all  colors  coming  into 
their  classes.  They  would  have  accepted  Southeast  Asians  coming  into  their  neigh- 
borhoods to  go  to  school  with  their  youngsters,  shoulder  to  shoulder  out  in  the 
playground,  but  they  didn't  want  their  kids  going  from  one  end  of  the  city  to  an- 

118 


other  end  of  the  city.  And  again,  the  characterization  that  that  is  not  inclusive  and 
has  racial  overtones  somehow  is  unfair.  And  frankly,  I  think  it  deflects  the  real 
issue:  Why  do  cities  have  to  do  it,  why  do  cities  have  to  bear  the  whole  brunt  of 
integrating  society? 

"Look  at  what  the  Irish  went  through  and  the  Greeks  went  through  in  the  city  of 
Lowell  and  how  long  it  took  for  them  to  achieve  what  they  achieved  versus  the 
Southeast  Asians,  who  in  less  than  fifteen  years  are  accepted  and  in  some  cases 
thriving,  and  certainly  their  issues  are  being  addressed  by  the  city.  I  don't  think 
they've  got  a  lot  to  squawk  about.  And  the  truth  is,  I  don't  hear  a  lot  of  squawking. 
Now  maybe  I'm  not  in  the  right  circles,  but  I  think  anything  that  has  to  be  done  is 
fine-tuning.  I  don't  think  there  is  racial  discord  in  the  city.  I  think  the  white  crowd 
is  concerned  with  whatever  issues  of  color  in  the  city.  And  that's  why  we  have  spent 
so  much  time  on  the  gang  situation,  which  is  really  an  intramural  fight  that  is  taking 
place  in  the  Cambodian  community.  Somebody  that  was  insensitive  would  ignore  it 
and  they  aren't.  Cambodians,  Vietnamese,  and  Thai  communities  have  done  very 
well  under  that  system.  And  ...  in  fifteen  years  they've  done  very  well  in  what 
they've  achieved.  And  that's  not  because  they've  had  a  helping  hand.61 

Sullivan's  perspective,  that  the  city  has  reached  out  to  the  Southeast  Asian  commu- 
nity and  deserves  a  lot  of  credit  for  doing  so,  is  a  position  that  is  supported  by  the  oral 
histories  I  collected  for  this  article.  Even  the  U.S.  Immigration  Commission,  under  the 
leadership  of  the  late  Congresswoman  Barbara  Jordan,  marveled  at  Lowell's  succession 
achievements  compared  with  other  cities  that  experienced  great  demographic  change  in 
the  1980s.62 

An  expanded  version  of  this  article  will  explore  in  greater  detail  the  city,  state,  and 
federal  government's  response  to  the  settlement  of  Southeast  Asians  in  Lowell.  Prelimi- 
nary evidence  indicates  that  Lowell  sought  to  accommodate  the  needs  of  Southeast 
Asians.  There  were,  however,  interest  groups  that  pressured  the  city  to  live  up  to  its 
commitments.63 

The  preliminary  findings  of  this  study  revealed  that  Cambodians  have  begun  the 
political  mobilization  phase  of  the  succession  process.  Nevertheless,  there  remains  a 
long  road  ahead  for  Cambodian  political  succession  in  Lowell.  Even  with  all  the  ob- 
stacles before  them,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  process  will  be  a  longer  one 
for  Cambodians  than  it  was  for  the  various  ethnic  groups  that  settled  in  Lowell  before 
them.  What  has  emerged  is  the  importance  of  both  internal  and  external  factors  in  the 
challenging  endeavor  of  political  succession.  However,  the  internal  factors  seem  a  little 
more  important  than  the  external  ones.  The  special  legacy  of  the  Cambodian  holocaust, 
the  absence  of  a  Cambodian  tradition  of  participatory  politics,  and  generational  differ- 
ences all  work  against  the  development  of  an  electoral  movement  that  might  challenge 
or  overcome  the  city's  at-large  representative  system  and  the  lack  of  active  political 
parties. 

Interviewees  suggested  other  areas  for  research  that  will  undoubtedly  shed  greater 
light  on  the  succession  process.  Class  divisions:  70  percent  of  Cambodians  living  in 
Lowell  are  at  or  below  the  poverty  line  at  the  same  time  that  a  solid  middle  class  has 
been  established.  Gender:  women's  participation  in  politics  is  frowned  upon  in  Cambo- 
dian culture  though  there  are  signs  that  young  women  are  poised  for  leadership  roles. 
Religion:   the  monks  of  the  Cambodian  Buddhist  temple  are  the  most  revered  figures  in 
the  community.  Lowell's  two  Buddhist  temples  are  at  odds  on  Buddhist  practices  as 
well  as  the  proper  place  of  religion  in  American  politics;  one  of  the  temples  has  shown 
signs  that  it  may  indirectly  lend  a  helping  hand  to  political  education  and  organizational 

119 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


efforts.64 

While  external  factors  appear  to  be  less  important  than  internal  factors,  matters  of 
political  structure  are  still  relevant.  A  number  of  questions  remain  unexplored  at  this 
time.  To  overcome  the  obstacles  to  minority  empowerment  that  at-large  elections 
represent,  it  seems  that  Cambodians  must  form  alliances  with  the  city's  other  sizable 
minority  group,  Hispanics,  and  a  bloc  of  sympathetic  white  ethnic  voters  to  win  elec- 
tion citywide.  Because  a  structural  change  of  the  electoral  system  is  unlikely  anytime 
soon,  coalition  building  is  of  the  highest  order.  Still,  a  failure  to  elect  Southeast 
Asians  to  local  office  in  the  coming  years  could  lead  to  a  lawsuit  similar  to  the  one 
filed  by  Hispanic  residents  of  Holyoke. 

While  local  elections  are  nonpartisan,  state  and  federal  elections  are  not.  Even 
with  a  mere  500  registered  voters,  Cambodians  have  it  within  their  power  to  tip  the 
scales  in  favor  of  either  the  Democrats  or  Republicans  in  closely  fought  state  and 
national  races.  Successful  bloc  voting  would  force  the  powers-that-be  to  show  the 
Cambodians  greater  political  respect.  Michael  Conway's  efforts  on  behalf  of  South- 
east Asian  Republicans  represent  just  the  kind  of  interethnic  cooperation  that  has  sped 
succession  in  other  cities.  Efforts  by  Republican  and  Democratic  candidates  for  the 
1998  governor's  race  to  reach  out  to  Cambodian  activists  is  evidence  that  state  politi- 
cians have  taken  notice  of  their  potential. 

Finally,  a  word  about  method.  Oral  history  was  extremely  useful  in  uncovering  the 
political  conflicts  within  the  Cambodian-American  community.  Knowing  more  than 
ever  how  reluctant  Cambodians  are  to  reveal  internal  squabbles,  it  is  imperative  for 
students  of  Cambodian  politics  to  seek  corroborating  testimony  from  those  who  work 
closely  with  the  community.  Also,  while  more  in-depth  interviews  are  essential  to  the 
further  exploration  of  succession  in  Lowell,  an  examination  of  the  growing  effort  to 
increase  citizenship,  voter  registration,  and  voting  levels  among  Cambodians  through 
the  scrutinization  of  voting  records  and  voting  behavior  is  necessary.  The  campaigns 
to  elect  Sambath  Chey  Fennel  to  the  Lowell  School  Committee  must  be  assessed;  the 
University  of  Massachusetts  Lowell's  Center  for  Immigrant  and  Refugee  Community 
Leadership  Empowerment  (CIRCLE)  program,  a  university-community  collaboration 
seeking  to  develop  sustainable  leadership,  which  is  in  its  third  year,  should  also  be 


Notes 

1 .     Massachusetts  Municipal  Profiles  (Lowell,  Mass.:  Middlesex  County,  Lowell  Public 
Library,  1992),  162.  The  latest  population  figure  is  from  the  Lowell  Public  Schools, 
"Enrollment  by  Race,"  October  1,  1996,  1,  Table  3.  A  total  of  4,644  Southeast  Asian 
children  attended  Lowell  schools  in  1996.  Using  a  widely  accepted  formula  for 
projecting  community  population  created  by  the  Massachusetts  Office  of  Refugees  and 
Immigrants,  4,644  is  multiplied  by  5.2  (estimated  average  family  size)  to  establish  the 
population  figure  of  24,148.  The  largest  growth  spurt  occurred  between  1985  and 
1990  when  Lowell  experienced  a  secondary  migration  pattern  of  Southeast  Asians 
from  within  the  United  States.  A  variety  of  reasons  account  for  it:  family  reunification, 
available  jobs  and  job  training,  and  the  establishment  of  a  Buddhist  temple  and  a 
mutual  assistance  association  in  the  city.  Interview  with  Hai  B.  Pho,  October  2,  1995, 
audiocassette,  and  Jean  Larson  Pyle,  "The  Impact  of  Immigration  Policy  on  Local 
Economies:  The  Importance  of  the  Phenomenon  of  Secondary  Migration,"  unpublished 
paper  prepared  fortestimony  at  a  public  hearing  of  the  U.S.  Commission  on  Immigration 


120 


Reform  at  the  Boott  Cotton  Mills,  Lowell,  August  1,  1994.  The  source  for  Lowell's 
nineteenth-century  population  is  Mary  Beth  Norton,  David  Katzman,  Paul  Escott, 
Howard  Chudacoff,  Thomas  Patterson,  and  William  Tuttle,  Jr.,  A  People  and  a  Nation: 
A  History  of  the  United  States,  Volume  1:  To  1877  (Boston:  Houghton  Mifflin,  1994), 
281. 

2.  Michael  J.  White,  "Racial  and  Ethnic  Succession  in  Four  Cities,"  Urban  Affairs  Quarter- 
ly 20,  no.  2  (December  1984):  165. 

3.  Ibid.,  166. 

4.  Nathan  Glazer  and  Daniel  P.  Moynihan,  Beyond  the  Melting  Pot:  The  Negroes,  Puerto 
Ricans,  Jews,  Italians  and  Irish  of  New  York  City  (Cambridge:  MIT  Press,  1963). 

5.  Ibid.,  4. 

6.  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan,  "Patterns  of  Ethnic  Succession:  Blacks  and  Hispanics  in  New 
York  City,"  Political  Science  Quarterly  94,  no.  1  (Spring  1979):  1. 

7.  Lawrence  Fuchs,  The  American  Kaleidoscope:  Race,  Ethnicity,  and  the  Civic  Culture 
(Hanover,  N.H.:  University  Press  of  New  England,  1990).  Fuchs,  the  Meyer  and  Walter 
Jaffe  Professor  in  American  Civilization  and  Politics,  Brandeis  University,  served  as 
executive  director.  Select  Commission  on  Immigration  and  Refugee  in  1981. 

8.  Steven  Erie,  Rainbow's  End:  Irish-Americans  and  the  Dilemmas  of  Urban  Machine 
Politics,  1840-1985  (Berkeley:  University  of  California  Press,  1988),  320,  and  Diane 
Pinderhughes,  Race  and  Ethnicity  in  Chicago  Politics:  A  Reexamination  of  the  Pluralist 
Theory  (Urbana:  University  of  Illinois  Press,  1 987),  64. 

9.  Roger  W.  Lotchin,  "Power  and  Policy:  American  City  Politics  between  the  Two  World 
Wars,"  in  Ethnics,  Machines,  and  the  American  Urban  Future,  ed.  Scott  Greer  (Cam- 
bridge: Schenkman,  1981),  6. 

10.  See  Jeffrey  Gerson,  "Building  the  Brooklyn  Machine:  Irish,  Jewish,  and  Black      Political 
Succession  in  Central  Brooklyn,  1919-1964"  (Ph.D.  diss..  City  University  of  New  York 
Graduate  School,  1990).  Some  earlier  pluralist  writers  on  the  subject  include:  Wallace 
S.  Sayre,  "The  Immigrant  in  Politics,"  in  Our  Racial  and  National  Minorities,  edited  by 
Francis  J.  Brown  and  Joseph  S.  Roucek  (Englewood  Cliffs,  N.J.:  Prentice  Hall,  1967), 
643-660,  and  Lawrence  H.  Fuchs,  "Some  Political  Aspects  of  Immigration,"  Law 

and  Contemporary  Problems  21  (Spring  1966):  270-283. 

1 1 .  Fuchs,  American  Kaleidoscope,  343.  Fuchs's  supporters  include  Robert  A.  Dahl,  Who 
Governs:  Democracy  and  Power  in  an  American  City  (New  Haven:  Yale  University 
Press,  1961 );  Elmer  Cornwell,  "Party  Absorption  of  Ethnic  Groups:  The  Case  of 
Providence,  R.I.,"  Social  Forces  38  (July  1961):  87-98;  and  "Bosses,  Machine,  and 
Ethnic  Groups,"  Annals  353  (May  1964):  27-39. 

12.  Fuchs,  American  Kaleidoscope,  343. 

13.  Ibid. 

14.  Ibid.,  346. 

15.  Ibid.,  349. 

16.  Gillian  Dara  Cohen,  "Knowledge  of  How  to  Combine:  The  Political  Socialization  of 
Southeast  Asian  Refugees  in  Lowell,  Mass.,"  bachelor's  thesis.  Department  of  Social 
Studies,  Harvard  University,  1994.  Cohen  cites  Jerome  Black,  "The  Practice  of  Politics 
in  Two  Settings:  Political  Transferability  among  Recent  Immigrants  to  Canada," 
Canadian  Journal  of  Political  Science,  December  1987,  731-753,  and  "Government  as 
a  Source  of  Ass i stance  for  Newly  Arrived  Immigrants  to  Canada,"  in  Education  for 
Democratic  Citizenship:  A  Challenge  for  Multi-Ethnic  Societies,  edited  by  Roberta  S. 
Sigel  and  Marilyn  Hoskin  (Hillsdale,  N.J.:  Erlbaum  Associates,  1991),  167-192. 

17.  Fuchs,  American  Kaleidoscope,  353. 

18.  Ibid.,  554,  fn  52. 

19.  April  R.  Schultz,  "Searching  for  a  Unified  America,"  American  Quarterly 45,  no.  4 
(December  1993):  642. 

20.  Jesus  Salvador  Trevino,  "The  Pluribus  That  Makes  the  Unum,"  Los  Angeles  Times 
Book  Review,  February  10,  1994,  11. 

2 1 .  The  Asian-American  Almanac:  A  Reference  Work  on  Asians  in  the  United  States,  edited 
by  Susan  Gall  and  Irene  Natividad  (Detroit:  Gale  Research,  1995),  29-39,  105  (the 
most  up-to-date  survey  of  the  status  of  Cambodians  in  the  United  States),  and  Peter 
Nien-chu  Kiang,  "When  Know-Nothings  Speak  English  Only:  Analyzing  Irish  and 

121 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Cambodian  Struggles  for  Community  Development  and  Educational  Equity,"  in  The 
State  of  Asian  American  Activism  and  Resistance  in  the  1990s,  edited  and  introduced 
by  Karin  Aguilar-San  Juan  (Boston:  South  End  Press,  1994),  125-145. 

22.  Cohen,  "Knowledge  of  How  to  Combine,"  7. 

23.  Ibid.,  106. 

24.  Ivan  D.  Steen,  review  of  "Don't  Call  Me  Boss:  David  L.  Lawrence,  Pittsburgh's  Renais- 
sance Mayor,"  Oral  History  Review  17,  no.  1  (Spring  1989):  183. 

25.  Herbert  Gutman,  "Labor  History  and  the  Sartre  Question,"  Humanities],  no.  1  (Sep- 
tember/October 1980):  189. 

26.  C.  Wright  Mills,  The  Sociological  Imagination  (New  York:  Oxford  University  Press, 
1959),  134. 

27.  Useful  background  information  was  found  in  Mary  H.  Blewett,  "The  Mills  and  the 
Multitudes:  A  Political  History,"  in  Cotton  Was  King:  A  History  of  Lowell,  Massachu- 
setts, ed.  Arthur  L.  Eno,  Jr.  (Somersworth:  New  Hampshire  Publishing,  1976);  161- 
189;  Brian  Mitchell,  The  Paddy  Camps:  The  Irish  of  Lowell,  1821-1861  (Urbana: 
University  of  Illinois  Press,  1988);  and  the  archival  collections.  The  Working  People  of 
Lowell,  Lowell  National  Historical  Park,  Mary  Blewett  and  Martha  Mayo,  University  of 
Lowell,  Center  for  Lowell  History,  Mogan  Center,  1987. 

28.  Professor  Hai  B.  Pho  of  the  University  of  Massachusetts  Lowell  ran  a  program,  under 
the  aegis  of  the  Indochinese  Refugee  Foundation,  that  provided  job  training  and 
placement  as  well  as  education  programs  to  Southeast  Asian  refugees  in  Lowell  from 
1980  to  1985.  He  has  also  written  on  Southeast  Asians  in  Lowell;  his  latest  work  on 
the  subject  is  "The  Impact  of  Recent  Southeast  Asian  Immigration  on  Lowell  and 
Lawrence,"a  paper  prepared  for  a  round  table  discussion,  Multiculturalism  and 
Transnationalism:  An  International  Conference,  October  14-16,  1994,  University  of 
Massachusetts  Lowell.  Pho  interview. 

29.  Not  until  the  1850s,  thirty  years  after  the  Irish  first  arrived  in  Lowell,  did  Benjamin  F. 
Butler  organize  the  Irish  into  a  bastion  of  the  Lowell  Democratic  Party.  See  Blewett, 
"The  Mills  and  the  Multitudes,"  168,  174.  On  Franco-Americans,  see  Ann 
MacGibbon's  paper,  "The  Franco-Americans  of  Lowell,  Massachusetts:  Ethnic  Politics 
in  a  New  England  Industrial  City,"  1996.  The  most  prolific  author  of  Greek  life  in 
Lowell  is  Nick  Karas;  see  his  Greek  Immigrant  Chronicles  (Lowell:  Lowell  Hellenic 
Heritage  Association, 1991),  120. 

30.  See  Cohen,  "Knowledge  of  How  to  Combine,"  and  Kiang,  "When  Know-Nothings 
Speak  English  Only." 

31 .  In  what  can  only  be  described  as  a  pragmatic  and  opportunistic  strategy  for  winning, 
Fennell  ran  on  a  conservative  ideological  plank:  eliminate  school  busing  and  bilingual 
education.  It  is  reported  that  one  of  his  advisers  is  a  longtime  School  Committee 
member,  George  Kouloheras,  who  made  a  name  for  himself  in  the  1980s  as  a  staunch 
opponent  of  busing  and  bilingual  education.  Fennell  is  also  backed  by  a  small  group  of 
Southeast  Asians  who  consider  themselves  Republicans.  Interview  with  Michael 
Conway,  August  18,  1995,  audiocassette.  Craig  Sandler,  Lowell  Sun,  October  11, 
1995,  4;  Lowell  Sun,  November  8,  1995,  1.  Lam  showed  the  importance  of  per- 
sistence, winning  election  on  his  third  try.  Interview  with  Daniel  Lam,  October  9, 
1997,  audiocassette.   Mayor  Hass  is  quoted  in  Kay  Lazar  and  Mark  Arsenault,  Lowell 
Sun,  "Cambodian  Vote  Seen  as  Untapped  Force  in  Lowell,"  November  9,  1997,  15,  17. 

32.  Interview  with  Tern  Chea,  August  8,  1995,  audiocassette.  In  May  1990,  the  CAVL  was 
cofounded  by  Tern  Chea  and  Michael  Ben  Ho.  Its  goal  is  to  encourage  Cambodians  to 
become  citizens  and  registered  voters.  He  is  a  school  social  worker  in  the  Special 
Education  Department  of  the  Lowell  public  schools.  I  am  investigating  the  latest  figures 
for  Southeast  Asian  citizenship  and  registered  voters  in  Lowell. 

33.  See  The  Asian-American  Almanac,  33,  for  figures  on  family  size. 

34.  I  have  edited  some  oral  histories  in  the  interest  of  clarifying  language. 

35.  Interview  with  Samkhann  Khoeun,  June  14  and  21,  1995,  audiocassette,  August  4, 
1995,  videocassette;  interview  with  Michael  Ben  Ho,  August  1,  1995,  audiocassette. 
Ho,  who  was  born  March  29,  1942  in  Cambodia,  is  a  supervisor  in  the  Massachusetts 
Department  of  Social  Services  in  Lowell.  He  is  highly  respected  as  an  elder  statesman 
in  the  Cambodian  community. 

122 


36.  Ho,  August  1,  1995,  interview. 

37.  One  federal  government  study  suggests  that  Southeast  Asians,  African-Americans,  and 
Latinos  view  leadership  differently.  Southeast  Asians,  for  example,  believe  the  develop- 
ment of  trust  is  instrumental  for  political    participation.  See  "Providing  Leadership,"  in 
The  Future  by  Design:  A  Community  Framework  for  Preventing  Alcohol  and  Other  Drug 
Problems  through  a  Systems  Approach  (Washington,  D.C.:  U.S.  Department  of  Health 
and  Human  Services,  1991),  60.  My  experience  confirms  this  study.  I  have  facilitated  a 
political  leadership  workshop  for  immigrant  and  refugee  activists  in  Lowell  since  1995. 
Trust  is  a  recurring  issue  in  the  discussions  with  all  the  Cambodian  participants. 

