(eBook PDF) Understanding Public

Policy, 15th Edition Thomas R. Dye

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/ebook-pdf-understanding-public-policy-15th-editio
n-thomas-r-dye/
Preface

P
olicy analysis is concerned with “who gets In short, this volume is not only an introduc-
what” in politics and, more important, tion to the study of public policy but also an intro-
“why” and “what difference it makes.” We duction to the models the political scientists use
are concerned not only with what policies gov- to describe and explain political life.
ernments pursue, but why governments pursue
the policies they do, and what the consequences New to this Edition
of these policies are.
The fifteenth edition of Understanding Public Pol-
Political Science, like other scientific disciplines,
icy focuses on the policy issues confronting Pres-
has developed a number of concepts and models to
ident Barack Obama in his second term in the
help describe and explain political life. These mod-
White House.
els are not really competitive in the sense that any
President Obama has made income inequal-
one could be judged as the “best.” Each focuses on
ity a major political issue. The rise of inequality
separate elements of politics, and each helps us un-
in recent years is described and analyzed in a re-
derstand different things about political life.
vised chapter entitled “Welfare and Inequality:
We begin with a brief description of eight an-
the Search for a Rational Strategy.” But despite
alytic models in political science and the potential
rising inequality, America remains the land of
contribution of each to the study of public policy:
opportunity. Income mobility—people moving
Process model Group model up and down the income ladder—characterizes
Institutional model Elite model American society. Studies reveal that over half of
Rational model Public choice model the poorest Americans can expect to move up the
Incremental model Game theory model income scale in less than a 10-year period.
Most public policies are a combination of Obamacare remains the signature political
rational planning, incrementalism, competition achievement of the Obama administration. So
among groups, elite preferences, public choice, far it has survived various challenges, including
political processes, and institutional influences. the important question of the constitutionality
Throughout this volume we employ these mod- of the individual mandate. Chapter 8 describes
els, both singly and in combination, to describe the complex reasoning of Chief Justice John Rob-
and explain public policy. However, certain chap- erts, who held that the mandate and penalty was
ters rely more on one model than another. The really a “tax” and therefore within the constitu-
policy areas studied are: tional power of Congress to levy taxes. This de-
cision, opposed by the Attorney Generals of 26
Criminal justice Energy and states, paved the way for the implementation of
Welfare and environment
Obamacare. Initially implementation went badly
inequality Civil rights
Health care Defense policy with computer glitches obstructing enrollment;
Education Homeland security later it was revealed that millions of existing
Economic policy International trade plans were canceled for failure to meet new fed-
Tax policy and Immigration eral requirements. The President’s promise “if

vii
viii Preface
you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your
healthcare plan” was broken.
According to national polls, the economy
remains the most important issue facing Amer-
ica. Chapter 11 describes the near collapse of the
banking industry in 2008–09 and the govern-
ment’s unprecedented efforts to avert another
Great Depression. It attributes much of the near
disaster to the federal government’s policies in-
cluding the actions of government corporations
“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” The chapter
traces the long, slow, incomplete recovery—the
“Great Recession.” The federal government’s debt
now amounts to about $18 trillion, an amount
in excess of $50,000 for every man, woman, and
child in the nation. The economic policy chapter
also describes that proposals to reduce annual
deficits. A new section shows America’s ranking
on the Economic Freedom Index to be dropping.
Despite years of seeming neglect, federalism
appears to be experiencing a revival in the Amer-
ican institutional structure. The states are leading
the way in medicinal use of marijuana, in same-
sex marriage, and banning racial preference. All
three issues are covered in separate chapters.
Crime is down from its historic highs, partially
as a result of law enforcement initiatives taken
in states and cities in the 1980s and 90s, although
now pressures have arisen to lessen sentences
and hard-nosed police practices. In education, the
federal government has granted waivers to most
states from the controversial No Child Left Be-
hind Act. The states have come together through
the National Governors Association to construct a
“common core” of desired educational outcomes.
Tax policy issues have severely divided the
Congress. The standoff between the President
and the Democratic-controlled Senate, and the
Republican-controlled House is described in de-
tail, including the sequestration and temporary
shutdown of the federal government in 2013.
President Obama succeeded in placing the blame
on the House Republicans, and he succeeded in
getting a raise in the top marginal income tax
rates back to 39.6 percent. Despite the president’s
rhetoric about income inequality, no change was
made in capital gains tax and dividends taxation,
which remain less than half of the rates on wage
income.
Comprehensive immigration reform passed
the Democratic-controlled Senate but failed to get
to a vote in the Republican-controlled House. The
elements of immigration reform are discussed in
Chapter 12 and contrasted with current immigra-
tion policy of the United States. The United States
has failed to enforce border controls and allowed
10–12 million undocumented immigrants to live
in the country as second-class non-citizens. Spe-
cial interests who gain from low-wage labor have
been successful so far in preventing comprehen-
sive immigration reform or even full implemen-
tation of current immigration laws. By executive
order, President Obama ordered the non-deporta-
tion of children brought to the United States by
their parents (in effect enacting the Dream Act
which had been defeated in Congress). One re-
sult was an influx of children across our Mexican
border.
Climate change is given new extensive cover-
age in Chapter 13 “Energy and the Environment:
Externalities and Interests.” “Cap and trade”
proposals are described as well as the efforts of
the Environmental Protection Agency to enact
rules previously rejected by the Congress. A new
revolution in energy production—“Fracking”—
promises to reduce United States dependence
on foreign oil and gas, as well as reduce carbon
emissions. Fracking was developed by the pri-
vate market, not government, which continues to
heavily subsidize “renewable” energy sources.
President Barack Obama’s drawdown of U.S.
military forces is described and assessed in a re-
vised defense policy chapter. The chaotic conclu-
sions to America’s participation in the Iraq and
Afghanistan wars are described as far as possible
through our date of publication. The new drone
war is also described. Obama’s statements on
the key question of when to use military force

