Policy Liberalism and Political Institutions
Received: May 31, 2010; Revised: Jun 15, 2010; Revised: Jun 30, 2010; Accepted: Jul 07, 2010
Published Online: Aug 31, 2010
Abstract
This paper examines the impacts of political institutions, especially a president’s party affiliation and job performance, on the generosity of social welfare benefits, which are one of the characteristics of policy liberalism, through an investigation of U.S. social welfare expenditures. Findings indicate that a president’s party affiliation is a key predictor of his policy preferences, agendas, and policy liberalism or conservatism despite institutional and political constraints, whereas a president’s job performance, measured by either success on congressional votes or job approval, is not linked to the generosity of social welfare benefits. In an age of global capitalism undergoing radical changes in the political and economic environment, however, a president’s party affiliation is not a crucial indicator of policy preferences or policy liberalism/conservatism. Additionally, political leaders’ policy preferences and tools appear to determine more significantly the destiny of welfare programs than a president’s job performance or economic conditions like unemployment.
Metrics
QR Code of this Article:
Related Articles
The Bureaucratic Perils of Presidentialism: Political Impediments to Good Governance in Latin America
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2021;36(4):1-14.
Presidential Leadership Qualities and Their Influence on Trust in Government
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2021;36(3):37-54.
The Issue-Attention Cycle and Public Policy in the United States
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2015;30(3):1-22.
Prior Success, Asset or Poison?: Leadership Failure of Korea’s CEO President, Lee Myung-bak
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2013;28(1):93-110.
The Institutionalization of the Presidential Secretariat in Korea, 1948-2011*
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2012;27(3):73-99.