38.  Although  it  is  not  possible  to  present  here  a  full  explanation  of  the  events  that  have  set 
back  the  development  of  trust  among  Cambodians,  a  few  words  on  the  subject  are  in 
order.  Fennell  engineered  a  coup  d'etat  against  the  CMAA  in  1991,  forcing  out  the 
executive  director,  Vera  Godley.  The  manner  in  which  it  was  carried  out  reminded 
many  Cambodian  activists  of  the  worst  political  traditions  of  Cambodia.  Fennell  was 
dictatorial,  acting  without  the  support  of  the  community  and  its  leaders.  CMAA  was 
able  to  stabilize  itself  in  the  fall  of  1996,  when  a  new  board  of  directors  that  opposed 
Fennell  was  voted  in.  Fennell,  because  he  is  the  only  Cambodian  who  has  run  for 
political  office,  remains  a  force  in  the  community  even  though  his  ability  to  garner 
votes  from  the  white  ethnic  or  minority  communities  of  the  city  is  extremely  poor. 

39.  The  Asian-American  Almanac,  37.  Also,  for  a  moving  and  harrowing  story  of  the  war 
trauma  some  Cambodian  women  refugees  have  experienced  as  a  result  of  witnessing 
unimaginable  horrors,  see  Alec  Wilkinson,  "A  Changed  Vision  of  God,"  The  New 
Yorker,  January  24,  1994,  52-68. 

40.  Steven  A.  Holmes,  "Anti-Immigrant  Mood  Moves  Asians  to  Organize,"  New  York  Times, 
January  3,  1996,  A1,  A11. 

41.  David  Chandler,  The  Tragedy  of  Cambodia  (New  York:  Cambridge  University  Press, 
1991),  29. 

42.  Pho  interview. 

43.  Nuon  was  born  in  Phnom  Penh  and  lived  through  the  holocaust.  When  the  Vietnamese 
Army  took  over  the  country,  he  and  his  family  fled  to  Thailand,  through  fear  of  again 
being  placed  in  concentration  camps.  Nuon  was  fourteen  when  his  father  and  mother 
and  he  and  his  seven  brothers  and  sisters  made  it  to  the  United  States  in  1982.  He 
serves  on  the  board  of  the  Cambodian  American  League  of  Lowell.  Interview  with 
Vesna  Nuon,  June  12,  1995,  audiocassette,  and  September  7,  1995,  videocassette. 

44.  Ho  interview. 

45.  Chea  interview.  Chea  points  out  several  other  obstacles  to  organizing:  older  Cambodi- 
ans cannot  read  or  write  English,  and  younger  Cambodians  have  no  interest  in  applying 
for  U.S.  citizenship  because  of  their  perceived  lack  of  an  immediate  benefit.  The  latter 
point  has  lost  some  of  its  strength  since  the  1996  passage  of  national  welfare  reform. 
The  fear  of  losing  Supplemental  Security  Income,  public  assistance,  and  food  stamps 
led  many  immigrants  and  refugees  to  apply  for  citizenship  in  record  numbers. 

46.  Ashley  Dunn,  "Cambodians  in  the  U.S.  Say  the  Dark  Shadow  of  the  Khmer  Rouge  is 
Back,"  New  York  Times,  August  14,  1995,  A10-11. 

47.  Nuon  interview. 

48.  Khoeun  interview. 

49.  The  Asian-American  Almanac,  38. 

50.  It  appears  that  some  of  Lowell's  Cambodian  youth  are  not  faring  well  in  this  regard. 
James  Higgins  and  Joan  Ross,  photographers,  film  makers,  and  authors,  have  traced 
the  development  of  a  group  of  Cambodian  children  whom  they  photographed  for 
Southeast  Asians:  A  New  Beginning  in  Lowell  (Lowell,  Mass.:  Mill  Town  Graphics, 
1986).  Higgins  found  that  many  of  the  children  are  troubled;  several  found  their  way 
into  local  gangs,  a  continuing  problem  in  the  Southeast  Asian  and  Latino  communities. 
Interview  with  Higgins,  Lowell,  April  22,  1995.  See  Higgins  and  Ross,  Fractured 
Identities:  Cambodia's  Children  of  War  (Lowell,  Mass.:  Loom  Press,  1997). 

51 .  Goldman,  quoted  in  Craig  Sandler,  "For  Minorities  in  Lowell,  There'll  Be  Little  Impact  at 
the  Polls,"  Lowell  Sun,  September  18,  1994,  22. 

52.  Interview  with  Michael  Goldman,  Boston,  July  27,1995,  videocassette. 

53.  Interview  with  Sean  Sullivan,  August  8,  1995,  audiocassette.  Sullivan,  who  was 

123 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


elected  to  the  Lowell  School  Committee  in  1987,  served  until  1989,  when  he  failed  to 
win  reelection.  He  was  elected  on  an  anti-immigrant,  antibusing,  and  antibilingual 
education  platform.  He  was  defeated  for  his  vocal  opposition  to  the  school  desegrega- 
tion plan  designated  as  central  enrollment  and  his  support  for  an  extension  for  Superin- 
tendent Henry  Mroz  by  an  active  parent-supported  school  reform  group  and  a  larger 
than  usual  minority  voter  turnout. 

54.  Conway  interviews. 

55.  Interview  with  Larry  Martin,  April  3,  1996,  audiocassette.  Martin,  a  Lowell  City 
Councilor  from  1993  until  his  defeat  on  November  7,  1997,  was  also  the  director  of 
admissions  at  the  University  of  Massachusetts  Lowell  for  many  years. 

56.  Frank  J.  Mauro  and  Gerald  Benjamin,  eds.,  Restructuring  the  New  York  City  Govern- 
ment: The  Reemergence  of  Municipal  Reform  (New  York:  Academy  of  Political  Science, 
Proceedings  37,  no.  3,  1989),  16-30. 

57.  Gerson,  "Building  the  Brooklyn  Machine."  I  maintain  that,  owing  in  part  to  the  district- 
based  election  units  of  Brooklyn's  Democratic  Party  organization,  Jews  and  later  blacks 
of  the  borough  were  able  to  effect  a  relatively  fluid  political  succession.  Otherfactors 
that  assisted  succession  were  rapid  demographic  change,  favorable  reapportionment  of 
districts,  astute  ethnic  group  leadership,  and  a  history  of  great  competition  from  within 
and  without  the  party  for  the  new  ethnic  vote  as  well  as  independent  voting  on  behalf 
of  Jews  and  blacks. 

58.  The  classic  statement  of  this  thesis  is  in  Samuel  P.  Hays,  "The  Politics  of  Reform  in 
Municipal  Government  in  the  Progressive  Era,"  Pacific  Northwest  Quarterly  55  (1964): 
157-169. 

59.  The  First  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  in  Boston  ordered  federal  district  court  judge  Michael 
Ponsor  to  review  his  findings  in  the  voting  rights  case  brought  by  Latinos  against  the 
city  of  Holyoke.  "The  ruling  set  aside  Ponsor's  order  reducing  the  number  of  at-large 
seats  on  the  15  member  City  Council  from  eight  to  two";  Boston  Globe,  October  1, 
1995,  26.  In  the  fall  of  1997,  Judge  Ponsor  reversed  his  previous  ruling,  which  held 
that  Holyoke  was  discriminating  against  Latino  voters.  The  city  did,  however,  settle, 
favorably  to  the  plaintiffs,  that  part  of  the  suit  alleging  violation  of  section  203,  which 
sets  forth  the  legal  requirements  for  bilingual  elections.  The  Docket,  ACLU  of  Massa- 
chusetts 27,  no.  2  (November  1997):  3. 

60.  Gleason  is  quoted  in  Kevin  Culien,  "Judge's  Ruling  Divides  Holyoke,"  Boston  Globe, 
April  24,  1995,  1.  Also,  interview  with  Daniel  J.  Gleason,  Boston,  July  27,  1995. 

61.  Paul  Sullivan  interview,  videocassette,  August  3,  1995;  Diane  MacLeod  interview,  July 
29,  1995,  audiocassette;  Jeffrey  Davidson  interview,  July  30,  1995,  audiocassette. 
MacLeod  was  Lowell's  affirmative  action  officer  from  1982  to  1994.  Davidson  has  been 
with  the  Lowell  Police  Department  for  twenty  years.  Both  served  on  Lowell's  Southeast 
Asian  Task  Force  and  are  well  respected  by  Southeast  Asian  activists.  Both  believe  that 
several  of  the  city's  political  leaders  during  the  1980s,  from  the  mayor  to  the  city 
managerto  the  police  chief,  are  deserving  of  praise.  MacLeod  cited  the  establishment  of 
a  revolving  housing  court  that  meets  in  Lowell,  as  well  as  in  Salem  and  Lawrence, 
Massachusetts. 

62.  U.S.  Commission  on  Immigration  Reform,  "Summary  of  Public  Hearing,  Local  Impacts 
of  Immigration,"  hearing  held  in  Lowell,  Massachusetts,  August  1,  1994. 

63.  Paul  Hudon,  "The  Ethnic  Covenant,"  paper  prepared  by  this  VISTA  volunteer  at  the 
University  of  Massachusetts  Lowell,  Office  of  Community  Service,  May  1996. 

64.  Terry  Tun  interview,  August  8,  1995,  audiocassette.  Tun  offers  a  Cambodian  woman's 
perspective  on  the  expected  role  of  women  in  the  community.  In  the  fall  of  1995,  Tun 
left  her  position  with  a  Cambodian  community  organization  to  become  congressman 
Martin  Meehan's  liaison  to  the  Southeast  Asian  community.  This  is  yet  another 
indication  that  ethnic  political  succession  is  proceeding.  I  thank  Pov  Ye  for  her  wisdom 
in  this  regard,  as  well  as  her  research  assistance  for  this  article.  Interview  with  Pov  Ye, 
September  22,  1995.  I  hope  to  interview  many  more  Cambodian  women.  For  insight 
into  the  division  among  the  Cambodian  temples,  see  Samkhann  Khoeun  interview, 
June  21,  1995. 


124 


Governing  Assessing  the  1993 

Massachusetts  Massachusetts 

Public  Schools  Education  Reform 

Act 

John  Portz 


The  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act  of  1993  created  a  number  of  important 
changes  in  public  education.  In  the  area  of  local  governance,  the  act  was  guided 
by  a  corporate  model  in  which  authority  and  responsibilities  were  reallocated 
among  school  committees,  superintendents,  principals,  and  newly  created  school 
councils.  School  committees  in  particular  assumed  a  policymaking  role,  and  super- 
intendents became  the  chief  executive  officers  of  their  school  districts.  This  article, 
based  on  responses  to  a  mail  sur\-ey,  is  an  early  assessment  of  the  act's  governance 
changes.  Superintendents  are  most  satisfied  with  their  role,  especially  their  author- 
ity over  principals  and  teachers.  School  committee  members  are  least  satisfied 
with  the  changes,  although  they  still  provide  general  support  for  the  goals  of  the 
act.  Although  they  are  concerned  about  their  job  security  under  the  ne^v  system, 
principals  are  supportive.  A  comparison  of  the  corporate  model  of  governance  with 
political  leadership  and  shared  governance  models  indicates  that  two  important 
challenges  lie  ahead:  developing  support  from  other  local  political  leaders  and 
fostering  a  cooperative  environment  among  local  governance  actors. 

American  public  education  is  one  of  the  most  central  institutions  in  our  society,  yet 
it  is  also  one  of  the  most  troubled.  Dissatisfaction  with  public  schools  is  a  recur- 
ring theme  in  the  media,  among  policymakers,  and  for  the  general  public.  Low  test 
scores,  poor  pedagogy,  weak  management,  and  a  host  of  other  criticisms  are  heard  fre- 
quently. Proposed  solutions  are  many.  Various  "waves"  of  reform,  from  statewide  stan- 
dards to  restructuring,  have  swept  through  school  systems  in  recent  years.1  Criticisms, 
however,  continue. 

Educational  governance  is  on  the  target  list  of  problems  as  weD  as  solutions.  Gover- 
nance, which  involves  the  establishment  of  educational  goals  and  the  allocation  of  re- 
sources, is  fraught  with  controversy  and  debate.  Goal  setting  raises  controversial  ques- 
tions about  the  very  purpose  of  teaching  and  learning;  resource  allocation  involves  the 
contentious  division  of  limited  and  often  shrinking  resources.  The  critique  of  school 
governance  ranges  from  the  lack  of  parental  and  community  participation  in  the  gover- 
nance process  to  incompetence  of  educational  professionals  to  deliver  education  effec- 
tively in  the  classroom.  Solutions  are  equally  broad  from  enhancing  the  parental  role 
with  school  vouchers  to  reallocating  responsibilities  among  educational  professionals. 

John  Portz.  associate  professor.  Department  of  Political  Science.  Northeastern  L'niversiry. 
teaches  and  writes  about  state  and  local  public  policy,  emphasizing  education  and  eco- 
nomic development. 


125 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


This  article  focuses  on  one  piece  of  the  governance  debate:  the  allocation  of  author- 
ity and  responsibility  among  educational  professionals  and  leaders  at  the  local  level. 
My  analysis  is  based  on  a  case  study  of  governance  changes  under  the  Massachusetts 
Education  Reform  Act  of  1993.  This  act,  described  below,  adopted  a  corporate  model  of 
governance  in  which  important  educational  responsibilities  were  reallocated  among 
superintendents,  principals,  school  committee  members,  and  school  councils.  Superin- 
tendents, for  example,  became  the  chief  executive  officers  of  school  districts,  while 
school  committees  became  policymaking  boards.  The  following  analysis,  based  on  mail 
survey  responses  from  superintendents,  school  committee  members,  and  principals,  is 
an  early  assessment  of  these  important  changes  under  the  act. 


Governance  Models 

Educational  governance  can  be  achieved  in  a  variety  of  ways.  One  prominent  example 
is  a  decentralization  model  in  which  governance  responsibilities  are  moved  to  the 
school  level.2  The  thrust  of  this  reform  movement  is  to  shift  decision  making  around 
goals  and  resource  allocation  to  the  individual  school.  School-based  management,  for 
example,  appears  in  various  forms  as  a  means  to  empower  local  school  councils  com- 
posed of  teachers,  parents,  and  principals.  Under  school-based  management,  many  of 
the  key  decisions  that  shape  the  learning  environment  are  made  in  each  school  building. 
Chicago,  Miami,  and  other  cities  have  experimented  with  this  governance  reform. 

A  market  model  of  governance,  in  which  competition  is  the  key  dynamic,  comprises 
another  popular  reform.  Vouchers  and  school  choice,  for  example,  are  forms  of  gover- 
nance in  which  schools  compete  for  the  attention  of  educational  consumers,  that  is, 
parents  and  students.3  In  this  competitive  model,  governance  arrangements  are  a 
byproduct  of  consumer  choice.  Successful  governance  is  among  the  attributes  of  those 
schools  which  succeed  in  the  educational  market  by  attracting  more  students. 

Many  popular  reforms  combine  elements  of  both  the  market  and  decentralization 
models.  The  charter  school  movement,  for  example,  encourages  competition  among 
schools  as  well  as  a  school-based  approach  to  educational  governance.  Charter  schools 
operate  under  a  contractual  arrangement  with  public  authorities,  but  they  are  outside  the 
direct  supervision  of  traditional  public  school  authorities  and  have  increased  flexibility 
to  alter  curriculum,  hours,  and  other  aspects  of  the  learning  environment.4  Privatization 
is  another  reform  movement  that  builds  upon  these  models,  particularly  the  market 
model.  In  Baltimore,  for  example,  the  private  firm  of  Educational  Alternatives,  Inc., 
was  hired  to  operate  a  number  of  schools  in  the  city  school  system.5 

The  traditional  governance  model,  however,  focuses  more  squarely  on  public-sector 
actors.  Superintendents,  local  school  boards,  mayors,  state  boards  of  education,  state 
legislators,  governors,  and  even  members  of  the  U.S.  Department  of  Education  are  pub- 
he  actors  who  assume  governance  roles.  Debates  over  governance  reform  often  center 
on  the  proper  allocation  of  authority  and  responsibility  among  these  various  players  in  a 
federal  system. 

There  are  three  variations  of  the  traditional  governance  model  at  the  local  level.  One 
variation,  a  corporate  model  of  governance,  is  the  focus  of  this  article.6  Central  to  this 
model  is  a  clear  demarcation  of  roles  and  responsibilities  among  governance  actors. 
School  board  members,  for  example,  concentrate  on  the  broad  issues  of  educational 
policy;  superintendents  focus  on  implementing  board  policies.  Each  governance  per- 
former should  be  held  accountable  for  his  or  her  actions  and  responsibilities.  As  the 


126 


chief  legislative  sponsor  of  the  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act  writes,  "Account- 
ability is  the  key  to  successful  education  reform."7  With  the  business  world  as  a  guide, 
the  corporate  model  argues  for  a  separation  of  policy  and  management  that  is  character- 
istic of  the  relationship  between  a  corporation's  board  of  directors  and  the  chief  execu- 
tive officer. 

Shared  governance  is  a  second  variation  of  the  traditional  model.  Rather  than  empha- 
size a  sorting  out  of  authority  and  responsibilities,  as  in  the  corporate  model,  it  high- 
lights dialogue  and  interdependence  among  governance  actors.8  In  this  model  goal  set- 
ting and  resource  allocation  are  shared  responsibilities;  communication  and  cooperation 
become  critical.9  School  committee  members  and  superintendents,  for  example,  must 
develop  a  high  level  of  trust  and  respect  that  facilitates  the  sharing  of  responsibilities 
and  tasks.  Similarly,  superintendents  and  principals  become  partners  in  the  management 
of  the  school  system.  Collective,  rather  than  individual,  accountability  is  characteristic 
of  this  model.  Shared  governance  can  even  be  expanded  to  include  community  actors, 
thereby  creating  networks  in  which  collaboration  and  creative  dialogue  become  criti- 
cal.10 

A  third  variation  focuses  on  political  leadership.  In  Chicago,  Boston,  Baltimore,  and 
several  other  cities,  mayors  have  assumed  a  central  governance  role  in  their  respective 
school  systems.11  In  Boston,  for  example,  Mayor  Thomas  Menino  appoints  members  of 
the  school  committee  and  has  taken  a  leading  role  in  educational  goal  setting  and  the 
allocation  of  resources.  As  the  mayor  stated  in  a  1996  speech,  "I  want  to  be  judged  as 
your  mayor  by  what  happens  now  in  the  Boston  public  schools.  I  expect  you  to  hold  me 
accountable  ...  If  I  fail,  judge  me  harshly."12  The  mayor  of  Chicago  has  also  assumed  a 
major  role  in  his  city's  schools.  Labeled  by  one  group  of  researchers  as  "integrated 
governance,"  this  centralization  of  authority  under  Mayor  Richard  Daley  appoints  mem- 
bers of  the  school  board  and  exercises  considerable  control  over  the  allocation  of  re- 
sources to  the  schools.13 


Local  Level  Educational  Governance:  Education  Reform 

The  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act  of  1993  covered  a  broad  range  of  educational 
activities,  including  school  finance,  teacher  certification,  learning  standards,  and  cur- 
riculum models  as  well  as  governance.  In  the  last  area,  the  corporate  model  clearly 
guided  the  reform  efforts.  As  the  state  Department  of  Education  notes  in  a  publication 
explaining  the  act,  "We  view  the  school  committee  as  the  publicly  elected  or  appointed 
equivalent  of  a  board  of  directors  of  a  corporation  .  .  .  [and]  the  superintendent  serves  as 
the  school  committee's  chief  executive  officer  and  educational  advisor."14  With  this 
model  as  a  guide,  governance  responsibilities  were  reallocated  among  four  local  bodies: 
school  committees,  superintendents,  principals,  and  newly  created  school  councils. 

The  major  reform  thrust  for  school  committees  is  an  emphasis  on  their  policymaking 
role.  Their  major  responsibilities  are  to 

•  establish  educational  goals  and  policies; 

•  negotiate  and  approve  collective  bargaining  agreements; 

•  vote  on  school  choice  policy; 

•  adopt  general  disciplinary  policies; 

•  approve  all  school  department  expenditures; 


127 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


•  review  and  approve  the  budget; 

•  hire  superintendent  and  several  other  identified  districtwide  personnel; 

•  establish  compensation  policy  for  principals; 

•  establish  performance  standards  for  all  personnel;  and 

•  adopt  a  professional  development  plan  for  all  personnel. 

The  most  significant  authority  removed  from  school  committees  is  the  hiring  of  prin- 
cipals and  teachers.  A  superintendent  no  longer  submits  to  the  school  committee  the 
names  of  candidates  for  principal  and  teaching  positions. 

Superintendents,  on  the  other  hand,  assume  administrative  and  management  respon- 
sibilities. As  chief  executive  officer  of  the  schools,  superintendents  are  responsible  for 
the  day-to-day  operations  of  their  school  districts.  In  this  context,  major  responsibilities 
include: 

•  appointing  principals  and  other  personnel  not  assigned  to  specific 

schools; 

•  reviewing  and  approving  the  appointment  of  teachers  and  staff  proposed 
by  principals; 

•  publishing  the  school  committees'  district  policies  on  teacher  and 
student  conduct; 

•  recommending  employee  performance  standards  to  the  school  commit- 
tees; 

9    maintaining  records  on  all  students  and  staff  and  filing  a  detailed 
annual  report; 

•  reviewing  and  approving  the  process  for  the  formation  of  school 
councils;  and 

•  overseeing  the  general  operation  of  their  school  districts. 

The  most  significant  new  responsibilities  for  superintendents  are  in  the  personnel 
area.  Superintendents  now  have  total  authority  over  hiring  principals  and  indirect  con- 
trol over  hiring  teachers. 

Principals  are  also  recognized  as  key  actors  in  school  governance.  Although  they  are 
appointed  by  superintendents,  each  of  them  has  considerable  authority  over  the  alloca- 
tion of  resources  within  his  or  her  school  building.  Major  responsibilities  include: 

•  administering  and  managing  resources  within  the  school; 

•  suspending  and  expelling  students; 

•  hiring  and  firing  all  teachers  and  school  staff,  subject  to  approval  of 
the  superintendent,  relevant  collective  bargaining  agreements,  and  state 
law; 

•  establishing  and  serving  as  cochair  of  the  school  council. 

Increased  accountability  is  the  purported  theme  of  the  Reform  Act  for  principals. 
They  exercise  greater  authority  over  school  personnel  and  are  individually  accountable 
for  teaching  and  learning  in  their  school  buildings.  Significantly,  principals,  defined  as 
managers,  can  no  longer  engage  in  collective  bargaining.  Each  principal  negotiates  an 
individual  employment  contract  (up  to  three  years)  with  his  or  her  superintendent. 

Finally,  the  Reform  Act  required  the  creation  of  a  school  council  in  each  school  in 


128 


the  state.  These  councils  are  composed  of  teachers,  parents,  community  members, 
principals,  and  at  the  high  school  level,  students.  Through  the  councils  the  Reform  Act 
encourages  the  participation  and  involvement  of  parents,  teachers,  and  community 
members  in  the  governance  of  individual  schools.  The  major  responsibilities  of  coun- 
cils include: 

•  advising  the  principal  in  setting  educational  goals  and  school  policies, 
as  well  as  reviewing  the  school  budget;  and 

•  preparing  and  reviewing  an  annual  school  improvement  plan. 


Evaluating  the  Impact  of  Governance  Changes 

To  assess  the  impact  of  these  changes,  I  sent  a  survey  questionnaire  to  all  Massachu- 
setts school  committee  members,  superintendents,  and  principals.  Of  the  4,310  ques- 
tionnaires mailed,  957  (22  percent)  were  returned.  (See  Appendix  A  for  a  discussion  of 
the  survey.)  In  addition  to  demographic  questions,  the  survey  posed  a  number  of  ques- 
tions concerning  governance  changes  under  the  Education  Reform  Act.  Questions 
probed  the  level  of  satisfaction  with  a  respondent's  governance  role,  the  impact  and 
importance  of  governance  changes,  and  the  support  for  or  opposition  to  other  possible 
governance  changes.  My  analysis  focused  on  the  similarities  and  differences  among 
responses  by  the  three  local  governance  actors.  Their  impressions  and  self-reported 
experiences  of  educational  professionals  and  leaders  form  the  basis  for  the  following 
assessment  of  the  corporate  governance  model  adopted  in  Massachusetts. 

General  Assessment  of  Roles 

On  a  measure  of  general  "satisfaction"  with  their  governance  role,  superintendents  are 
clearly  the  most  satisfied  with  changes  under  the  Education  Reform  Act.  Survey  re- 
spondents were  asked,  "How  satisfied  are  you  in  your  current  governance  role?"  The 
average  responses  for  all  three  groups  are  provided  in  Table  1 . 

Table  1 

Satisfaction  in  Current  Governance  Role 

Dissatisfied  Satisfied 

1  2  3  4  5 

School  committees  3.2 

Superintendents  4.0 

Principals  3.3 


The  feeling  of  satisfaction  among  superintendents  is  striking:  an  average  score  of 
4.0.  In  fact,  75  percent  of  superintendents  circled  4  or  5;  only  9  percent  expressed 
dissatisfaction  by  circling  1  or  2.  To  be  certain,  some  superintendents  complained  of 
continuing  micromanagement  by  school  committees,  but  the  overall  level  of  satisfac- 
tion is  quite  high. 

In  contrast,  school  committee  members  are  the  least  satisfied  among  the  three  types 
of  governance  actors.  In  response  to  the  same  question,  the  average  response  is  only 
3.2.  Only  43  percent  of  school  committee  members  circled  4  or  5,  while  33  percent 

129 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


expressed  dissatisfaction  by  circling  1  or  2.  Principals  lie  in  the  middle  on  this  measure 
of  satisfaction,  with  an  average  score  of  3.3.  In  response  to  the  question,  52  percent  of 
principals  circled  4  or  5,  and  29  percent  circled  1  or  2. 

A  second  question  concerning  general  governance  roles  reveals  a  similar  trend. 
Question  3  of  the  survey  uses  a  1  to  5  scale  for  the  following  question:  "In  the  alloca- 
tion of  governance  responsibilities  in  your  district,  how  would  you  rate  the  role  of  each 
of  the  following  [school  committee,  superintendent,  principal,  school  council]." 

Too  Weak Just  Right Too  Strong 

12  3  4  5 

From  this  perspective,  81  percent  of  superintendents  describe  their  role  as  "just 
right";  only  13  percent  viewed  it  on  the  weak  side  of  the  scale  (1  and  2).  This  was  the 
highest  self-assessment  score  among  all  three  groups.  Furthermore,  superintendents 
look  favorably  on  the  role  of  the  other  two  governance  categories.  With  respect  to  the 
role  of  principals,  for  example,  85  percent  of  superintendents  view  the  principal's  role 
as  "just  right."  The  role  of  school  committees  rates  a  slightly  lower  75  percent  "just 
right"  score,  while  school  councils  score  70  percent  on  the  same  measure.  In  general, 
superintendents  appear  to  be  quite  satisfied  with  their  role  as  chief  executive  officer  of  a 
school  system. 

School  committees,  again,  show  a  sharp  contrast  and  different  assessment  of  their 
governance  role.  In  assessing  it,  only  41  percent  of  the  members  rate  it  as  "just  right," 
while  53  percent  rate  it  weak  (scores  1  and  2).  Clearly,  school  committee  members  have 
concerns  over  their  role  in  governance.  Not  surprisingly,  this  cohort  also  questions  the 
roles  of  other  governance  participants.  Although  48  percent  of  committee  members 
view  the  superintendent's  role  as  "just  right,"  an  almost  equal  number,  44  percent,  rate 
it  on  the  strong  side  (scores  4  and  5).  For  principals,  the  picture  presents  a  greater  split: 
51  percent  of  the  members  view  the  principals'  role  as  "just  right,"  with  the  remainder 
divided  between  weak  and  strong.  Finally,  41  percent  of  school  committee  members 
view  school  councils  as  weak  (scores  1  and  2)  ,  while  37  percent  rate  them  "just  right." 

Principals  again  fall  in  the  middle,  although  their  assessment  lies  closer  to  that  of 
school  committee  members  than  of  superintendents.  In  assessing  their  own  role,  a  bare 
majority,  52  percent,  rate  their  role  as  "just  right."  In  contrast,  39  percent  of  principals 
offer  a  self-assessment  on  the  weak  side  of  the  scale.  In  light  of  this  judgment,  a  signifi- 
cant number  of  principals  view  the  role  of  other  governance  actors  as  too  strong.  With 
school  committees,  for  example,  53  percent  of  principals  perceive  the  committee  role  as 
"just  right,"  while  35  percent  perceive  it  as  strong.  The  pattern  is  almost  identical  for 
superintendents:  52  percent  of  principals  consider  the  superintendent's  role  as  "just 
right,"  while  37  percent  consider  it  as  strong.  With  school  councils,  however,  principals 
are  more  sympathetic.  For  these  partners  at  the  school  level,  62  percent  of  principals 
think  their  role  is  "just  right,"  while  29  percent  think  it  is  weak. 


Assessing  the  Importance  of  Changes 


To  assess  the  relative  importance  of  specific  changes  under  the  Massachusetts  Educa- 
tion Reform  Act,  the  survey  uses  a  1  to  5  scale  for  the  following  question:  "Listed 
below  are  major  governance  changes  under  the  Education  Reform  Act.  Regardless  of 
the  impact  on  your  district,  how  important  do  you  think  each  is  in  improving  educa- 


130 


tional  governance?"  The  tables  below  list  the  average  response  for  the  three  types  of 
governance  personnel. 

School  Committees  and  Superintendents 

One  of  the  most  important  changes  under  the  Education  Reform  Act  involves  a  shift  in 
school  committee  responsibility  from  general  hiring  decisions  to  a  policymaking  board 
that  hires  only  the  superintendent.  The  companion  to  this  change  is  the  assumption  of 
authority  by  superintendents  to  hire  principals  and  teachers.  These  two  changes  are 
central  to  the  corporate  model  that  was  instrumental  in  guiding  reform  legislation: 
board  of  directors  (school  committee)  making  policy  and  chief  executive  officer  (super- 
intendent) responsible  for  hiring. 

The  assessment  of  each  change  is  reported  in  Tables  2  and  3.  Each  change  was  per- 
ceived as  quite  important  in  school  governance,  particularly  by  superintendents.  For 
both  survey  questions,  the  average  response  for  superintendents  is  4.8.  In  the  case  of 
each  question,  85  percent  of  superintendents  circled  5  on  the  response  scale.  In  contrast, 
school  committee  members  are  less  inclined  to  view  this  change  as  very  important. 
Their  average  response  is  3.8  or  3.9  for  these  questions.  For  the  first  question,  only  39 
percent  of  school  committee  members  circled  5,  and  for  the  second  question  only  35 
percent  did  so.  Principals  fall  between  the  two,  although  they  are  more  closely  aligned 
with  superintendents.  Their  average  response  rating  is  4.6  and  4.4,  respectively,  for  the 
two  changes.  In  general,  the  responses  indicate  a  fairly  strong  endorsement  of  the  cor- 
porate model  of  governance,  although  school  committee  members  have  significant 
reservations. 


Table  2 

Hiring  Authority 

(School  committees'  focus  on  policy  and  budget  with  less  hiring  authority) 

Not  Important                                                          Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.9 

Superintendents  4.8 

Principals  4.6 


Table  3 

Superintendents'  Responsibility  for  Hiring  Principals 

Not  Important                                                          Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.8 

Superintendents  4.8 

Principals  4.4 


131 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Principals 

For  principals,  several  of  the  changes  under  the  act  are  greeted  with  considerable  sup- 
port. In  particular,  those  which  enhance  the  authority  of  principals  are  perceived  as 
important  to  educational  governance.  The  authority  of  principals  to  hire  teachers,  for 
example,  receives  strong  endorsement  (see  Table  4).  The  average  response  for  princi- 
pals is  4.8,  with  82  percent  of  principals  circling  5.  Superintendents  are  also  highly 
supportive  of  this  change.  Their  average  response  is  4.6,  with  71  percent  circling  5.  Not 
surprisingly,  school  committee  members,  who  lose  authority  under  this  change,  see  it  as 
less  important  to  improving  governance.  Their  average  response  is  4.0,  and  only  38 
percent  circled  5. 

Table  4 

Principals'  Responsibility  for  Hiring  Teachers 

Not  Important                                                                     Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  4.0 

Superintendents  4.6 

Principals  4.8 

Enhanced  authority  for  principals  over  student  discipline  receives  an  approximately 
similar  level  of  support  from  all  parties.  As  Table  5  indicates,  school  committee  mem- 
bers, principals,  and  superintendents  gave  an  average  response  of  either  4.1  or  4.3. 


Table  5 

Principals'  Authority  over  Student  Discipline 

Not  Important                                                                           Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  4.1 

Superintendents  4.3 

Principals  4.3 

One  final  change  regarding  principals,  namely,  their  removal  from  collective  bar- 
gaining, receives  less  support  as  important  to  governance,  particularly  by  them  (see 
Table  6).  This  controversial  provision  in  the  Education  Reform  Act  is  deemed  by  many 
principals  to  be  a  removal  of  protections  from  arbitrary  actions  by  superintendents.  The 
principals'  average  response  is  only  3.2.  Equally  significant,  33  percent  of  principals 
circled  1 ,  indicating  strong  sentiment  against  this  change.  On  the  other  hand,  many 
superintendents  and  school  committee  members  regarded  this  change  as  an  important 
step  in  enhancing  principals'  accountability.  The  average  response  of  both  of  these 
groups  is  4.0. 


132 


Table  6 

Principals'  Loss  of  Collective  Bargaining 

Not  Important                                                                 Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  4.0 

Superintendents  4.0 

Principals  3.2 

School  Councils 

A  final  area  of  change  involves  the  creation  of  school  councils.  These  site-based  advi- 
sory groups  are  newly  created  under  the  Education  Reform  Act.  Support  for  school 
councils  is  fairly  consistent  across  respondents  (see  Tables  7  and  8),  although  the  level 
of  importance  in  educational  governance  is  less  than  that  attributed  to  several  other 
changes,  particularly  the  changes  in  policymaking  and  personnel  responsibilities. 


Table  7 

School  Councils' Advice  to  Principals 

Not  Important                                                                    Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.8 

Superintendents  3.9 

Principals  3.7 


Table  8 

School  Councils  and  Principals'  Development 
of  Improvement  Plans 

Not  Important                                                                   Very  Important 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3 . 9 

Superintendents  4.1 

Principals  4.0 


Possible  Changes  in  Educational  Governance 

In  addition  to  the  changes  made  under  the  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act,  a 
number  of  other  governance  reforms  are  under  consideration  or  are  the  subject  of  de- 
bate. Another  part  of  the  survey  used  a  1  to  5  scale  (strongly  oppose  to  strongly  support) 
for  the  following  question:  "Listed  below  are  possible  changes  in  educational  gover- 
nance and  policymaking.  Would  you  support  or  oppose  these  changes?" 

School  Committees 

For  school  committees,  one  possible  change  is  to  restore  their  hiring  authority,  prima- 
rily the  choice  of  principals.  Survey  respondents  were  asked  whether  they  supported  or 


133 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


opposed  allowing  school  committees  to  vote  on  the  hiring  and  dismissal  of  principals. 
Under  the  new  Education  Reform  Act,  superintendents  have  sole  responsibility  in  this 
area.  Not  surprisingly,  this  change  receives  support  from  school  committee  members, 
with  an  average  response  of  3.8,  but  strong  opposition  from  superintendents,  whose 
average  response  is  1.5.  In  fact,  70  percent  of  superintendents,  indicating  their  strong 
opposition,  circled  1.  Principals,  51  percent  of  whose  responses  to  a  hiring  process  that 
opens  their  appointment  to  the  scrutiny  of  school  committees  circled  1,  were  also 
strongly  opposed  to  this  change  (see  Table  9). 

Table  9 

Should  School  Committees  Vote  on  Hiring 
and  Dismissing  Principals? 

Strongly  Oppose                             Neutral                               Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.8 

Superintendents  1.5 

Principals  2.1 

One  method  of  limiting  the  likely  scope  of  school  committee  action  —  restricting 
school  committees  to  quarterly  meetings  —  also  sparks  divergent  responses  (see  Table 
10).  School  committee  members,  not  surprisingly,  strongly  oppose  such  restrictions. 
Their  average  response  is  1 .4,  with  80  percent  of  them  circling  1 .  Superintendents, 
however,  find  more  merit  in  this  proposal.  Their  average  response  score  of  3.7  indicates 
sympathy  with  a  change  that  might  lessen  micromanagement  of  the  school  system  by 
the  school  committee.  Principals,  with  an  average  response  of  3.3,  evidence  a  more 
neutral  position  on  this  change. 

Table  10 

Limiting  School  Committees  to  Quarterly  Meetings 

Strongly  Oppose                           Neutral                                  Strongiy  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees       1.4 

Superintendents  3.7 

Principals  3.3 

Finally,  a  more  radical  change  in  choosing  school  committees  —  appointment  rather 
than  election  —  receives  general  opposition  from  all  parties,  particularly  school  com- 
mittee members,  whose  average  response  is  1.8  (see  Table  11).  It  appears  that  despite 
their  support  by  former  governor  William  Weld,  this  concept  and  Boston's  experiment 
with  an  appointed  committee  have  little  advocacy  among  local  educational  leaders 
around  the  state. 


134 


Table  11 

Allowing  Local  Communities  to  Appoint  School  Committees 

Strongly  Oppose                           Neutral                                  Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  1.8 

Superintendents  2.1 

Principals  2.6 

Superintendents 

Two  possible  changes  in  the  responsibility  and  authority  of  superintendents  receive 
mixed  responses.  One  proposed  change  is  to  require  superintendents  to  negotiate  labor 
contracts,  which  is  currently  the  responsibility  of  school  committees.  It  can  be  argued, 
however,  that  this  is  not  an  appropriate  function  for  a  policymaking  board.  Rather,  it  is 
a  management  function  that  should  rest  with  the  chief  executive  officer  of  the  corpora- 
tion. Such  a  proposal  draws  divergent  responses  (see  Table  12),  with  school  committee 
members  generally  opposed  (2.5),  principals  in  favor  (4.1),  and  superintendents  slightly 
opposed  (2.8). 


Table  12 

Requiring  Superintendents  to  Negotiate  Labor  Contracts 

Strongiy  Oppose         Neutral       Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  2.5 

Superintendents  2.8 

Principals  4.1 

A  second  change  would  reduce  superintendents'  authority  by  removing  the  require- 
ment that  a  superintendent  approve  the  hiring  and  dismissal  of  teachers.  Under  the  Edu- 
cation Reform  Act,  principals  have  primary  responsibility  for  teacher  personnel  deci- 
sions, but  superintendents  retain  final  approval  authority.  This  proposed  change  draws 
quite  strong  opposition  from  school  committee  members  (2.0)  and  superintendents 
(1.6).  Opposition  is  particularly  strong  among  superintendents,  of  whom  70  percent 
circled  1  on  the  survey.  Principals  generally  support  this  change,  but  their  level  of  sup- 
port is  mild  (3.3)  compared  with  the  opposition  of  the  other  two  groups. 

Table  13 

Allowing  Principals  Sole  Authority  to  Hire  and  Fire  Teachers 

Strongly  Oppose         Neutral                       Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  2.0 

Superintendents  1.6 

Principals  3.3 

Principals 

The  authority  and  responsibility  of  principals  is  another  important  governance  area. 
One  proposed  change,  to  involve  them  in  the  teachers'  collective  bargaining  process,  is 

135 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


designed  to  enhance  the  accountability  of  principals.  Since  collective  bargaining  contracts 
often  restrict  the  authority  of  principals  and  other  administrators,  a  role  for  principals 
in  the  process  appears  logical.  The  reaction,  however,  is  mixed  among  respondents. 
School  committee  members,  who  probably  perceive  this  as  a  loss  of  authority,  tend  to 
oppose  such  a  change  (2.6),  and  principals  generally  support  (3.6)  it,  although  neither 
group  stakes  out  a  strong  position  on  this  issue. 


Table  14 

Allowing  Principals  to  Participate  in 
Teachers'  Collective  Bargaining 

Strongly  Oppose                        Neutral                                Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  2 . 6 

Superintendents  3.2 

Principals  3.6 

Job  security  is  a  second  important  issue  for  principals.  Under  the  Education  Reform 
Act,  principals  are  no  longer  allowed  to  participate  in  collective  bargaining  and  avail 
themselves  of  concomitant  job  protections.  Many  principals  perceive  this  as  threat  to 
their  positions  and  a  change  that  undermines  their  accountability.  A  proposal  to  require 
minimum  two-year  contracts  for  principals  receives  support  or  a  neutral  response  (see 
Table  15).  Support  by  principals  is  particularly  strong  (4.6);  73  percent  of  them  circled  5. 


Table  15 

Requiring  Minimum  Two-year  Contracts  for  Principals 

Strongly  Oppose                       Neutral                               Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.1 

Superintendents  3.4 

Principals  4.6 

School  Councils 

A  general  reluctance  to  expand  the  scope  of  governance  is  evident  in  a  question  that 
proposes  to  give  school  councils  authority  over  a  portion  of  the  school  budget.  School 
councils  possess  only  advisory  authority  under  the  act;  they  lack  the  decision-making 
and  financial  authority  that  is  often  sought  by  advocates  of  school-based  management. 
This  proposal,  however,  is  generally  opposed  by  educational  professionals  (see  Table 
16).  Superintendents  (2.0)  and  school  committee  members  (2.2),  in  particular,  tend  to 
thwart  such  a  diminution  of  their  authority. 


136 


Table  16 

Giving  School  Councils  Authority  over 
Part  of  the  School  Budget 

Strongly  Oppose           Neutral                          Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  2.2 

Superintendents  2.0 

Principals  2.8 

Other  Changes 

The  reluctance  to  share  governance  responsibilities  is  even  more  evident  when  the 
proposal  is  made  to  allow  municipal  officials  more  authority  in  collective  bargaining. 
Under  the  Education  Reform  Act,  the  chief  executive  in  each  city  or  town  —  the  mayor 
or  town  manager  —  sits  with  the  school  committee  to  vote  on  collective  bargaining 
contracts.  The  intent  of  this  provision  is  to  involve  municipal  officials,  who  are  respon- 
sible for  the  allocation  of  funds  to  all  departments,  including  the  schools,  a  greater  role 
in  determining  how  funds  are  spent.  Education  leaders,  particularly  superintendents, 
oppose  an  expansion  of  authority  for  municipal  officials  (see  Table  17). 

Table  17 

Increasing  Municipal  Officials' Authority 
in  Collective  Bargaining 

Strongly  Oppose                     Neutral                      Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  2.3 

Superintendents  1.6 

Principals  2.4 

A  final  proposal  reveals  a  general  ambivalence  on  the  part  of  local  education  leaders 
toward  significant  changes  within  the  school  system.  This  proposal  would  enable  local 
districts  to  establish  within-district  charter  schools.  Like  Boston's  pilot  schools,  the 
charter  schools  would  be  exempt  from  many  regulations  and  procedures  mandated  by 
the  district  office  and  labor  contracts,  but  the  individual  schools  would  still  be  part  of 
the  local  school  district.  This  proposal  receives  a  generally  neutral  response  from  re- 
spondents, although  superintendents  indicate  mild  support  (see  Table  18). 

Table  18 

Allowing  Local  Districts  to  Establish  Charter  Schools 

Strongly  Oppose                      Neutral                             Strongly  Support 
1 2 3 4 5 

School  committees  3.1 

Superintendents  3.4 

Principals  3.0 


137 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


In  general,  governance  changes  under  the  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act  of  1993 
receive  support  from  educational  leaders  at  the  local  level.  Superintendents,  particularly, 
are  satisfied  with  their  new  role  and  responsibilities  as  the  chief  executive  officers  of  the 
school  system.  School  committee  members  and  principals  express  a  number  of  concerns, 
but  they  also  are  generally  supportive  of  the  overall  thrust  of  the  act. 

One  of  its  most  important  changes  —  the  reallocation  of  hiring  and  dismissal  author- 
ity —  is  supported  by  governance  actors,  albeit  with  some  significant  reservations.  Un- 
der reallocation,  school  committees  are  restricted  to  hiring  and  dismissing  superinten- 
dents (and  a  few  others  in  districtwide  positions);  superintendents,  who  hire  and  dismiss 
principals,  have  final  approval  of  teachers  and  other  school-based  personnel;  and  princi- 
pals assume  primary  responsibility  for  hiring  and  dismissing  teachers  and  others  in  their 
buildings. 

Schools  are  slowly  adjusting  to  this  new  allocation  of  responsibilities.  Thus  far, 
superintendents  appear  to  be  most  satisfied  with  their  role.  Their  authority  over  the  key 
official  at  each  school,  the  principal,  is  enhanced  considerably.  A  majority  of  school 
committee  members,  on  the  other  hand,  are  concerned  about  their  loss  of  authority  over 
personnel,  particularly  principals.  In  fact,  68  percent  of  school  committee  members 
support  (circled  4  or  5)  resumption  of  their  power  to  hire  and  dismiss  principals.  Princi- 
pals, for  their  part,  strongly  endorse  their  authority  to  hire  and  dismiss  teachers,  thereby 
enhancing  their  accountability  for  the  quality  of  teaching.  Some  principals,  however, 
remain  troubled  about  collective  bargaining  restrictions  and  legal  roadblocks  to  dismiss- 
ing teachers.  As  one  elementary  principal  writes,  "Why  not  put  teachers  on  the  same 
one-to-three-year  contracts  and  abolish  tenure  and  professional  status?  Do  that  and 
you'll  revolutionize  education  overnight." 

Furthermore,  many  principals  are  disturbed  about  their  new  status  outside  collective 
bargaining.  A  common  refrain  is  that  they  are  vulnerable  to  the  whims  of  the  superin- 
tendent. As  another  elementary  principal  writes,  changes  should  be  made  to  "reduce  a 
superintendent's  power  —  absolute  power  corrupts;  principals  are  at  the  mercy  of  super- 
intendents." Emphasizing  this  point,  88  percent  of  principals  support  (circled  4  or  5) 
requiring  a  minimum  two-year  contract  for  individuals  in  their  position. 

School  councils,  newly  created  under  the  Education  Reform  Act,  receive  general 
support  from  participants  in  the  survey.  School  improvement  plans,  which  are  approved 
by  school  councils,  also  receive  a  favorable  rating.  One  principal  writes,  "The  school 
improvement  plan  helps  to  bring  together  the  vision,  goals,  and  objectives  for  the 
school  from  principal,  staff,  and  parents." 

In  general,  school  committee  members,  superintendents,  and  principals  favor  many 
of  the  act's  reforms,  but  they  are  also  cautious  and  protective  of  their  authority  and 
position.  When  faced  with  reforms  that  might  alter  the  balance  of  power,  local  actors 
are  typically  opposed  or  neutral.  Appointed  school  committees,  for  example,  are  op- 
posed by  all  three  groups.  Similarly,  more  extensive  budget  authority  for  school  coun- 
cils is  opposed,  chiefly  by  school  committees  and  superintendents.  All  three  groups  are 
opposed  to  granting  municipal  officials  more  authority  in  the  collective  bargaining 
process,  and  they  are  generally  neutral  about  the  prospect  of  creating  within-district 
charter  schools.  For  these  educational  leaders,  there  are  limits  to  the  acceptable  scope 
of  educational  reform.  Future  legislative  proposals  to  alter  the  governance  framework 
need  to  take  this  cautious  perspective  into  consideration  or  risk  strong  opposition  from 


138 


major  educational  constituencies. 

The  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Act  is  inspired  by  a  corporate  model  of  educa- 
tional governance.  The  essence  of  this  model  is  a  sorting-out  or  demarcation  of  respon- 
sibilities among  governance  actors.  A  policymaking  board  of  directors,  the  local  school 
committee,  and  a  managing  chief  executive  officer,  the  superintendent,  are  central  to 
this  model.  In  addition,  school  principals  are  to  take  charge  of  their  individual  build- 
ings, and  school  councils  provide  a  forum  for  teacher,  parent,  student,  and  community 
input  to  the  decision-making  process. 

On  the  basis  of  the  self-assessments  of  school  committee  members,  superintendents, 
and  principals,  the  Education  Reform  Act  has  generally  been  effective  in  clarifying 
governance  responsibilities  and  enhancing  accountability.  However,  major  challenges 
he  ahead.  In  fact,  the  two  other  variations  of  the  public-sector  approach  to  governance 
outlined  earlier  —  political  leadership  and  shared  governance  —  point  to  two  of  them. 
Each  variant  points  to  a  different  piece  of  reality  in  the  world  of  educational  gover- 
nance. 

From  a  political  leadership  perspective,  the  key  challenge  is  the  development  of 
support  for  public  education  from  among  political  and  community  leaders  outside  the 
schools.  This  is  an  external  concern  generally  lacking  in  the  corporate  model,  which 
instead  focuses  on  policy  development  and  management  within  the  school  system. 
School  committees  focus  on  educational  policies;  superintendents  concentrate  on 
systemwide  administrative  and  management  responsibilities;  and  principals  are  con- 
cerned with  the  operations  of  their  own  school.  Under  a  corporate  model,  fostering 
broad  political  support  from  external  constituencies  in  the  community  is  not  central  to 
the  tasks  of  these  governance  actors.  Mayors  and  city  councillors,  for  example,  are  not 
of  major  concern  from  a  corporate  model  perspective.  Indeed,  this  model  eschews  the 
political  world  for  the  bias  and  influence  that  it  might  exert  over  a  policy  and  manage- 
ment process  which  should  focus  on  educational  rather  than  political  matters. 

The  political  leadership  model,  however,  poses  a  different  reality  in  which  broad 
political  support  for  education  is  critical.  This  perspective  is  particularly  pertinent  in 
Massachusetts,  whose  school  districts  are  fiscally  dependent  on  local  governments.  The 
latter,  composed  of  city  councils,  mayors,  managers,  and  others,  must  approve  the  over- 
all school  appropriation.  If  the  schools  lose  favor  with  these  political  leaders,  the  school 
budget  suffers.  Of  course,  the  funding  formula  of  the  Education  Reform  Act  requires  a 
certain  level  of  local  fiscal  support  for  the  schools,  but  this  is  essentially  a  minimum.  To 
go  beyond  this  level,  local  government  leaders  must  be  convinced  that  the  schools  merit 
additional  funding.  Thus,  governance  actors  must  add  to  their  duties  the  political  tasks 
of  seeking  and  lobbying  for  support,  particularly  fiscal  support,  from  these  leaders. 

In  this  context,  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  Boston  stands  apart  from  other  state  com- 
munities, for,  unlike  other  school  districts'  system  of  independently  electing  school 
committees,  the  city's  mayor  appoints  the  members.  Boston  thus  benefits  from  a  politi- 
cal leadership  approach  to  governance  that  has  translated  into  considerable  fiscal  and 
administrative  support  for  the  school  system.  As  noted  earlier,  Boston's  Mayor  Menino 
has  staked  his  political  future  on  improving  the  schools. 

The  second  major  challenge  is  apparent  from  the  shared  governance  approach.  From 
this  perspective,  the  critical  concern  is  how  to  build  an  environment  of  cooperation  and 
mutual  respect.  As  this  model  emphasizes,  governance  in  local  school  districts  often 
defies  the  demarcation  and  sorting-out  rationale  of  the  corporate  perspective.  As  one 
educational  association  notes,  "[The]  line  between  policy  and  administration  is  rarely 


139 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


clear-cut."15  Dialogue  and  interdependence  can  be  as  important  as  division  of  authority 
and  responsibilities.  The  question,  then,  is  whether  the  corporate  model  can  foster  this 
cooperative  environment  while  retaining  its  emphasis  on  the  policy-management  distinc- 
tions. 

A  major  challenge  to  building  a  cooperative  environment  comes  from  suspicions  and 
divisions  among  governance  actors.  Under  the  Education  Reform  Act,  for  example,  the 
job  insecurity  noted  by  many  principals  can  be  disruptive  to  the  development  of  shared 
governance.  Many  principals  perceive  their  position  as  subject  to  the  whims  of  the  super- 
intendent. The  act's  intent  is  to  make  principals  more  accountable  for  their  schools,  but 
so  mandating,  it  also  increases  the  authority  of  superintendents  over  principals.  The 
result  has  not  always  been  a  more  cooperative  environment  for  governance.  As  one  prin- 
cipal noted,  policymakers  need  to  "rethink  collective  bargaining  for  principals  —  we  are 
much  too  vulnerable  in  our  present  position." 

A  Public  Agenda  Foundation  study  raised  a  similar  point  in  its  conclusion  that  build- 
ing a  cooperative  environment  is  the  critical  step  in  educational  reform.16  "Good  ideas 
about  curricula,  textbooks,  tests,  financing  and  governance  will  founder  if  the  parties 
who  must  implement  them  cannot  get  along."17  One  superintendent  in  this  study  com- 
pared his  school  district  to  a  "giant  dysfunctional  family,"  while  in  several  communities 
surveyed,  educational  reform  fell  "victim  to  division,  factionalism,  and  gridlock."18  In 
Massachusetts  as  well,  fostering  a  cooperative  environment  is  difficult.  As  one  superin- 
tendent notes,  "There  has  been  a  distinct  and  open  polarization  of  school  committees 
and  superintendents.  In  fact,  Education  Reform  has  created  an  even  greater  and  more 
intense  political  climate." 

The  challenge  is  formidable.  A  cooperative  governance  arrangement  implies  that  all 
sectors  work  together  and  that  accountability  is  collective.  From  this  perspective,  school 
committees,  superintendents,  principals,  and  school  councils  are  in  the  governance 
game  together.  Each  plays  a  part  in  a  collective  enterprise  that  is  judged  on  its  overall 
success  —  the  educational  achievement  of  students.  A  critical  task  is  to  combine  this 
collective  accountability  with  the  individual  accountability  of  the  corporate  model.  It 
requires  a  means  of  assessment  that  discriminates  between  the  collective  and  individual 
responsibilities  of  governance  actors.  Principals,  for  example,  are  individually  account- 
able for  their  school  buildings,  but  they  are  joined  by  other  governance  players  in  over- 
all accountability  for  the  educational  performance  of  students.  Measuring  and  assessing 
such  distinctions  is  difficult,  as  is  establishing  an  acceptable  system  of  rewards.  Never- 
theless, this  is  an  important  task  that  lies  at  the  heart  of  improving  educational  gover- 
nance. ** 

For  their  assistance  in  preparing  and  mailing  this  survey,  I  thank  the  Massachusetts 
Department  of  Education,  the  Massachusetts  Association  of  School  Committees,  the 
Massachusetts  Association  of  School  Superintendents,  John  Schneider  of  the  Massachusetts 
Legislature,  and  Paul  Reville  of  the  Massachusetts  Education  Reform  Review  Commission. 
Partial  financial  support  was  provided  by  the  Research  and  Scholarship  Development  Fund, 
Northeastern  University. 


140 


Appendix  A 

Survey  Methodology 

A  survey  questionnaire  was  mailed  to  all  Massachusetts  school  committee  members,  su- 
perintendents, and  principals  in  the  fall  of  1996.  School  committee  members  received 
theirs  in  a  quarterly  mailing  from  the  Massachusetts  Association  of  School  Committees, 
superintendents  and  principals  in  a  regular  Massachusetts  Department  of  Education  mail- 
ing. Several  questions  were  open-ended,  while  others  used  a  five-point  scale  to  assess  the 
respondents'  impressions.  Questions  also  sought  information  regarding  various  demo- 
graphic and  other  background  characteristics  of  the  respondents.  The  response  rate  was  as 
follows: 


Surveys 
Mailed 


Responses 
Received 


Percentage 
Returned 


School  Committee  Members 

Superintendents 

Principals 

Total 


2,200 

280 

1,830 

4,310 


391 
138 
428 
957 


18  percent 
49  percent 
23  percent 
22  percent 


Available  demographic  data  for  the  entire  population  of  each  governance  group  form  the 
basis  for  the  following  comments  on  the  representativeness  of  the  responses. 

School  Committee  Members.  Compared  with  a  1995  membership  survey  conducted  by 
the  Massachusetts  Association  of  School  Committees  as  characteristic  of  the  entire  state 
population,  my  respondents  are  representative  in  terms  of  gender  and  education.  Distribu- 
tion of  males  and  females  in  both  is  roughly  equal,  and  approximately  50  percent  of  the 
respondents  and  the  school  committee  population  have  graduate  or  professional  degrees. 
In  years  of  service,  however,  my  group  is  more  experienced.  Among  them,  58  percent  had 
five  or  more  years  of  service  on  a  school  committee,  whereas  the  comparable  figure  for  the 
state  total  is  34  percent.. 

Superintendents.  Population  characteristics  for  this  group  are  based  on  an  annual  survey 
conducted  by  the  Massachusetts  Association  of  School  Superintendents.  My  survey 
group  is  representative  in  terms  of  age  and  size  of  school  district.  Among  both  respon- 
dents and  the  state  population  of  superintendents,  34  percent  are  between  the  ages  of  36 
and  50,  while  66  percent  are  51  or  older.  By  school  district,  66  percent  of  my  sample  and 
69  percent  of  the  state  population  are  superintendents  of  districts  with  enrollments  be- 
tween 1,000  and  5,000.  In  terms  of  years  in  their  current  governance  role,  my  respondents 
are  more  experienced  than  the  typical  total  state  population.  Among  all  superintendents, 
44  percent  have  been  in  their  jobs  for  1  to  3  years  and  39  percent  for  4  to  10  years.  In  my 
survey,  the  comparable  percentages  are  24  percent  and  52  percent,  respectively.  Again,  as 
with  school  committee  members,  my  respondents  are  somewhat  more  experienced  than 
the  overall  state  population. 

Principals.  The  Massachusetts  Department  of  Education  reports  that  the  gender  distribu- 
tion of  state  principals  is  64  percent  male  and  36  percent  female;  my  respondents  reported 
identical  figures. 


141 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Notes 

1.  Chester  Finn,  Jr.,  and  Theodor  Rebarber,  Education  Reform  in  the  '90s  (New  York: 
Macmillan,  1992). 

2.  Joseph  Murphy,  Restructuring  Schools:  Capturing  and  Assessing  the  Phenomena  {New 
York:  Teachers  College  Press,  1991 );  Cross  City  Campaign  for  Urban  School  Reform, 
Reinventing  Central  Office:  A  Primer  for  Successful  Schools  (Chicago:  Cross  City 
Campaign  for  Urban  School  Reform,  1995);  Paul  Hill  and  Josephine  Bonan,  Decentrali- 
zation and  Accountability  in  Public  Education  (Santa  Monica:  Rand  Corporation,  1991 ). 

3.  Edith  Rasell  and  Richard  Rothstein,  eds..  School  Choice:  Examining  the  Evidence 
(Washington,  D.C.:  Economic  Policy  Institute,  1993);  Carnegie  Foundation,  School 
Choice  (Princeton:  Carnegie  Foundation  for  the  Advancement  of  Teaching,  1992). 

4.  Paul  Hill,  Lawrence  Pierce,  and  James  Gutherie,  Reinventing  Public  Education:  How 
Contracting  Can  Transform  America's  Schools  (Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press, 
1997). 

5.  Craig  Richards,  Rima  Shore,  and  Max  Sawicky,  Risky  Business:  Private  Management  of 
Public  Schools  (Washington,  D.C.:  Economic  Policy  Institute,  1996). 

6.  Twentieth  Century  Fund,  Report  of  the  Twentieth  Century  Fund  Task  Force  on  School 
Governance  (New  York:  Twentieth  Century  Fund  Press,  1 992);  Jacqueline  Danzberger, 
"Governing  the  Nation's  Schools:  The  Case  for  Restructuring  Local  School  Boards,"  Phi 
Delta  Kappan,  January  1994,  366-373. 

7.  Mark  Roosevelt,  Education  Reform:  Where  We  Stand  Today  (Boston:  Massachusetts 
Legislature  Joint  Committee  on  Education,  Arts,  and  Humanities,  1994),  14. 

8.  Paul  Bauman,  Governing  Education:  Public  Sector  Reform  or  Privatization  (Boston:  Allyn 
and  Bacon,  1996). 

9.  American  Association  of  School  Administrators,  Roles  and  Relationships:  School  Boards 
and  Superintendents  (Arlington,  Va.:  American  Association  of  School  Administrators, 
1994),  13. 

10.  Sandra  Waddock,  Not  by  Schools  Alone:  Sharing  Responsibility  for  America's  Educa- 
tional Reform  (Westport,  Conn.:  Praeger,  1995). 

11.  Rochelle  Stanfield,  "Bossing  City  Schools,"  National  Journal,  no.  6  (February  8,  1997): 
272-274;  Charles  Mahtesian,  "Handing  the  Schools  to  City  Hall,"  Governing  (October 
1996):  36-40;  Richard  Hunter,  "The  Mayor  versus  the  School  Superintendent:  Political 
Incursions  into  Metropolitan  School  Politics,"  Education  and  Urban  Society  29,  no.  2 
(February  1997):  217-232. 

12.  Thomas  Menino,  "State  of  the  City"  Address  (Boston:  City  of  Boston,  Mayor's  Office, 
January  17,  1996). 

13.  Kenneth  Wong,  Robert  Dreeben,  Laurence  Lynn,  Jr.,  and  Gail  Sunderman,  Integrated 

Governance  as  a  Reform  Strategy  in  the  Chicago  Public  Schools  (Chicago:  University  of 
Chicago,  Department  of  Education  and  Graduate  School  of  Public  Policy  Studies, 
1997);  Kenneth  Wong,  ed..  Advances  in  Educational  Policy:  Rethinking  School  Reform 
in  Chicago,  vol.  2  (Greenwich,  Conn.:  JAI  Press,  1996). 

14.  Massachusetts  Department  of  Education,  Advisory  on  School  Governance  (Maiden, 
Mass.:  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  Department  of  Education,  1995),  2. 

15.  American  Association  of  School  Administrators,  Roles  and  Relationships,  6. 

1 6.  Steve  Farkas,  Divided  Within,  Besieged  Without:  The  Politics  of  Education  in  Four 
American  School  Districts  (New  York:  Public  Agenda  Foundation,  1993). 

17.  Ibid.,  28. 

18.  Ibid.,  v.1. 


142 


Citizen  Participation 
and  Strategic  Planning 
for  an  Urban 
Enterprise  Community 


Michael  Leo  Owens 


Public  policies  rarely  have  single  objectives.  For  the  federal  Empowerment  Zones 
and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative,  bettering  the  socioeconomic  opportunity 
structure  among  a  collection  of  the  nation 's  low-income  areas  is  only  one  of  its 
goals.  Another  initiative  objective  is  to  foster  the  representation  of  common  citi- 
zens, especially  residents,  in  the  planning  and  implementation  of  strategies  and 
programs  designed  to  redevelop  these  low-income  areas.  Strategic  community 
planning  was  the  method  chosen  by  the  initiative's  designers  to  achieve  both  ob- 
jectives. This  article,  which  makes  use  of  the  case  study  approach,  addresses  stra- 
tegic community  planning  as  an  instrument  of  advancing  citizen  representation  in 
urban  redevelopment  processes.  Specifically,  it  describes  and  critiques  the  process 
jointly  administered  in  three  upstate  New  York  cities  —  Albany,  Schenectady,  and 
Troy  —  that  are  participating  in  the  urban  portion  of  the  federal  initiative.  The 
purpose  of  this  study  is  to  assess  the  degree  to  which  residents  of  the  low-income 
areas  of  these  three  cities  participated  in  the  strategic  community  planning  pro- 
cess. 


Residents  who  participate  directly  in  the  process  of  urban  redevelopment  planning 
have  the  opportunity  to  acquire  expertise  in  the  subject  matter,  patience  to  see 
projects  through  from  problem  definition  to  implementation,  and  new  skills,  for  ex- 
ample, idea  formulation,  deliberation,  negotiation,  and  consensus  building,  along  with  a 
sense  of  political  efficacy.1  Moreover,  citizen  engagement  in  urban  redevelopment,  both 
at  the  planning  and  policy  implementation  levels,  holds  out  a  possibility  for  "the  devel- 
opment of  responsible  social  and  political  action  on  the  part  of  the  individual,"2  which 
democratic  theorists  like  Carole  Pateman  and  Jane  Mansbridge  envision  as  the  end 
product  of  political  participation  and  the  central  aim  of  democratic  societies.3  Conse- 
quently, urbanists  of  all  types,  for  example,  planners,  philosophers,  and  political  scien- 
tists, assert  that  urban  redevelopment  should  be  democratized,  namely,  that  citizen 
participation  in  urban  decision  making  should  be  increased  and  widespread.4  Scholars, 
however,  are  not  alone  in  calling  for  greater  citizen  participation;  governments  have 
also  made  this  assertion.  Consider  the  example  of  the  Clinton  administration5  and  the 
implementation  of  the  urban  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initia- 
tive by  its  Department  of  Housing  and  Urban  Development  (HUD).6 

Michael  Leo  Owens,  a  doctoral  candidate  in  the  Program  in  Political  Science,  State  Uni- 
versity of  New  York  at  Albany,  is  affiliated  with  the  Urban  and  Metropolitan  Studies  pro- 
gram, Nelson  A.  Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government. 

143 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


In  the  early  stages  of  the  initiative,  which  is  a  reincarnation  of  earlier  federal  poli- 
cies targeting  grants  and  tax  incentives  to  low-income  urban  neighborhoods,7  strategic 
planning  was  relied  upon  to  provide  for  and  encourage  citizen  participation  in  the 
redevelopment  decisions  for  low-income  neighborhoods  nominated  by  their  cities  to 
receive  federal  reinvestment  funds  from  HUD  under  the  initiative.8  In  the  hands  of 
common  citizens,  strategic  planning  is  a  tool  for  identifying  community  problems  and 
priorities;  scanning  their  community's  weaknesses  and  strengths  vis-a-vis  those  of 
other  communities;  formulating  plans  aimed  at  minimizing  the  disadvantages  of  their 
communities  and  exploiting  their  strengths  in  relation  to  new  opportunities;  and  target- 
ing community  resources  more  efficiently  and  effectively. 

HUD  required  prospective  applicant  cities  to  administer  strategic  community  plan- 
ning processes  that  were  bottom-up  driven  and  open  to  all  who  had  stakes  in  the  future 
of  the  targeted  communities.9  As  Marilyn  Gittell  notes,  "The  Clinton  Administration 
invited  —  indeed  encouraged  —  communities,  including  community  organizations  as 
well  as  rank-and-file  citizens,  to  pull  together  in  drafting  blueprints  for  future  eco- 
nomic growth  and  urban  development."10  A  cross  section  of  affected  groups  —  com- 
munity residents,  social  and  religious  organizations,  representatives  from  the  private 
and  nonprofit  sectors,  and  local  governments  —  were  to  be  involved.  However,  of  the 
ordinary  citizens  who  were  expected  to  participate  in  the  planning  process,  no  group 
was  considered  more  important  than  the  residents  of  the  low-income  communities  that 
would  eventually  be  targeted  for  federal  funding:  it  was  expected  that  they  would  be 
full  partners  in  the  process.11  This  notion  was  mortgaged  to  a  belief  that  the  representa- 
tives from  low-income  neighborhoods  should  be,  would  want  to  be,  and  are  capable  of 
being  active  participants  in  the  redevelopment  of  their  communities. 

An  evaluation  of  the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative 
showed  that,  among  the  sample  of  eighteen  cities  selected  for  study,  most  of  the  strate- 
gic community  plans  submitted  to  HUD  were  initiated  and  designed  through  processes 
that  included  cross  sections  of  citizens.12  This  study  of  participation  and  governance  in 
the  planning  phase  concluded  that  "the  citizen  participation  that  occurred  during  the 
development  of  strategic  [community]  plans  was  significantly  and  substantively 
greater  than  that  which  [took]  place  under  previous  federal  urban  initiatives."13  How- 
ever, "because  community  involvement  is  solicited,"  notes  Gerry  Riposa,  "it  does  not 
necessarily  follow  that  .  .  .  [political  elites]  will  divide  authority  and  decision-making 
powers  with  those  whose  input  is  sought."14 

Despite  the  finding  of  "significant  and  substantive"  citizen  participation,  some  stra- 
tegic community  plans  submitted  to  HUD  were  formulated  with  very  little,  and  some- 
times without  any,  citizen  involvement.  In  an  undetermined  number  of  cases,  the 
Clinton  administration's  call  for  citizen  participation  and  community  empowerment 
went  unheard.  In  some  instances,  as  John  Gaventa  and  his  colleagues  found,  "regional 
development  districts  or  industrial  boards  led  the  effort  to  draft  [strategic  community 
plans].  Because  some  institutions  had  tittle  experience  with  bottom-up  planning,  strat- 
egies that  they  devised  largely  flowed  from  the  top  down."15  As  a  result,  "participation 
of  community  groups  was  only  an  afterthought;  for  the  most  part,  professional  bureau- 
crats and  politicians  shaped  [their]  city's  plan."16  Absent  high  levels  of  government 
involvement,  private-sector  elites  from  both  the  non-  and  for-profit  realms  assumed 
responsibility  for  and  control  of  their  city's  strategic  community  planning  process.17 
While  a  wide  range  of  groups  may  have  been  present  "around  the  table,"  those 
involved  in  designing  and  setting  the  agendas  that  created  the  plans  for  their  cities 


144 


were  "the  same  old  players  who  had  always  managed  planning  and  development  [in 
their  cities]"  —  government,  philanthropic,  and  economic  elites.18 

Looking  through  the  lens  of  citizen  participation  and  participatory  planning  litera- 
ture, this  study  evaluates  HUD's  use  of  strategic  community  planning  in  its  Empower- 
ment Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative.  It  describes  and  critiques  the  strate- 
gic community  planning  process  that  took  place  in  one  of  the  nation's  sixty-five  urban 
enterprise  communities,  namely,  Albany-Schenectady-Troy.19  The  survey  centers  on  the 
case  study  approach  to  detail  the  strategic  community  planning  process  that  took  place 
among  the  poorest  sections  of  these  three  cities  prior  to  their  joint  submission  of  an 
application  to  HUD  for  designation  as  an  enterprise  community.  It  (1)  identifies  the 
actor(s)  who  initiated  and  guided  the  strategic  community  planning  process  that  was 
administered;  (2)  describes  the  level  of  resident  participation  throughout  the  strategic 
community  planning  process;  and  (3)  outlines  how  such  planning  for  federal  urban 
neighborhood  redevelopment  initiatives  can  be  enhanced  to  promote  greater  citizen 
participation  in  the  future. 


The  Urban  Enterprise  Community  Program 

According  to  HUD  secretary  Andrew  Cuomo,  the  urban  Empowerment  Zones  and  En- 
terprise Communities  initiative  is  the  Clinton  administration's  opportunity  "to  prove  to 
the  nation  that  we  do  know  how  to  revitalize  devastated  areas."20  Functioning  as  the 
nation's  urban  policy,  the  initiative  targets  low-income  urban  neighborhoods  for  concen- 
trated and  coordinated  federal  resources;  coordinates  redevelopment  and  revitalization 
efforts  among  both  the  public  and  private  sectors;  promotes  long-range  strategic  com- 
munity planning  as  a  vehicle  for  citizen  participation  and  community  empowerment; 
and  promotes  holistic  redevelopment  strategies  that  combine  physical,  social,  and  eco- 
nomic revitalization  activities.21  The  Clinton  administration  hopes  that  HUD's  imple- 
mentation of  the  initiative,  which  incorporates  federal  funds  with  regulatory  relief, 
technical  assistance,  and  the  participation  of  stakeholders  —  residents,  business  owners, 
service  providers,  and  governments  —  will  yield  inner-city  low-income  communities 
that  provide  security,  community,  and  opportunity  to  their  residents.22 

The  initiative  is  comprised  of  two  components  —  the  Empowerment  Zones  program 
and  the  Enterprise  Communities  program.  The  former  targets  $815  million  in  flexible 
grants  and  $900  million  in  federal  tax  credits  among  a  few  central  cities;23  the  latter 
targets  far  less  money  at  a  far  greater  number  of  small  to  medium-size  cities.24  Of  the 
two,  the  Empowerment  Zones  portion  has  received  the  bulk  of  the  academic 
community's  attention.25  The  Enterprise  Communities  program,26  however,  while  not  as 
well  funded  or  administered  in  the  nation's  largest  cities,  cannot  be  overlooked:  Over 
the  next  ten  years  it  will  aim  an  estimated  $195  million  in  Title  XX  Social  Services 
Block  Grants  and  $195  million  in  federal  tax  credits  at  improving  the  economies  and 
social  environments  among  a  number  of  U.S.  urban  low-income  communities.27 

Cities  in  this  program,  as  well  as  those  in  the  Empowerment  Zones  program,  were 
chosen  by  HUD  on  the  basis  of  their  submission  of  strategic  community  plans  that  (1) 
identified  specific  geographic  areas  that  met  the  initiative's  criteria  for  socioeconomic 
distress;28  (2)  detailed  how  the  economic,  physical,  and  human  capital  among  the  resi- 
dents of  the  identified  impoverished  communities  would  be  increased;  and  (3)  noted  the 
degree  to  which  state,  local,  and  private  resources  would  be  made  available  for  redevel- 
oping these  communities.  Taken  as  a  whole,  a  city's  strategic  community  plan  had  to 
address  the  creation  of  economic  opportunities  and  sustainable  community  development 

145 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


in  its  low-income  neighborhoods  by  identifying  strategies  that  could  effectively  lower 
the  barriers  to  employment  faced  by  the  residents  of  their  city's  low-income  communi- 
ties and  rebuild  the  physical  and  social  environments  of  such  places.  But  that  was  not 
all. 

Developing  strategies  for  bettering  the  socioeconomic  opportunity  structure  in  the 
nation's  low-income  areas  was  only  one  requirement  for  cities  applying  to  the  urban 
Enterprise  Communities  program.  For  another,  the  cities  had  to  foster  the  participation 
of  ordinary  citizens,  especially  residents,  in  planning  and  implementing  strategies  for 
redeveloping  their  low-income  areas.  This  participation,  according  to  the  Clinton 
administration's  written  record  and  the  rules  and  regulations  for  the  Empowerment 
Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative,  was  to  be  direct  and  have  the  effect  of 
empowering  average  citizens.29  As  a  consequence,  applicant  cities  had  to  describe  the 
extent  to  which  rank-and-file  citizens,  especially  residents  of  target  communities,  par- 
ticipated in  the  strategic  community  planning  process,  along  with  their  anticipated  roles 
in  the  post-designation  process.30 


Empowerment  through  Participation:  A  Note  on  Praxis 

Susan  Fainstein  and  Clifford  Hirst  discern  a  strong  belief  that  "participation  in  urban 
politics  and  community  life  [is]  a  potentially  transformative  experience."31  Those  favor- 
ing citizen  participation,  especially  among  residents,  in  the  public  decision-making 
processes  surrounding  urban  planning  and  redevelopment  consider  collaboration  itself 
to  be  educative  and  socially  transformative:  participation  fosters  the  development  of 
"public  regardedness"  and  a  concern  for  collective  interests  over  individual  interests.32 
But  beyond  serving  as  a  means  of  fostering  public  regardedness  and  collectivism,  citi- 
zen participation  in  urban  redevelopment  is  promoted  as  an  instrument  of  empower- 
ment, notably  among  the  residents  of  low-income  urban  neighborhoods.33 

Empowerment  is  centered  around  the  axiom  that  the  inclusion  and  ongoing  involve- 
ment of  residents  in  the  formulation  and  implementation  of  community-based  agendas 
are  essential  to  the  sustained  revitalization  of  low-income  communities.34  As  Robyne 
Turner  informs  us,  empowerment  "is  more  than  agenda  access;  it  is  the  ability  to 
change  direction  and  be  responsible  for  making  it  happen.  ...  It  addresses  the  question 
of  who  defines  the  process  rules  and  ultimately  the  agenda."35  In  their  study  of  neigh- 
borhood participation  in  five  U.S.  cities,  Jeffrey  Berry,  Kent  Portney,  and  Ken  Thomson 
conclude  that  it  "may  not  transform  people  to  the  degree  that  participation  theorists 
have  anticipated,  but  it  does  make  a  difference  in  the  attitudes  of  people  who  become 
involved  in  such  political  activities";  resident  empowerment  can  come  from  participa- 
tion in  public  decision-making  processes.36  Through  education  and  encouragement  by 
governments  and  philanthropies,  residents  can  play  a  direct  role  in  and  influence,  if  not 
control  and  determine,  the  course  of  their  communities.37 

"Making  the  case  for  [participation  and  empowerment]  on  theoretical  grounds  is 
much  easier,"  caution  Berry  et  al.,  "than  demonstrating  that  it  will  work."38  But  theory 
is  being  put  into  practice  and  yielding  the  expected  results.  Around  the  United  States, 
low-income  communities  are  being  reconverted  to  stable  places  of  residence  through 
the  organization  and  mobilization  of  their  occupants,  coupled  with  external  funding 
from  not-for-profit  and  public  institutions.39  In  these  situations,  residents  are  often  the 
primary  instruments  for  reversing  the  downward  trajectory  of  their  neighborhoods. 
Boston's  Dudley  Street  Neighborhood  Initiative  (DSNI),  for  example,  demonstrates 


146 


empirically  that  participation  and  empowerment  are  not  only  possible  but  fundamental 
to  the  redevelopment  of  low-income  localities.40 

In  the  Dudley  Street  neighborhood,  incorporation  and  involvement  not  only  encour- 
aged the  leadership  of  residents  in  addressing  community  issues  but  increased  their 
political  efficacy,  which  was  necessary  to  the  success  of  resident-controlled  community 
redevelopment.41  The  DSNI  illustrates  that  in  choosing  action  over  resignation  (accept- 
ing neighborhood  conditions  as  unalterable)  and  exit  (flight  from  a  neighborhood), 
citizens  can  be  effective  at  community  problem  solving.42  Although  resignation  and  exit 
remain  viable  options  for  them,  the  residents  of  such  neighborhoods  can  also  choose  to 
engage  in  day-to-day,  grassroots,  community-based  activities  intended  to  reverse  spiral- 
ing  socioeconomic  conditions  in  their  surroundings.43  Examples  of  these  activities  in- 
clude neighborhood  crime  watches,  incumbent  upgrading,  community  gardens,  forma- 
tion of  neighborhood  associations,  and  chartering  community  development  corpora- 
tions. 


Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy  in  a  Regional  Context 

As  in  other  northeastern  U.S.  cities,  economic  restructuring  has  had  a  profound  effect 
on  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy,  which,  150  miles  north  of  the  Bronx,  are  in  New 
York  State's  Capital  Region.44  For  example,  over  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  manufac- 
turing jobs  in  and  around  these  three  cities  have  decreased  by  more  than  40  percent 45 
while  technology  and  advanced  service  industry  employment  has  increased.  Between 
1973  and  1995,  manufacturing  employment  in  the  region  dropped  from  19  percent  to  9 
percent,  while  service  employment  increased  to  36  percent,  up  from  25  percent.46 

Besides  experiencing  alterations  in  the  private-sector  employment  structure  of  their 
economies,  public-sector  employment,  which  has  been  central  to  the  three  cities  and 
their  economies,  especially  Albany's,  is  declining.47  By  century's  end,  the  public  sector 
is  expected  to  have  contracted  by  10  percent.48  If  predictions  prove  true,  government 
employment  will  account  for  fewer  than  20  percent  of  the  region's  jobs,  down  from  the 
current  30  percent.49  The  restructuring  of  employment  opportunities  in  the  public  sector, 
particularly  at  the  state  government  level,  is  expected  to  have  "major  direct  and  indirect 
impacts  for  the  long  term  stability  of  the  region's  economy,"  for  instance,  retail  vacan- 
cies, declining  home  ownership  and  housing  values,  and  decreased  local  revenues,  espe- 
cially in  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy.50 

In  addition  to  transformed  economies,  the  region's  urban  housing  markets  have  un- 
dergone noticeable  changes;  a  majority  of  the  region's  population  has  shifted  from  its 
cities  to  its  suburbs.  In  1970,  53  percent  of  this  population  resided  in  the  three  cities.51 
Twenty  years  later,  less  than  half  (44  percent)  of  this  population  resided  in  one  of  the 
three.52  Coupled  to  the  region's  increased  suburbanization  of  population  and  housing  is 
the  increased  suburbanization  of  commercial  activity  and  employment.  In  1972,  Albany, 
Schenectady,  and  Troy  accounted  for  63  percent  of  the  region's  retail  sales,  but  by  1990 
the  figure  was  less  than  50  percent.53  Windshield  tours  of  the  three  cities  reveal  that 
commercial  vacancies  have  increased;  in  some  sections,  whole  commercial  blocks  have 
been  abandoned.  Buildings  in  which  large  retailers  like  Woolworth  once  prospered  are 
empty;  they  are  too  large  and  too  expensive  for  most  local  entrepreneurs. 

The  migration  of  human,  financial,  and  social  capital  to  the  suburban  peripheries  of 
the  region's  three  urban  centers  has  depressed  the  socioeconomic  conditions  of  the  inner 


147 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


cities.  Social  distress,  as  measured  by  indicators  such  as  poverty  and  physical  deteriora- 
tion, have  risen.54  In  Albany,  for  example,  the  poverty  rate  has  grown  and  the  number  of 
people  on  public  assistance  has  doubled.55  This  downward  mobility  has  occurred  despite 
the  fact  that  the  city's  residents  have  experienced  an  overall  increase  in  their  median 
household  incomes.56  Moreover,  in  the  poorest  communities  of  the  three  cities  — 
Albany's  South  End,  Arbor  Hill,  and  West  Hill  neighborhoods,  Schenectady's  Hamilton 
Hill  neighborhood,  and  Troy's  North  Central  neighborhood  —  representatives  of  neigh- 
borhood-based and  grassroots  community  development  organizations  assert  that  munici- 
pal services,  the  quality  and  quantity  of  housing,  and  the  public  infrastructure  of  roads, 
parks,  and  sewers  are  all  in  decline.57  Unemployment  and  poverty,  along  with  other 
measures  of  socioeconomic  distress,  are  believed  to  be  higher  in  these  communities 
relative  to  their  cities  and  the  region. 

There  is  no  statistical  proof  to  support  the  claims  made  by  community  organizations 
regarding  municipal  malfeasance.  But  there  is  evidence  that  the  social  environments  of 
the  cities'  poorest  neighborhoods  differ  markedly  from  the  rest  of  the  Capital  Region. 
While  unemployment  stood  at  10  percent  in  the  poorest  urban  neighborhoods  of  Al- 
bany, Schenectady,  and  Troy  at  the  start  of  the  decade,  the  rate  for  the  region  was  5 
percent.58  In  terms  of  poverty,  33  percent  of  families  residing  in  the  cities'  low-income 
neighborhoods  were  in  poverty  in  1990,  compared  with  9  percent  of  f amities  throughout 
the  region.59  As  for  the  proportion  of  households  on  public  assistance,  19  percent  of 
those  in  the  region's  poor  urban  communities  received  public  assistance  compared  with 
5  percent  for  the  region.60  Finally,  67  percent  of  adults  residing  in  the  cities'  low-income 
neighborhoods  were  high  school  graduates,  compared  with  87  percent  for  the  region  as 
a  whole.61 

These  statistics  show  clearly  that  the  low-income  neighborhoods  of  Albany, 
Schenectady,  and  Troy  would  be  nominated  to  participate  in  the  urban  Enterprise  Com- 
munities program.  They  typify  the  districts  the  Clinton  administration's  Empowerment 
Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative  intended  to  target.  As  one  mayor  wrote  to 
HUD,  'The  neighborhoods  that  would  benefit  the  most  from  [the  Enterprise  Communi- 
ties program]  are  overwhelmed  by  the  more  complex  and  life-threatening  burdens  of  the 
drug  war  and  the  associated  social  ills  of  unemployment,  teenage  pregnancy,  and  sub- 
stance abuse."62 


Planning  for  the  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community 

HUD  issued  criteria  for  the  selection  of  city-nominated  communities  to  participate  in 
the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative  in  January  1994.63 
Applicant  cities  were  given  six  months  to  organize  residents;  involve  representatives 
from  both  the  public  and  private  sectors;  formulate  strategic  plans  for  their  communities 
and  submit  them  to  HUD.  Applicant  cities  were  required  to  form  strategic  community 
planning  committees  comprised  of  a  cross  section  of  people  broadly  representing  the 
racial,  cultural,  and  economic  diversity  of  the  neighborhood.  HUD  mandated  that  com- 
mittees include  all  stakeholders:  residents  of  target  areas,  along  with  officials  from 
municipal  and  state  government  and  representatives  of  the  private  for-  and  not-for-profit 
sectors  had  to  be  chosen  as  members.64 

Generally,  local  governments  were  the  catalysts  for  the  strategic  community  plan- 
ning process  in  the  cities  that  applied  for  federal  funding  under  the  initiative.65  Mayors 
or  city  managers  usually  initiated  their  cities'  application.66  But  the  mayors  of  Albany, 

148 


Schenectady,  and  Troy  initially  chose  not  to  apply  to  the  program  despite  the  fact  that 
an  Enterprise  Community  designation  would  provide  S2  million  in  federal-state  funding 
to  each  municipality.67  The  catalyst  for  the  initiation,  development,  and  submission  of 
the  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community  application  was  a  nongovernmen- 
tal institution  established  and  funded  by  the  300  largest  private  for-profit  corporations 
in  the  Capital  Region,  the  Center  for  Economic  Growth  (CEG).  This  group  formulated 
the  proposal  for  a  joint-municipality  application;  convinced  the  mayors  to  pursue  an 
Enterprise  Community  designation;  raised  funds  to  arrange  for  the  strategic  community 
planning  process;  served  as  the  liaison  between  the  three  cities,  New  York  State,  and 
HUD;  and  selected  the  membership  of  the  strategic  community  planning  committee.68 

The  Center  for  Economic  Growth 

Prior  to  HUD's  inviting  applications  for  the  urban  Enterprise  Communities  program, 
projects  involving  the  redevelopment  of  the  region's  poorest  urban  communities,  espe- 
cially those  with  large  African-American  and  Latino  populations,  were  absent  from  the 
activities  of  the  Center  for  Economic  Growth.  In  line  with  the  perspective  of  Paul 
Peterson  on  urban  economic  development,  CEG  adheres  to  the  notion  that  urban  policy 
alternatives  are  limited  by  cities'  having  to  be  economically  competitive.69  Emphasizing 
the  commercial  intensification  of  land  use  and  economic  growth,  CEG  seeks  to  expand 
commercial  opportunities  for  established  companies,  attract  new  firms  to  the  region, 
and  provide  services  to  firms  that  either  relocate  to  the  region  or  are  starting  up.70  It 
attempts  to  increase  its  ability  to  accomplish  such  goals  by  advocating  for  public  poli- 
cies assumed  to  increase  the  region's  competitive  advantage  in  relation  to  its  economic 
position,  political  influence,  and  social  prestige,  namely,  tax  abatements,  wage  credits, 
and  low  taxes,  which  are  common  government  inducements  to  entice  investors,  produc- 
ers, and  consumers  to  relocate  from  other  areas.71 

CEG's  interest  in  the  low-income  neighborhoods  of  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy 
was  fostered  by  the  urban  Enterprise  Community  program's  emphasis  on  economic 
opportunity,  especially  job  creation  and  entrepreneurship,  rather  than  on  social  ser- 
vices.72 Because  the  program  was  not  redistributive  in  terms  of  policy,  CEG's  involve- 
ment would  not  gainsay  its  growth-oriented  agenda.  (It  is  plausible  that  had  the  applica- 
tion for  the  program  required  a  financial  commitment  from  the  private  and  local  public 
sectors,  CEG  would  probably  not  have  initiated  the  pursuit  of  an  Enterprise  Community 
designation  for  the  three  cities.  Residents  and  activists  from  the  target  neighborhoods, 
however,  contend  that  the  motivation  behind  CEG's  involvement  was  a  public  relations 
campaign  aimed  at  providing  its  membership  with  the  appearance  of  being  responsible 
corporate  citizens.)73 

Moreover,  since  the  program  called  for  collaboration  and  cooperation  between  the 
public  and  private  sectors,  CEG,  which  has  promoted  public-private  partnerships  since 
its  inception,  viewed  it  as  an  opportunity  to  advance  the  interests  of  the  region.74  It  was 
in  the  spirit  of  creating  a  regional  private-public  partnership  that  the  Center  for  Eco- 
nomic Growth  involved  itself  with  the  Enterprise  Community  program:  "By  working 
with  [Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy]  to  coordinate  the  application,  CEG   [played]  the 
role  of  honest  broker  in  an  effort  which  could  result  in  additional  federal  assistance  for 
a  vast  array  of  economic  development  and  job  creation  efforts  in  the  region."75 

Following  HUD's  issuance  of  the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities 
initiative's  criteria,  CEG  spent  three  months  promoting  the  joint  application  of  Albany, 
Schenectady,  and  Troy  to  the  urban  Enterprise  Community  program.  In  its  meetings 

149 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


with  the  mayors  of  the  three  cities,  CEG  proposed  to  cosubmit  to  HUD  an  application 
that  focused  on  regional  collaboration  and  cooperation  among  the  for-profit,  nonprofit, 
and  public  sectors.  Such  an  application,  influenced  by  the  scholarship  which  contends 
that  regions,  not  cities  or  states,  are  increasingly  the  central  social  and  economic  units 
of  society,  might  prove  to  be  novel  compared  with  others  received  by  HUD.76  Beyond 
its  originality,  regionalization  made  sense  in  the  context  of  the  Capital  Region  and  the 
relationship  among  its  three  cities:  "No  community  in  the  region  [was]  economically 
self-sufficient,  nor  will  they  be.  .  .  .  The  region  already  functions  as  a  region,  not  as  a 
collection  of  self-sufficient  municipalities."77  A  region-based  strategic  community  plan 
would  allow  the  municipalities  to  deal  together  with  problems  like  poverty,  unemploy- 
ment, and  crime,  something  that  had  never  happened  in  the  region.  Should  an  Enter- 
prise Community  designation  be  awarded,  a  regional  plan  for  the  cities'  low-income 
communities  would,  in  the  words  of  one  mayor,  "allow  for  a  sharing  of  successful  pro- 
grams [that]  will  greatly  enhance  the  efforts  to  improve  distressed  neighborhoods  in  all 
three  communities."78  Collaboration  would  allow  the  cities  to  coordinate  their  policies 
and  programs  and  share  in  a  new  pool  of  resources  that  might  allow  them  to  be  effective 
at  turning  around  their  poor  neighborhoods.79 

There  were,  however,  more  practical  reasons  for  CEG's  regional  approach.  If  the 
cities  applied  to  the  Enterprise  Community  program  individually,  each  would  probably 
be  rejected.  Although  each  city  had  low-income  areas,  no  single  city  could  identify 
enough  of  them  to  meet  HUD's  criterion  of  socioeconomic  distress.  In  addition,  should 
an  Enterprise  Community  designation  be  awarded  to  the  three  cities,  the  moneys  that 
accompanied  the  designation  could  be  used  to  enhance  the  background  conditions  that 
are  believed  to  influence  decisions  regarding  business  relocation,  for  example,  imple- 
menting human  resource  policies  that  foster  and  sustain  a  skilled  workforce.80  Finally, 
because  HUD  did  not  require  a  financial  commitment,  the  cost  of  applying  for  an  Enter- 
prise Community  designation  was  low.81 

The  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Committee 

With  the  consent  of  the  mayors  of  the  three  cities,  along  with  $30,000  in  public  funds 
—  $10,000  in  discretionary  funding  from  each  municipality  —  CEG  established  the 
Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community  (TriCity  EC)  Steering  Committee. 
According  to  HUD,  this  committee  "reflected  the  age,  ethnic,  economic,  and  gender 
diversity  of  the  designated  neighborhoods  and  representatives  were  identified  through  a 
community-based  nomination  process  which  identified  one  resident  from  each  of  the 
participating  neighborhoods  as  a  member."82  This  description  is  inaccurate.83 

The  committee  was  comprised  solely  of  representatives  of  the  three  cities'  private, 
nonprofit,  and  public  sectors,  and  the  strategic  community  planning  process  was  top- 
down  and  elite-driven  rather  than  bottom-up  and  community-centered.  No  residents  of 
the  communities  that  would  be  targeted  by  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee's  strate- 
gic community  planning  process  served  on  the  committee,  nor  was  the  membership  of 
the  steering  committee  decided  by  nomination  and  election  or  by  governmental  ap- 
pointment. 

The  membership  of  the  steering  committee  was  determined  by  CEG.  It  extended 
invitations  to  those  groups  believed  to  possess  the  best  knowledge  about  and  resources 
for  developing  and  submitting  a  strategic  community  plan  that  emphasized  regionalism. 
These  groups  then  selected  representatives  to  serve  on  the  committee.  The  result  was  a 
steering  committee  that  represented  the  interests  of  the  three  municipalities:  high-level 


150 


staffers  from  their  economic  development  and  planning  departments;  the  Council  of 
Community  Services,  an  association  of  the  region's  not-for-profit  social  services  agen- 
cies and  a  United  Way  human  services  planning  affiliate;  the  Capital  District  Regional 
Planning  Commission,  a  regional  planning  agency;  and  the  Center  for  Economic 
Growth.84 

The  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  charged  itself  to  identify  and  assess  the 
strengths  and  weaknesses  of  the  cities'  low-income  communities  and  create  a  strategic 
community  plan  that  would  be  submitted  to  HUD  by  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy. 
However,  by  the  time  the  steering  committee  convened  its  first  meeting,  three  months 
had  elapsed  since  the  application  guidelines  for  the  Enterprise  Communities  program 
were  issued.  It  was  only  three  months  until  the  June  deadline  for  HUD's  receipt  of  ap- 
plications. To  expedite  its  planning  process,  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  issued 
a  request  for  proposals  from  local  economic  development  consultants  and  grant  writers. 
One  month  later  it  hired  EastWest  Planning  &  Development,  a  Troy-based  firm,  to 
assist  the  steering  committee  in  formulating  a  planning  process  for  the  three  cities.85  It 
would  prepare  strategic  plan  narratives,  complete  the  application  forms,  conduct  a  sur- 
vey, and  organize  a  set  of  community  forums.86  Most  important,  EastWest  was  con- 
tracted to  "structure  a  strategic  plan  consistent  with  Enterprise  Community  prin- 
ciples."87 Its  "presence  in  the  process,"  from  EastWest's  perspective,  "would  provide  an 
opportunity  to  help  the  [steering]  Committee  think  critically  about  the  decisions"  it 
would  make  concerning  its  target  neighborhoods.88 

Citizen  Participation  and  Resident  Input 

With  the  hiring  of  EastWest  Planning  &  Development,  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Com- 
mittee had  three  options  concerning  the  strategic  community  planning  process:  (1)  with 
an  impending  June  deadline,  the  steering  committee  could  limit  resident  access  to  the 
process,  focusing  more  of  its  attention  and  time  on  institutional  cooperation  and  the 
production  of  a  plan  suitable  for  submission  to  HUD;  (2)  influenced  by  EastWest's 
knowledge  of  the  importance  of  legitimacy  to  comprehensive  community  initiatives,  the 
steering  committee  could  open  its  planning  and  decision-making  processes  to  direct 
resident  participation;  or  (3)  the  steering  committee  could  apply  a  midrange  approach, 
one  that  would  allow  for  a  modest  degree  of  resident  incorporation  to  occur  without 
jeopardizing  the  committee's  ability  to  meet  HUD's  deadline.  The  TriCity  EC  Steering 
Committee  chose  the  third  option. 

According  to  the  application  the  steering  committee  submitted  to  HUD,  "Many  of 
the  Steering  Committee  members  believed  that  resident  input  into  the  strategic  planning 
process  could  be  obtained  by  gathering  key  human  service  agencies  together  to  repre- 
sent the  needs  of  their  constituencies."89  Over  time  this  belief  was  muted.  The  opinions 
and  attitudes  of  residents  concerning  their  communities  and  policy  priorities  entered  the 
strategic  community  planning  process  through  two  mechanisms  that  are  widely  used  to 
capture  citizens'  sense  of  problems  and  priorities:  public  forums  and  surveys.  In  theory, 
when  used  as  part  of  public  decision-making  processes,  forums  and  surveys  are  useful.90 
In  practice,  however,  these  instruments  have  been  used  by  political  elites  to  limit  the 
direct  participation  of  citizens  in  public  decision  making.91 

To  facilitate  citizen  participation  in  the  strategic  community  planning  process,  the 
TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  sponsored  "structured  community  workshops."92  A 
workshop  was  held  in  each  of  the  three  cities  one  month  prior  to  the  date  the  strategic 
community  plan  was  due  to  HUD.93  These  workshops  introduced  the  target  communi- 


151 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


ties  to  the  Enterprise  Communities  program  and  the  membership  of  the  TriCity  EC 
Steering  Committee.  The  intent  of  these  public  forums  was  to  elicit  community  partici- 
pation and  provide  the  committee  with  a  clearer  understanding  of  the  communities' 
problems,  resources,  and  prospects  for  affecting  positive  socioeconomic  and  physical 
change,  that  is,  job  creation,  home  ownership,  and  youth  enrichment.  The  workshop 
format  consisted  of  a  general  introduction  by  the  committee  followed  by  a  question- 
and-answer  period  and  small-group  discussions. 

The  Enterprise  Communities  program  "promised  residents  authentic  input  into  the 
planning  process  and  the  opportunity  to  share  feedback  on  the  proposed  strategic  plan, 
giving  them  reassurance  that  their  voices  mattered."94  According  to  the  steering  commit- 
tee, its  workshops  fulfilled  this  promise  by  providing  a  mechanism  which  ensured  that 
the  strategic  community  planning  process  for  the  TriCity  EC  "was  driven  by  the  needs 
and  wishes  of  the  residents";  "represented  the  diversity  of  the  neighborhoods";  demon- 
strated "hands-on  resident  support"  in  its  development  and  implementation;  and  vali- 
dated "the  importance  of  the  problems,  resources,  and  obstacles  identified  in  other  stud- 
ies by  residents  of  the  targeted  communities."95 

The  application  submitted  to  HUD  by  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  does  not 
state  the  number  of  attendees  at  these  community  workshops,  which,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Schenectady  workshop,  were  held  outside  its  targeted  neighborhoods.96  But  few 
residents  from  these  neighborhoods  attended  the  workshops.  Those  who  did  attend  the 
workshops  were  generally  "outnumbered  three-to-one  by  the  service  providers  operat- 
ing in  the  target  neighborhoods."97  Consequently,  most  of  the  "citizen"  input  came  from 
neighborhood  social  service  providers,  many  of  whom  "were  perceived  by  neighbor- 
hood residents  as  unaccountable,  unresponsive,  over-professionalized,  and  inacces- 
sible," as  well  as  "partially  responsible  for  abandoning  their  problems,  choosing  profes- 
sionally or  politically  expedient  courses  of  action,  and  setting  up  unnecessary  program- 
matic limitations,  guidelines,  and  rules  which  isolate  many  residents  from  needed  ser- 
vices and  support."98 

Concurrently  with  the  community  workshops,  EastWest  Planning  &  Development 
conducted  a  survey  among  the  five  neighborhoods  that  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Com- 
mittee would  eventually  nominate  to  participate  in  HUD's  Enterprise  Communities 
program.  This  "needs  assessment"  survey  was  designed  to  identify  the  strengths,  prob- 
lems, and  policy  priorities  of  the  neighborhoods,  which  would  be  used  by  EastWest  in 
preparing  the  strategic  community  plan.99  Social  services  and  human  resource  provid- 
ers, along  with  local  businesses  serving  the  neighborhoods  targeted  by  the  steering 
committee,  were  surveyed  by  mail.  Resident  were  also  surveyed  for  their  opinions 
about  the  problems  and  prospects  for  these  neighborhoods.  According  to  the  steering 
committee,  nearly  two-fifths  of  the  600  surveys  (38  percent  or  227)  were  completed  and 
returned  to  EastWest.100  Of  this  number,  almost  three-quarters  (71  percent  or  162)  were 
returned  by  residents  of  the  steering  committee's  target  communities.  The  resident  re- 
sponse rate,  however,  must  be  put  in  perspective:  fewer  than  one  percent  of  the  five 
neighborhoods'  39,072  residents  responded  to  the  survey. 

Relying  on  the  information  culled  from  the  three  community  workshops  and  the 
survey  responses,  EastWest  prepared  the  TriCity  EC  strategic  community  plan.  The 
steering  committee  then  submitted  the  plan,  which  emphasized  three  areas  of  "commu- 
nity" concern  —  employment,  youth  development,  and  neighborhood  capacity  building 
—  to  HUD.  At  the  end  of  the  strategic  community  planning  process,  the  steering  com- 
mittee declared  in  its  application  to  HUD  that  the  degree  of  participation  in  the  three 


152 


cities  "was  designed  to  maximize  community  involvement  and  consensus."10'  Pointing 
to  its  public  forums  and  survey,  the  committee  avowed  that  it  had  met  its  requirement  of 
participation. 


Reflections  on  Strategic  Community  Planning 
and  Federal  Urban  Initiatives 


Urban  scholars  acknowledge  that  introducing  common  citizens  to  the  process  of  public 
decision  making  is  difficult;  making  collective  decisions  "can  be  time-consuming,  co- 
optative,  and  nonproductive"  for  rank-and-file  citizens.102  Moreover,  issues  of  expertise 
and  incrementalism,  along  with  citizen  interest  and  ability  to  articulate  alternatives 
effectively,  influence  levels  of  citizen  participation  and  incorporation  into  public  deci- 
sion making.103  Residents  of  low-income  neighborhoods  targeted  for  redevelopment  are 
prone  to  be  intimidated  by  the  jargon  and  complexity  of  redevelopment  and,  perhaps 
rightfully  so,  suspicious  and  impatient  with  the  process  of  incremental  urban 
policymaking.104  Nevertheless,  the  inclusion  of  ordinary  citizens  in  the  planning  and 
implementation  stages  of  public  policymaking  continues  to  have  its  academic  advo- 
cates.105 

Robert  Chaskin  and  Sunil  Garg  note  that  there  are  ethical  and  practical  reasons  for 
the  incorporation  of  citizens  in  public  decision-making  processes  that  affect  their  com- 
munities.106 "Ethically,  to  include  citizens  in  policymaking  and  program  delivery  is  to 
take  seriously  their  rights  and  responsibilities  to  have  some  control  over  policies  that 
will  have  an  impact  on  their  lives."107  Additionally,  as  theorists  of  democratic  participa- 
tion profess,  "the  experience  of  participation  [in  public  decision  making]  in  some  way 
leaves  the  individual  better  psychologically  equipped  to  undertake  further  participation 
in  the  future."108  Average  citizens,  whether  from  poor  or  nonpoor  communities,  possess 
that  which  government  lacks:  "a  unique  understanding  about  their  own  lives,  hopes, 
aspirations,  goals,  and  preferences  and  about  the  manner  in  which  resources  should  be 
provided  or  services  should  be  designed  and  delivered."109  In  accordance  with  this  idea, 
Jeffrey  Henig  has  found  that  citizens  "represent  resources  in  knowledge,  information, 
creativity,  commitment,  and  energy"  that  often  prove  useful  to  government  decision- 
makers and  policy  success.110  Therefore,  "practically,  involving  citizens  in  planning  and 
implementing  practices  that  affect  them  promotes  better  (i.e.,  more  connected,  directed, 
and  appreciated)  public  policies."111  Being  closest  to  the  problems  facing  their  commu- 
nities, citizens  can  provide  perspectives  that  may  go  unconsidered  by  public  officials 
and  their  staff  in  the  absence  of  resident  involvement.112  Yet  the  structure  of  citizen 
participation  in  public  initiatives  that  promote  urban  redevelopment  makes  "a  substan- 
tial difference  in  the  degree  to  which  such  structures  can  be  seen  as  connected  to,  and 
acting  on  behalf  of,  the  interests  of  the  community."113 

The  key  terms  of  the  federal  administration's  urban  policy  orientation  and  the  tenets 
underlying  its  Enterprise  Communities  program  are  cooperation  and  collaboration; 
participation  and  empowerment.114  Still,  the  strategic  community  planning  process  for 
the  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community  failed  to  engender  cooperation 
and  collaboration  among  residents  and  nonresidents  or  to  promote  high  levels  of  partici- 
pation from  or  empowerment  in  the  areas  targeted  for  federal  revitalization  funds  by  the 
TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee.  Surveys  and  forums  proved  inferior  methods  of  effec- 
tively structuring  resident  input  into  the  strategic  community  planning  process  for  the 
TriCity  Economic  Community.  "Residents  of  the  [TriCity  EC]  had  participated  in  the 

153 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


community  workshops  and  filled  out  surveys  —  but  they  lacked  the  capacity  to  de- 
velop a  truly  'bottom-up'  neighborhood  plan."115  Instead,  the  EastWest  Planning  & 
Development  plan  outlined  a  citizen-driven  process  in  the  post-strategic  community 
planning  period.116  This  was  a  blueprint  for  neighborhood  planning  and  resident  em- 
powerment after  HUD  designated  the  three  cities  as  a  joint  Enterprise  Community.117 
In  short,  the  strategic  community  planning  process  for  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy 
deferred  resident  participation  and  community  empowerment  to  an  unknown  point  in 
time.  Why? 

The  rules  and  regulations  for  the  Enterprise  Communities  program  were  not  spe- 
cific about  the  role  of  residents  in  their  city's  planning  process.  Beyond  the  statement 
that  community  residents  were  to  be  included  in  partnerships  with  the  public  and 
private  sectors,  there  was  no  definitive  message  about  the  type  and  quality  of  resident 
participation  that  should  characterize  the  process.  This  lack  of  specificity  allowed  for 
narrow  definitions  of  participation  to  be  used  in  determining  who  would  be  involved 
in  a  city's  strategic  community  planning  process  and  how  their  connection  would  be 
facilitated.  It  also  impressed  upon  elites  that  resident  participation  was  a  suggestion, 
not  a  requirement  for  strategic  community  planning;  resident  consultation  was  ad- 
equate to  constitute  participation. 

In  the  future,  policymakers  designing  federal  urban  neighborhood  redevelopment 
initiatives  could  ensure,  through  direct  language,  that  citizen  participation  go  beyond 
the  level  of  consultation,  as  expressed  through  surveys  and  forums.  As  Sherry 
Arnstein's  "ladder  of  citizen  participation"  illustrates,  unless  citizen  consultation  by 
government  decision  makers  is  linked  to  other  opportunities  for  participation,  commu- 
nities cannot  be  guaranteed  that  their  resident  ideas  and  concerns  will  be  taken  into 
account  by  those  guiding  the  agenda-setting  and  decision-making  processes.118  More- 
over, when  government  decision  makers  "restrict  the  input  of  citizens'  ideas  solely  to 
[consultation],  participation  remains  just  a  window-dressing  ritual."119 

Residents  of  areas  targeted  for  redevelopment  often  want  to  serve  their  communi- 
ties in  capacities  that  go  beyond  survey  responses  or  public  forum  statements.120  If  this 
is  to  be  believed,  policymakers  could  create  opportunities  for  resident  participation  by 
mandating  that  urban  neighborhood  redevelopment  programs  that  receive  federal 
funds  must,  during  the  planning  and  post-planning  periods,  include  residents  of  the 
affected  communities  on  the  committees  appointed  to  formulate  neighborhood  rede- 
velopment plans.  Policymakers  could  also  establish  formal  institutions  for  citizen 
governance  of  strategic  community  planning  processes.  Such  neighborhood-based 
entities  could  be  charged  with  arranging,  planning,  and  coordinating  strategies  for 
neighborhood  redevelopment.  In  terms  of  their  membership,  these  institutions  might 
be  comprised  of  neighborhood  representatives  chosen  by  election  or  by  stratified, 
random  sampling  from  communities  targeted  for  public  reinvestment  and  redevelop- 
ment.121 Also,  policy  makers  could  require  that  the  proposals  formulated  by  neighbor- 
hood-based institutions  be  submitted  to  resident  comment,  perhaps  through  resident- 
community  referenda. 

Citizen  participation  comes  with  costs,  the  most  basic  being  time  and  money. 
Policymakers  should  grant  enough  time  and  public  funds  to  program  administrators  to 
allow  citizen  participation  to  reach  a  level  above  consultation.  In  the  Enterprise  Com- 
munities program,  cities  were  afforded  six  months  to  create  and  submit  their  strategic 
community  plans.  Because  of  the  time  it  takes  to  select  and  organize  committees, 
orient  members  with  the  requirements  and  processes  of  a  given  program,  and  raise 


154 


awareness  among  affected  communities,  federal  urban  initiatives  relying  on  strategic 
community  planning  probably  should  last  longer  than  six  months.  A  period  of  a  year, 
for  example,  would  allow  planning  committees  more  time  not  only  to  organize  them- 
selves and  their  communities,  but  increase  the  likelihood  that  their  activities,  be  they 
surveys,  community  forums,  or  other  mechanisms  for  divining  citizen  opinions,  will 
produce  better  plans  in  terms  of  their  citizen  input  and  ideas.  Not  only  might  more 
citizens  participate  in  the  planning  process,  but  a  greater  number  of  cities  might  be  able 
to  compete  for  funding  based  on  their  plans,  and  the  quality  of  the  plans  submitted  to 

the  program  itself  increase. 

*  *  * 

The  Enterprise  Communities  program  is  grounded  on  the  belief  that  citizen  participa- 
tion and  sustained  community  involvement  are  essential  to  the  success  of  federal  initia- 
tives to  influence  the  revitalization  of  low-income  communities.122  Therefore,  residents 
of  the  neighborhoods  targeted  by  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee,  with  the  assis- 
tance of  public,  private,  and  not-for-profit  professionals,  should  have  been  at  the  fore- 
front of  the  strategic  community  planning  process  of  the  TriCity  EC.  But  residents  were 
not  significant  and  substantive  participants  in  that  strategic  community  planning  pro- 
cess. 

The  lack  of  resident  participation  in  the  planning  for  the  Albany-Schenectady-Troy 
Enterprise  Community  was  partly  the  result  of  the  steering  committee's  misunderstand- 
ing that  resident  participation  would  matter  more  in  the  post-designation  period,  after 
areas  of  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy  were  designated  as  an  Enterprise  Community 
and  federal  funds  were  secured.  It  was  also  the  result  of  the  committee's  reliance  on 
forms  of  participation  that  discouraged  citizen  incorporation  and  community  empower- 
ment. Moreover,  the  opportunity  for  citizens  to  take  part  in  the  planning  was  limited  by 
HUD  itself:  (1)  it  failed  to  define  what  it  meant  by  resident  involvement;  (2)  it  did  not 
account  for  slow  responses  from  cities  and  the  weak  commitment  of  elites  to  empower 
residents;  and  (3)  it  overlooked  the  importance  of  funding  cities  to  promote  citizen 
participation  and  neighborhood  empowerment  as  part  of  strategic  community  planning. 

Another  reason  was  the  steering  committee's  displacement  of  the  Clinton 
administration's  goal  of  resident  incorporation.  By  placing  its  goal  of  meeting  HUD's 
application  deadline  ahead  of  HUD's  goal  of  resident  incorporation,  the  committee 
obstructed  the  realization  of  high  levels  of  resident  participation  and  community  em- 
powerment. 

The  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  achieved  its  goal  in  December  1994:  HUD 
designated  portions  of  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy  as  one  of  the  nation's  sixty-five 
urban  Enterprise  Communities.  This  designation  was  accompanied  by  $3  million  in 
federal  funds  to  be  shared  equally  among  the  three  cities.  However,  this  goal  was 
achieved  in  violation  of  the  principles  outlined  by  the  Clinton  administration's  written 
record  and  the  Enterprise  Communities  program's  formal  requirements. 

In  the  pre-designation  period,  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  lost  an  opportunity 
to  empower  residents  of  the  low-income  neighborhoods  of  Albany,  Schenectady,  and 
Troy.  In  the  post-designation  period,  however,  new  opportunities  for  participation  and 
empowerment  appeared  with  the  establishment  of  a  second  steering  committee  and  the 
implementation  of  the  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community's  strategic 
community  plan  that  emphasizes  resident  planning  and  neighborhood  empowerment. 
"The  people  in  the  neighborhoods  [comprising  the  TriCity  Enterprise  Community]," 
according  to  the  president  of  the  Center  for  Economic  Growth,  "will  be  making  the 


755 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


decisions."123  Unfortunately,  the  residents  of  the  low-income  neighborhoods  in  the  three 
cities  have  yet  to  influence  the  public  decision-making  process  of  their  Enterprise 
Community.124  Instead,  the  TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  continues  to  favor  elite 
control  and  expediency.  Unfortunately,  resident  skepticism  and  reticence  concerning  the 
possibility  of  collaboration  and  cooperation  between  residents  and  nonresidents  of  the 
targeted  communities  has  deepened.125  *«? 


Notes 


Peter  Medoff  and  Holly  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope:  The  Fall  and  Rise  of  an  Urban  Neighbor- 
hood (Boston:  South  End  Press,  1994). 

Carole  Pateman,  Participation  and  Democratic  Theory  (Cambridge,  England:  Cambridge 
University  Press,  1970),  24. 

Ibid,  and  Jane  J.  Mansbridge,  Beyond  Adversary  Democracy  (New  York:  Basic  Books, 
1980). 

See  John  Abbott,  Community  Participation  and  its  Relation  to  Community  Develop- 
ment,   Community  Development  Journal  30,  no.  2  (1995);  Sherry  R.  Arnstein,  A 
Ladder  of  Citizen  Participation,    AIP  Journal,  July  1969;  Benjamin  R.  Barber,  Strong 
Democracy:  Participatory  Politics  for  a  New  Age  (Berkeley:  University  of  California  Press, 
1984);  Jeffrey  M.  Berry,  Kent  E.  Portney,  and  Ken  Thomson,  The  Rebirth  of  Urban 
Democracy  (Washington,  D.C.:  Brookings  Institution,  1993);  Rachel  G.  Bratt,  The  Role 
of  Citizen-initiated  Programs  in  the  Formulation  of  National  Housing  Policies,  in  Citizen 
Participation  in  Public  Decision  Making,  edited  by  Jack  DeSario  and  Stuart  Langton  (New 
York:  Greenwood  Press,  1987);  Robert  Chaskin  and  Sunil  Garg,  The  Issue  of  Gover- 
nance in  Neighborhood-based  Initiatives,    Urban  Affairs  ReviewZl,  no.  5  (1997);  Pierre 
Gavel,  Jessica  Pitt,  and  Jordan  Yin,  The  Community  Option  in  Urban  Policy,     Urban 
Affairs  ReviewZl,  no.  4  (1997);  John  Michael  Daley  and  Julio  Angulo,  People-centered 
Community  Planning,    Journal  of  the  Community  Development  Society 21 ,  no.  2  (1990); 
Susan  S.  Fainstein  and  Clifford  Hirst,  Urban  Social  Movements,  in    Theories  of  Urban 
Politics,  edited  by  David  Judge,  Gerry  Stoker,  and  Harold  Wolman  (London:  Sage,  1995); 
Robert  Fisher,  Neighborhood  Organizing:  The  Importance  of  Historical  Context,  in 
Revitalizing  Urban  Neighborhoods,  edited  by  W.  Dennis  Keating,  Norman  Krumholz,  and 
Philip  Star  (Lawrence:  University  Press  of  Kansas,  1996);  Jeffrey  R.  Henig,  Neighbor- 
hood Mobilization:  Redevelopment  and  Response  {New  Brunswick,  N.J.:  Rutgers 
University  Press,  1982);  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope;  Ronald  Shiftman  with  Susan 
Motley,  Comprehensive  and  Integrative  Planning  for  Community  Development,  paper 
prepared  for  the  1989  Community  Economic  Development  Assessment  Study  Confer- 
ence; Randy  Stoecker,  Defending  Community:  The  Struggle  for  Alternative  Redevelop- 
ment in  Cedar-Riverside  (Philadelphia:  Temple  University  Press,  1994);  Clarence  Stone 
and  Heywood  T.  Sanders,  The  Politics  of  Urban  Development  (Lawrence:  University 
Press  of  Kansas,  1987);  and  Robyne  Turner,  Political  Coalitions  and  Neighborhood 
Initiatives:  Comparing  Types  of  Political  Responses  in  Urban  Places,  paper  prepared  for 
the  1995  meeting  of  the  American  Political  Science  Association. 
U.S.  Department  of  Housing  and  Urban  Development  (HUD),  Empowerment:  A  New 
Covenant  with  America  s  Communities   President  Clinton  s  National  Urban  Policy 
Report  (Washington,  D.C.:  HUD,  1995),  and  John  Gaventa,  Janice  Morrissey,  and 
Wanda  R.  Edwards.  Empowering  People:  Goals  and  Realities,     Forum  for  Applied 
Research  and  Public  Policy  10,  no.  4  (1995):  116-21. 

The  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative  emphasizes  both  urban 
and  rural  community  renewal.  The  urban  portion  is  administered  by  the  U.S.  Department 
of  Housing  and  Urban  Development;  the  rural  component  is  administered  by  the  U.S. 
Department  of  Agriculture.  This  study  focuses  solely  on  the  HUD-administered  portion  of 
the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative.  In  particular,  it  empha- 
sizes the  small-medium  cities  component  of  this  urban  initiative   the  Enterprise 
Communities  program. 

156 


7.  Parallels  have  been  drawn  between  the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities 

initiative  and  priorfederal  urban  initiatives  such  as  the  Community  Action  Program  and 
Model  Cities.  See  Sarah  F.  Liebschutz,  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communi- 
ties: Reinventing  Federalism  for  Distressed  Communities,    Publius:  The  Journal  of 
Federalism  25,  no.  3  (1995);  Marilyn  Marks  Rubin,  Can  Reorchestration  of  Historical 
Themes  Reinvent  Government?  A  Case  Study  of  the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise 
Communities  Act  of  1993,     Public  Administration  Review  54,  no.  2  (1994);  and  Gerry 
Riposa,  From  Enterprise  Zones  to  Empowerment  Zones:  The  Community  Context  of 
Urban  Economic  Development,    American  Behavioral  Scientist  39,  no.  2  (1996). 

8.  Strategic  planning  is  a  method  for  maximizing  the  position  of  an  organization  in  a 

changing  and  competitive  environment ;  its  objective  is  to  provide  the  organization  with 
an  effective  and  efficient  means  of  adapting  to  future  economic,  social,  and  physical 
conditions.  The  logic  behind  strategic  planning,  which  guides  corporations  and  govern 
ments  alike,  is  to  pull  out  of  losing  ventures  and  concentrate  resources  on  strategic 
opportunities.  See  Todd  Swanstrom,  The  Limits  of  Strategic  Planning  for  Cities, 
Journal  of  Urban  Affairs  9,  no.  2  (1987);  139,  152.  This  way  of  reasoning,  however,  is 
no  longer  practiced  solely  by  the  institutions  of  the  market  and  the  state.  Acting  through 
neighborhood  associations  and  community-based  organizations,  common  citizens  use 
strategic  planning  to  prepare  and  respond  to  changing  environmental  and  urban  condi- 
tions. See,  for  example,  Berry  et  al.,  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy,  and  Michael  J. 
Rich,  Community  Building  and  Empowerment:  An  Assessment  of  Neighborhood 
Transformation  Initiatives  in  American  Cities,  paper  prepared  for  1995  meeting  of  the 
Association  for  Public  Policy  Analysis  and  Management. 
9.  HUD  and  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture  (DOA),  Building  Communities  Together: 

Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  Application  Guide  (Washington,  D.C.: 
HUD  and  DOA,  1994);  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Federal  Register  59,  no.  11  (18 
January  1994):  2700—2710;  and  HU D, Empowerment. 

10.  Marilyn  Gittell,  Growing  Pains,  Politics  Beset  Empowerment  Zones,     Forum  for  Applied 

Research  and  Public  Policy  10,  no.  4  (1995),  107—111. 

11.  HUD  and  DOA,  Building  Communities  Together.  See  also  U.S.  Government  Printing 

Office,  Federal  Register. 

12.  Nelson  A.  Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government,  Empowerment  Zone  Initiative:  Building  a 

Community  Plan  for  Strategic  Change   Findings  from  the  First  Round  Assessment  of 
the  Empowerment  Zone/Enterprise  Community  Initiative  (Albany,  N.Y.:  Nelson  A. 
Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government,  State  University  of  New  York,  1997). 
13.  This  study,  however,  failed  to  distinguish  between  citizen  participation  and  resident 
participation.  The  degree  to  which  the  residents  of  the  target  communities  included  in 
the  study  sample  of  eighteen  cities  were  involved  in  the  strategic  community  planning 
process  that  preceded  their  city  s  designation  as  either  an  Empowerment  Zone  or  an 
Enterprise  Community  is  unknown.  See  Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government,  Empower- 
ment Zone  Initiative,  2. 

14.  Riposa,  From  Enterprise  Zones  to  Empowerment  Zones. 

15.  Gaventa  et  al.,  Empowering  People. 

16.  Gittell,  Growing  Pains,  Politics  Beset  Empowerment  Zones. 

17.  See  ibid.  See  also  Marilyn  Gittell,  Kathe  Newman,  Janice  Bockmeyer,  and  Robert 

Lindsay,  Expanding  Civic  Opportunity:  Urban  Empowerment  Zones,     Urban  Affairs 
Review 33,  no.  4  (1998);  Gaventa  et  al.,   Empowering  People  ;  and  Kian  Tajbaksh  and 
Brian  Sahd,  Community  Empowerment  in  Urban  Policy:  Comparing  the  Harlem   and 
South  Bronx  Empowerment  Zones  Processes,  paper  prepared  forthe1998  meeting  of 
the  Urban  Affairs  Association. 

18.  Gaventa  etal..  Empowering  People,   118. 

19.  This  single  upstate  New  York  Enterprise  Community  is  comprised  of  the  poorest  sections 
of  the  cities  of  Albany,  Schenectady,  and  Troy. 

20.  Testimony  of  Andrew  Cuomo  before  the  Subcommittee  on  Human  Resources,  U.S. 
House  of  Representatives,  Ways  and  Means  Committee,  Washington,  D.C.,  March  22, 
1994. 
21.  Liebschutz,  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  ;   Riposa,  From 


757 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Enterprise  Zones  to  Empowerment  Zones  ;  and  Rubin,  Can  Reorchestration  of  Historical 
Themes  Reinvent  Government? 

22.  HUD  and  DOA,  Building  Communities  Together. 

23.  Six  cities  Atlanta,  Baltimore,  Chicago,  Detroit,  New  York,  and  Philadelphia/Camden 
were  designated  Empowerment  Zones,  which  were  accompanied  by  an  award  of  $100 
million  in  block  grant  funding,  coupled  with  another  $150  million  in  federal  tax  credits, 
to  assist  the  cities  in  the  implementation  of  their  strategic  plans.  At  the  same  time,  Los 
Angeles  and  Cleveland  were  chosen  as  Supplemental  EmpowermentZones,  the  former 
being  awarded  $125  million  in  economic  development  assistance  and  the  latter  receiving 
$90  million. 

24.  HUD  has  designated  areas  of  sixty-five  cities  as  urban  Enterprise  Communities.  These 

include  Birmingham,  Alabama;  Phoenix,  Arizona;  Pulaski  County,  Arkansas;  San  Diego 
and  San  Francisco,  California;  Denver,  Colorado;  Bridgeport  and  New  Haven,  Connecti- 
cut; Wilmington,  Delaware;  Miami  and  Tampa,  Florida;  Albany,  Georgia;  East  St.  Louis 
and  Springfield,  Illinois;  Indianapolis,  Indiana;  Des  Moines,  Iowa;  Louisville,  Kentucky; 
New  Orleans,  Louisiana;  Lowell  and  Springfield,  Massachusetts;  Flint  and  Muskegon, 
Michigan;  Minneapolis  and  St.  Paul,  Minnesota;  Jackson,  Mississippi;  St.  Louis,  Missouri; 
Omaha,  Nebraska;  Las  Vegas,  Nevada;  Manchester,  New  Hampshire;  Newark,  New 
Jersey;  Albuquerque,  New  Mexico;  Albany/Schenectady/Troy,  Buffalo,  Newburgh/ 
Kingston,  and  Rochester,  New  York;  Charlotte,  North  Carolina;  Akron  and  Columbus, 
Ohio;  Oklahoma  City,  Oklahoma;  Portland,  Oregon;  Harrisburg  and  Pittsburgh,  Pennsylva- 
nia; Providence,  Rhode  Island;  Charleston,  South  Carolina;  Memphis  and  Nashville, 
Tennessee;  Dallas,  El  Paso,  San  Antonio,  and  Waco,  Texas;  Ogden,  Utah;  Burlington, 
Vermont;  Norfolk,  Virginia;  Seattle  and  Tacoma,  Washington;  Huntington,  West  Virginia; 
and  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin. 

25.  See,  for  example,  Gittell  et  al..  Expanding  Civic  Opportunity  ;    Gerry  Riposa,  L.A.  s 

Empowerment  Zones:  Can  the  Community  Development  Bank  Empower  South 
Central?  paper  prepared  for  the  1998  meeting  of  the  Urban  Affairs  Association; 
Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government,  Empowerment  Zone  /n/f;'af/Ve;Tajbaksh  and  Sahd, 
Community  Empowerment  in  Urban  Policy. 

26.  HUD  applies  two  designations  to  cities  participating  in  the  Urban  Enterprise  Communities 

program    Enhanced  Enterprise  Communities  and  Enterprise  Communities.  A  city  s 
designation  determines  the  amount  of  public  investment  it  will  receive:  Enhanced 
Enterprise  Communities  receive  $25  million  in  Title  XX  Social  Services  Block  Grants; 
Enterprise  Communities  receive  $3  million  in  Title  XX  Social  Services  Block  Grants  and 
$3  million  in  tax  credits. 

27.  HUD  and  DOA,  President  Clinton  Announces  Designation  of  More  Than  100  Empower- 

ment Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities,  joint  press  release,  December  21,  1995.  See 
also  HUD  and  DOA,  Building  Communities  Together. 

28.  To  be  eligible  for  designation  as  an  enterprise  community,  target  areas  must  have  had  a 

maximum  population  which  is  the  lesser  of  200,000  or  the  greater  of  50,000,  or  ten 
percent  of  the  population  of  the  most  populous  city  located  within  the  nominated  area  ; 
pervasive  poverty,  unemployment,  and  general  distress;  not  exceed  twenty  square  miles 
in  total  land  area;  a  poverty  rate  equal  to  greater  than  20  percent  in  each  of  its  nomi- 
nated census  tracts,  or  25  percent  in  90  percent  of  the  census  tracts  within  the 
nominated  area,  or  35  percent  for  at  least  50  percent  of  the  census  tracts  within  the 
nominated  area;  a  continuous  boundary  or  consist  of  not  more  than  three  noncontiguous 
tracts  of  land;  been  located  entirely  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  unit(s)  making  the 
nomination,  and  not  be  located  in  more  than  two  contiguous  States;  and  not  included  in 
any  portion  of  a  central  business  district  unless  the  poverty  rate  for  each  census  tract  in 
the  district  was  at  least  30  percent.  See  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Federal 
Register,  2701. 

29.  See,  for  example,  HUD  and  DOA,  Building  Communities  Together.  See  also,  HUD  and 

DOA,  President  Clinton  Announces  Designation. 

30.  See  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Federal  Register,  2708. 

31.  Fainstein  and  Hirst,   Urban  Social  Movements,    170. 

32.  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope;  Shiffman  with  Motley,  Comprehensive  and  Integra- 

tive Planning  for  Community  Development  ;Stoecker,  Defending  Community;  and 

158 


Richard  Taub,  Nuance  and  Meaning  in  Community  Development:  Finding  Community  and 
Development  [New  York:  Community  Development  Research  Center,  New  School  for 
Social  Research,  1990). 
33.      Daley  and  Angulo,  People-centered  Community  Planning  ;  Alan  Barr,  Empowering 
Communities    Beyond  Fashionable  Rhetoric?  Some  Reflections  on  Scottish  Experi- 
ence,   Community  Development  Journal  30,  no.  2  (1995);  Stella  Capek  and  John  I. 
Gilderbloom,  Community  versus  Commodity:  Tenants  and  the  American  City  (Albany, 
N.Y.:  State  University  of  New  York  Press,  1992);  Mel  King,  Chain  of  Change:  Struggles 
for  Black  Community  Development  (Boston:  South  End  Press,  1981);  Andrea  Isabel 
Nagel,  The  Dudley  Street  Neighborhood  Initiative:  A  Case  Study  in  Community- 
controlled  Planning,  master  s  thesis,  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology,  May  1990; 
Gordana  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders:  A  Tale  of  Neighborhood  Mobilization  in  Two 
Cities  (Philadelphia:  Temple  University  Press,  1996);  and  Turner,  Political  Coalitions  and 
Neighborhood  Initiatives. 

34.  This  presumes,  however,  that  when  communities  obtain  more  influence  and  control  over 
the  definition  of  their  needs,  as  well  as  more  influence  and  control  over  the  responses  to 
them,  the  visions  they  hold  for  their  neighborhoods  future  stand  a  stronger  chance  of 
becoming  a  reality. 

35.  Turner,  Political  Coalitions  and  Neighborhood  Initiatives,  12. 

36.  Berry  et  al.,  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy,  291. 

37.  See  Barr,  Empowering  Communities  ;  Berry  etal.,    The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy, 
Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope;  Fisher,  Neighborhood  Organizing  ;  and  Taub, 
Nuance  and  Meaning  in  Community  Development. 

38.  Berry  et  al..  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy,  21. 

39.  See,  for  example,  Keating  et  al..  Revitalizing  Urban  Neighborhoods,  and  Medoff  and 
Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope. 

40.  For  more  on  the  Dudley  Street  Neighborhood  Initiative,  see  Nagel,  The  Dudley  Street 
Neighborhood  Initiative,  and  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope. 

41.  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope. 

42.  John  Orbell  and  Toru  Uno,  ATheory  of  Neighborhood  Problem  Solving:  Political  Action 
vs.  Residential  Mobility,    American  Political  Science  Review  66  (1972):  471 — 489. 

43.  Berry  et  al.,  The  Birth  of  Urban  Democracy;  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope;  Michael 
Leo  Owens,  Renewal  in  a  Working-class  Black  Neighborhood,     Journal  of  Urban  Affairs 
19,  no.  2  (1997);  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders;  and  Stoecker,  Defending  Commu- 
nity. 

44.  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders,  and  State  Commission  on  the  Capital  Region,  Growing 
Together  Within  the  Capital  Region:  The  Report  of  the  State  Commission  on  the  Capital 
Region  (Albany,  N.Y.:  Nelson  A.  Rockefeller  Institute  of  Government,  State  University  of 
New  York,  June  1996). 

45.  State  Commission  on  the  Capital  Region,  Growing  Together,  5. 

46.  Ibid. 

47.  Ibid. 

48.  Ibid. 

49.  Ibid. 

50.  ibid. 

51.  Centerfor  Economic  Growth  (CEG),  Albany — Schenectady — Troy  Enterprise  Community 
Designation  Application  (Albany,  N.Y.:  CEG,  1994),  20. 

52.  Ibid. 

53.  Ibid. 

54.  Ibid. 

55.  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders,  and  State  Commission  on  the  Capital  Region,  Growing 
Together. 

56.  State  Commission  on  the  Capital  Region,  Growing  Together,  5. 

57.  Interviews  with  Aaron  Dare,  president  and  chief  executive  officer  (CEO),  Urban  League 
of  Northeastern  New  York,  Inc.,  July  25,  1997,  Aaron  Mair,  executive  director,  Field  of 
Dreams,  January  22,  1998,  and  Lloyd  Stewart,  former  president  and  CEO,  Urban  League 
of  Northeastern  New  York,  Inc.,  October  31,  1995.  See  also  Rabrenovic,  Community 


159 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


Builders,  especially  60 — 62,  92 — 119,  164 — 190,  and  Amy  Poe,    Empowerment  Failure, 
Metroland,  January  29,  1998. 
58.  U.S.  Bureau  of  the  Census,  1990  Census  of  Population  and  Housing,  Summary  Tape  File 
3A. 

59.  Ibid. 

60.  Ibid. 

61.  Ibid. 

62.  June  10,  1994,  letter  from  Gerald  Jennings,  mayor  of  Albany,  to  Henry  Cisneros, 
secretary,  HUD. 

63.  Although  the  formal  guidelines  were  not  available  until  January  1994,  the  Empowerment 
Zones  and  Enterprise  Communities  initiative  was  announced  by  the  Clinton  administra- 
tion, along  with  an  invitation  for  applications,  in  December  1993.  Cities  across  the 
United  States  were  mobilized  and  began  tentatively  to  plan  for  submitting  applications 
to  these  programs  as  soon  as  the  regulations  were  released.  See,  for  example,  Gittell  et 
al..  Expanding  Civic  Opportunity  ;  June  Manning  Thomas,  Applying  for  Empowerment 
Zone  Designation:  A  Tale  of  Woe  and  Triumph,    Economic  Development  Quarterly  9,  no. 
3  (1995);  and  Robin  Boyle,   Notes  on  the  Detroit  Empowerment  Zone  Process, 
manuscript. 

64.  The  justification  for  including  both  residents  and  nonresidents  in  strategic  community 
planning  processes  is  that  the  union  of  different  perspectives,  bases  of  knowledge, 
bodies  of  expertise,  access  to  resources  connects  professional  planning  with 
grassroots  knowledge  and  intent.  In  the  case  of  the  Empowerment  Zones  and  Enterprise 
Communities  initiative,  residents  and  nonresident  partnerships  were  anticipated  to 
combine  the  skills  and  energies  of  professional  planners  and  the  residents  of  the  target 
neighborhoods  to  produce  consensus  documents  that  outlined  common  understandings 
of  the  target  neighborhoods  priorities  and  pragmatic  solutions  for  advancing  community 
renewal.  See  Robert  Chaskin  and  Sunil  Garg,  Neighborhood  Governance,  in    Core  Issues 
in  Comprehensive  Community-building  Initiatives,  ed.  Rebecca  Stone  (Chicago:  Chapin 
Hall  Center  for  Children,  University  of  Chicago,  1996),  44;  U.S.  Government  Printing 
Office,  Federal  Register,  especially  2701;  and  HUD  and  DOA,  Building  Communities 
Together. 

65.  See  Gittell  et  al..  Expanding  Civic  Opportunity,  535 — 539,  and   Rockefeller  Institute  of 
Government,  Empowerment  Zone  Initiative,  1 — 2. 

66.  Gittell  et  al..   Expanding  Civic  Opportunity,     535 — 539,  and  Rockefeller  Institute  of 
Government,  Empowerment  Zone  Initiative,  2. 

67.  August  27,  1996  interview  with  Kevin   O  Connor,  president,  CEG  ,  Albany,  N.Y.  This 
finding  is  surprising  considering  that  local  officials  had  proved  quite  entrepreneurial  in  the 
past,  seeking  federal  funds  for  such  economic  development  projects  as  the  Omni  Hotel  in 
downtown  Albany.  See  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders,  61. 

68.  O  Connor  interview. 

69.  Paul  E.  Peterson,  City  Limits  (Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1981). 

70.  See  CEG,  Annual  Report  (Albany,  N.Y.:  CEG,  1995),  and  CEG,  Albany— Schenectady— 
Troy  Enterprise  Community  Designation  Application's. 

71 .  Michael  Leo  Owens,  Enterprise  Zones  and  their  Incentives  for  Business  and  Jobs  in  Poor 
Places:  A  Review,  manuscript. 

72.  O  Connor  interview. 

73.  Dare,  Mair,  and  Stewart  interviews. 

74.  O  Connor  interview. 

75.  CEG,  press  release,  May  3,  1994. 

76.  See,  for  example,  William  R.  Barnes  and  Larry  C.  Ledebur,  Local  Economies:  The  U.S. 
Common  Market  of  Local  Economic  Regions  (Washington,  D.C.:  National  League  of 
Cities,  August  1994);  Henry  Cisneros,  Urban  Entrepreneurialism  and  National  Economic 
Growth  (Washington,  D.C.:  HUD,  September  1995);  and  Manuel  Pastor,  Peter  Dreier,  J. 
Eugene  Grigsby,  and  Marta  Lopez-Garza,  Growing  Together:  Linking  Regional  and 
Community  Development  in  a  Changing  Economy  (Los  Angeles:  International  and  Public 
Affairs  Center,  Occidental  College,  April  1997). 

77.  State  Commission  on  the  Capital  Region,  Growing  Together,  7. 


160 


78.  Letter  to  Henry  Cisneros,  secretary,  HUD,  from  Eugene  Eaton,  mayor  of  Troy,  June  20, 
1994  . 

79.  See  letter  to  Henry  Cisneros  from  Kay  Ackerman,  Schenectady  director  of  development, 
June  17,  1994. 

80.  Some  believe  that  CEG  involved  itself  only  to  acquire  federal  revitalization  moneys  for 
projects  outside  the  neighborhoods  targeted  for  investment  by  the  Enterprise  Community 
program,  namely,  the  central  business  district  of  Albany,  where  CEG  is  headquartered. 
This  insight  was  obtained  from  my  interviews  with  Dare,  Mair,  and  Stewart. 

81.  In  other  cities  across  the  country,  the  private  sector  made  substantial  financial  pledges 
to  support  efforts  of  their  cities  should  their  target  areas  be  designated  Enterprise 
Communities.  See  HUD  and  DOA,  President  Clinton  Announces  Designation. 

82.  HUD,  Albany,  New  York,  Enterprise  Community  Performance  Report,  1995 — 7996 
(Washington,  D.C.:  HUD,  1997). 

83.  HUD  s  description  is  applicable  only  to  the  steering  committee  formed  in  the  post-award 
process  of  the  Enterprise  Communities  program,  not  the  committee  that  managed  the 
pre — awarcprocess  of  strategic  community  planning  for  the  three  cities  in  the  Capital 
Region. 

84.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Designation  Application,  15 — 17. 

85.  To  supplement  the  work  of  EastWest  Planning  &  Development,  the  membership  of  the 
TriCity  EC  Steering  Committee  volunteered  their  staff  and  other  organizational  resources. 
CEG  provided  the  committee  with  the  technical  assistance  for  defining  the  objectives  of 
the  strategic  community  plan  and  the  blueprint  for  its  implementation  if  the  three  cities 
received  an  Enterprise  Community  designation.  It  also  coordinated  the  committee  s 
public  relations  and  media  strategy.  The  Council  of  Community  Services  identified  the 
social,  economic,  and  physical  assets  of  the  target  communities  and  identified  barriers  to 
the  start — up  of  new  social  services  and  human  development  programs.  Additionally,  they 
were  used  to  assist  the  committee  in  organizing  community  workshops.  The  Capital 
District  Regional  Planning  Committee  analyzed  census  data  and  created  demographic 
neighborhood  profiles  and  mapsforthe  committee,  which  it  included  in  the  final  version 
of  its  plan.  The  local  municipalities  contributed  resource  materials  and  considered 
changes  to  their  regulations  and  ordinances.  See  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Applica- 
tion, 29. 

86.  Letterto  James  Conroy,  vice  presidentforcommunity  development,  CEG,  from  John  M. 
Holehan,  CEO,  EastWest  Planning  &  Development,  June  21,  1994. 

87.  Ibid. 

88.  Telephone  interview  with  Margaret  Irwin,  EastWest  Planning  &  Development,  October 
26,1995. 

89.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Designation  Application,  72.  Critics  of  the  TriCity  EC 
Steering  Committee  contend  that  it  backed  away  from  significant  resident  involvement 
for  fear  of  being  criticized  for  the  past  actions  of  committee  members  and  their  organiza- 
tions. This  information  was  obtained  from  my  interviews  with  Dare,  Mair,  Stewart. 

90.  Mary  Grisez  Kweit  and  Robert  W.  Kweit,  The  Politics  of  Policy  Analysis:  The  Role  of 
Citizen  Participation  in  Analytic  Decision  Making,  in  Citizen  Participation  in  Public 
Decision  Making,  edited  by  Jack  DeSario  and  Stuart  Langton  (New  York:  Greenwood 
Press,  1987),  30. 

91.  Arnstein,  A  Ladder  of  Citizen  Participation. 

92.  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community  Steering  Committee,  Strategic  Plan 
Summary  (Albany,  N.Y.:  Albany-Schenectady-Troy  Enterprise  Community  Steering 
Committee,  1994). 

93.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Application,  45 — 51. 

94.  Ibid.,  75. 

95.  Ibid.,  45. 

96.  Ibid.,  45—51. 

97.  Telephone  interview  with  Doug  Sauer,  executive  director,  Council  for  Community 
Services,  and  member,  Tri-City  Enterprise  Community  Steering  Committee,  October  31, 
1995. 

98.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Application,  72. 

99.  Ibid.  This  was  further  supported  by  my  interview  with  Irwin. 

161 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 


100.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Application,  52. 

101.  Ibid.,  3. 

1  02.  Norman  Fainstein  and  Susan  S.  Fainstein,  Participation  in  New  York  and  London: 

Community  and  Market  under  Capitalism,  in  Mobilizing  the  Community:  Local  Politics  in 
the  Era  of  the  Global  City,  edited  by  Robert  Fisher  and  Joseph  Kling  (Newbury  Park, 
Calif.:  Sage,  1993),  and  Frances  Fox  Piven  and  Richard  A.  Cloward,  Poor  Peoples 
Movements:  Why  They  Succeed,  How  They  Fail  (New  York:  Vintage  Books,  1972), 
especially  256—282. 

103.  Daley  and  Angulo,  People-centered  Community  Planning  ;  Berry  etal..    The  Rebirth  of 
Urban  Democracy;  Jack  DeSario  and  Stuart  Langton,  Citizen  Participation  and  Technoc- 
racy, in  Citizen  Participation  in  Public  Decision  Making;  Jane  J.  Mansbridge,  Beyond 
Adversary  Democracy; Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope;  Stoecker,  Defending  Commu- 
nity; and  Taub,  Nuance  and  Meaning  in  Community  Development. 

1  04.  See  Stoecker,  Defending  Community,  and  Medoff  and  Sklar,  Streets  of  Hope. 

105.  See,  for  example,  Arnstein,  A  Ladder  of  Citizen  Participation  ;  Barber,    Strong  Democ- 
racy; Barr,  Empowering  Communities  ;  Nigei  Berkeley,  George  Goodall,  David  Noon, 
and  Clive  Collins,  Involving  the  Community  in  Plan  Preparation,     Community  Develop- 
ment Journal  30,  no.  2  (1995);  Berry  et  al.,  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy;  Daley  and 
Angulo,  People-Centered  Community  Planning  ;  DeSario  and  Langton,    Citizen  Participa- 
tion in  Public  Decision  Making;Susar\  S.  Fainstein  and  Clifford  Hirst,  Neighborhood 
Organizations  and  Community  Planning:  The  Minneapolis  Neighborhood  Revitalization 
Program,  in  Revitalizing  Urban  Neighborhoods;  and  Stuart  Langton,  Citizen  Participa- 
tion in  America  (Lexington,  Mass.:  Lexington  Books,  1978). 

1  06.  Chaskin  and  Garg,  Governance  in  Neighborhood-based  Initiatives. 

107.  Ibid.,  633. 

1  08.  Pateman,  Participation  and  Democratic  Theory,  45. 

109.  Daley  and  Angulo,  People-centered  Community  Planning,  93;  see  also  Henig,    Neighbor- 
hood Mobilization. 

110.  Henig,  Neighborhood  Mobilization. 

111.  Chaskin  and  Garg,  Governance  in  Neighborhood-based  Initiatives,  633. 

112.  Henig,  Neighborhood  Mobilization. 

113.  Chaskin  and  Garg,  Governance  in  Neighborhood-based  Initiatives,     638. 

114.  HUD,  Empowerment. 

115.  CEG,  Enterprise  Community  Application,!^. 

116.  Irwin  interview. 

117.  Ibid,  and  Sauer  interview. 

118.  The  sets  of  rungs  on  Arnstein  s  ladder  of  citizen  participation,  from  lowest  to  highest 

levels  of  participation,  are  nonparticipation  (manipulation  and  therapy),  tokenism 
(informing,  consultation,  and  placation),  and  citizen  power  (partnership,  delegated 
power,  and  citizen  control).  See  Arnstein,  A  Ladder  of  Citizen  Participation. 

119.  Ibid.,  219. 

120.  See,  for  example,  Berry  et  al.,  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy;  Medoff  and  Sklar, 
Streets  of  Hope;  Rabrenovic,  Community  Builders;  and  Stoecker,  Defending  Community. 

121 .  For  more  on  this,  see  Berry  et  al..  The  Rebirth  of  Urban  Democracy;  Chaskin  and  Garg, 

Governance  in  Neighborhood-based  Initiatives  ;  and  Chaskin  and  Garg,  Neighborhood 
Governance. 

122.  HUD,  Empowerment. 

123.  3  Cities  Pave  Way  for  Building  Enterprise  Zones,     Albany  Times  Union,  August  23, 
1995,  Al. 

124.  See  Poe,  Empowerment  Failure,  and  Albany  s  Enterprise  Zone  Slowto  Show 
Progress,    Albany  Times  Union,  September  14,  1996. 

125.  See  Poe,  Empowerment  Failure,  and  Albany  s  Enterprise  Zone  Slowto  Show 
Progress. 


162 


Subscription  Form 

New  Renewal 


Subscribe  to  the  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 
The  Journals  a  bi-annuaf  publication. 

Library  or  Institution 

One  year,  $40  Two  years,  $70 


Individual 
One  year,  $20 


Two  years,  $35 


Three  years,  $100 


Three  years,  $50 


Payment  must  accompany  your  order.   Make  check  payable  to  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy. 

(Please  print) 

Name 


Address. 


City. 


clip  and  mail  to: 


State 


-Zip. 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 

John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs 

University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 

1 00  Morrissey  Boulevard 

Boston,  Massachusetts  02125-3393 


Subscription  Form 

New 


Renewal 


Subscribe  to  the  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 
The  Journal  is  a  bi-annualpublication. 

Library  or  Institution 

One  year,  $40 


Individual 
One  year,  $20 


Two  years,  $70 


Two  years,  $35 


Three  years,  $100 


Three  years,  $50 


Payment  must  accompany  your  order.   Make  check  payable  to  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy. 

(Please  print) 

Name 


Address 


City. 


clip  and  mail  to: 


State 


-Zip. 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 

John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs 

University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 

1 00  Morrissey  Boulevard 

Boston,  Massachusetts  02125-3393 


New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 
Guidelines  for  Contributors 

Authors  must  adhere  to  the  following  guidelines  when  preparing  a  manuscript  for  the  journal. 

1.  Length  of  manuscript,  not  including  figures,  tables,  endnotes,  and  appendixes,  should  be  approximately  24  to 
40  double-spaced  pages  of  300  words  per  page,  or  7,000  to  1 2,000  words,  in  roman  and  italic  fonts  only.  Please 
forward  three  copies  of  the  manuscript  to  the  editor.  Once  a  manuscript  is  accepted  for  publication,  authors  are 
responsible  for  providing  a  WordPerfect  or  Microsoft  Word  for  Windows  diskette  copy  of  the  work. 

2.  Place  each  figure  and  table  on  a  separate  page,  omitting  all  horizontal  and  vertical  lines,  indicating  its  location 
in  the  manuscript.  Include  below  each  one,  when  pertinent,  a  full  note,  labeled  Source,  crediting  the  originator  of 
the  data.  Should  permission  to  reprint  material  from  the  source  be  necessary,  request  it  and  the  desired  credit  line 
from  the  copyright  holder,  in  writing,  and  submit  it  with  the  manuscript.  Should  your  methodology  require 
explanation,  place  it  on  separate  double-spaced  pages  under  the  heading  Methodology. 

3.  Provide  an  Abstract  —  a  short  summary  of  the  article  —  of  about  150  words,  double-spaced,  labeled 
Abstract,  as  well  as  a  one-line  author  identification.  The  latter  should  include  professional  title(s)  and 
affiliation(s).  For  articles  by  more  than  one  author,  provide  an  ID  line  for  each. 

Example:  Shaun  O'Connell,  professor  of  English,  University  of  Massachusetts  Boston,  specializes  in  contempo- 
rary Irish  and  American  literature. 

4.  Endnotes,  which  appear  at  the  end  of  the  text  under  the  heading  Notes,  must  be  formatted  in  humanities  style, 
double-spaced,  and  placed  in  a  separate  file.  Under  no  circumstances  should  they  also  be  embedded  in  the  text. 
Author-date  style  with  reference  list  is  unacceptable.  See  sample  citations  below.  Book  and  periodical  titles  must 
be  in  italics,  never  underlined. 

When  possible,  place  mathematical  formulas  in  the  endnotes. 

Publication  data  for  citations  from  a  book  must  include,  in  the  following  order:  full  first  name  or  initials  and  last 
name  of  author(s),  editor(s,)  compiler(s),  translator(s);  full  title,  including  subtitle,  of  the  work;  editor's  name  if 
given  in  addition  to  author;  city  of  publication;  year  of  publication;  and  pertinent  page  number(s).  For  example: 

Robert  Frost,  "The  Gift  Outright,"  in  The  Poetry  of  Robert  Frost,  ed.  Edward  Connery  Lathem  (New  York:  Holt, 

Rinehart  and  Winston,  1975),  348. 

Richard  E.  Neustadt,  Presidential  Power  (New  York:  Wiley,  1960),  24. 

Publication  data  for  citations  from  a  periodical  must  include,  in  the  following  order:  full  first  name  or  initials 
and  last  name  of  author(s);  full  title,  including  subtitle,  of  article;  full  name  of  periodical/journal,  including 
volume  and  issue  numbers,  date,  and  pertinent  page  number(s).  For  example: 

Shaun  O'Connell,  "The  Infrequent  Family:  In  Search  of  Boston's  Literary  Community,"  Boston  Magazine  67, 
no.  1  (January  1975):  44-47. 

5.  The  journal  uses  shortened  references  rather  than  op.  cit.  For  a  book,  include  last  name(s)  of  author(s);  short 
title  containing  key  word(s)  of  main  title;  and  page  number(s)  of  reference.  For  an  article  in  a  periodical,  include 
last  name(s)  of  author(s);  short  title  of  article;  and  page  number(s).  For  example: 

Frost,  "The  Gift  Outright,"  348. 
Neustadt,  Presidential  Power.  24. 
O'Connell,  "Infrequent  Family,"  44-47. 

6.  We  are  happy  to  answer  any  questions  about  these  guidelines.  Address  queries  and  manuscripts  to: 

Padraig  O'Malley,  Editor,  New  England  Journal  of  Public  Policy 
John  W.  McCormack  Institute  of  Public  Affairs.  University  of  Massachusetts  Boston 
100  Morrissey  Boulevard 
Boston,  Massachusetts  02125-3393 
Telephone:  617-287-5550;  fax:  617-287-5544