are contrasted with earlier statements by General
Colin Powell and by Presidents Reagan, George
W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. The final chapter on
homeland security discusses the trade-offs be-
tween security and liberty, including surveillance
by the National Security Agency, the activities of
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FICA)
Court, and the status of “enemy combatants”
held at the United States prison and Guantánamo
Bay, Cuba.
Thomas R. Dye
Available Instructor Resources
The following resources are available for instruc-
tors. These can be downloaded at http://www
.pearsonhighered.com/irc. Login required.
Preface ix
• PowerPoint—provides a core template of the
content covered throughout the text. Can eas-
ily be expanded for customization with your
course.
• Instructor’s Manual and Test Bank— includes
a description, in-class discussion questions,
and a research assignment for each chapter.
Also included in this manual is a test bank of-
fering multiple-choice, true/false, and essay
questions for each chapter.
• MyTest—an electronic format of the Test
Bank to customize in-class tests or quizzes.
Visit: http://www.pearsonhighered.com
/mytest.
This page intentionally left blank
Chapter 1
Policy Analysis
What Governments Do, Why They
Do It, and What Difference It Makes

Expanding the Scope of Public Policy President Barack Obama signs the Patient Protection and Afford-
able Care Act in the East Room of the White House, March 30, 2010. This health care reform bill greatly expands the
scope of public policy in America. (© Brooks Kraft/Corbis News/Corbis)

1.1: What Is Public
Policy?
This book is about public policy. It is concerned
with what governments do, why they do it, and
what difference it makes. It is also about political
science and the ability of this academic discipline
to describe, analyze, and explain public policy.
1.1.1: Definition of Policy
Public policy is whatever governments choose to
do or not to do.1 Governments do many things.
1
2 Chapter 1

They regulate conflict within society, they orga- in scope to encompass just about every sector of
nize society to carry on conflict with other soci- American life.
eties, they distribute a great variety of symbolic Throughout most of the twentieth century,
rewards and material services to members of government grew in both absolute size and in re-
the society, and they extract money from society, lation to the size of the national economy. The size
most often in the form of taxes. Thus, public pol- of the economy is usually measured by the gross
icies may regulate behavior, organize bureaucra- domestic product (GDP), the sum of all the goods
cies, distribute benefits, or extract taxes—or all of and services produced in the United States in
these things at once. a year (see Figure 1–1). Government spending
amounted to only about 8 percent of the GDP at
1.1.2: Policy Expansion and the beginning of the last century, and most gov-
ernmental activities were carried out by state and
Government Growth local governments. Two world wars, the New Deal
Today people expect government to do a great programs devised during the Great Depression of
many things for them. Indeed there is hardly the 1930s, and the growth of the Great Society pro-
any personal or societal problem for which some grams of the 1960s and 1970s all greatly expanded
group will not demand a government solution— the size of government, particularly the federal
that is, a public policy designed to alleviate per- government. The rise in government growth rela-
sonal discomfort or societal unease. Over the tive to the economy leveled off during the Reagan
years, as more and more Americans turned to presidency (1981–1989). The economy in the 1990s
government to resolve society’s problems, gov- grew faster than government s­ pending, result-
ernment grew in size and public policy expanded ing in a modest decline in the size of government

Figure 1–1 The Growth of Government

The size of government can be measured in relation to the size of the economy. Total federal, state, and local
government spending now exceeds 37 percent of the GDP, the size of the economy.
*Estimate from Budget of the United States Government, 2015.

50
1944
Percentage of Gross Domestic Product

Great
40 Society

World
War II Total
30
Government
Expenditures

20 World
War I Obama
Federal
10 Government
Expenditures

0
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 1995 2005 2015*
1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2000 2010
Year
 Policy Analysis 3

r­ elative to the economy. Federal spending was less
than 20 percent of the GDP.
The Obama Administration brought about a
dramatic increase in federal spending, much of it
in response to the “Great Recession” of 2008–2009.
Federal spending in 2009 soared to 25 percent of
the GDP; this spending included a “stimulus”
package designed to jump–start the economy (see
­Chapter 10). Under President Barack Obama, fed-
eral spending was kept close to 24 percent of the
GDP. The nation’s 50 state governments and 90,000
local governments (cities, counties, towns and
townships, school districts, and special districts)
combined to account for over 13 percent of the GDP.
Total government spending—federal, state, and
­local—now amounts to about 37 percent of GDP.
1.1.3: Scope of Public Policy
Not everything that government does is reflected
in governmental expenditures. Regulatory activ-
ity, for example, especially environmental regula-
tions and health insurance requirements, imposes
significant costs on individuals and businesses;
these costs are not shown in government budgets.
­Nevertheless, government spending is a common
indicator of governmental functions and priorities.
For example, Figure 1–2 indicates that the federal

Figure 1–2 Public Policy: What Governments Do

Government spending figures indicate that Social Security and Medicare consume the largest share of federal spending,
while education is the largest item in state and local government spending.
SOURCES: Budget of the United States Government, 2015; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2013.

What the Federal Government Does What State and Local Governments Do

Defense Education
Social Security
and Medicare Welfare

Health, Inc. Medicaid Health

and Hospitals
Income Security, Inc.
Food stamps, welfare Highways
Transportation
Police and
Fire
Education, Training
Sanitation
Veterans

Interest Prisons

Natural Resources
Justice and Environment
Natural Resources
and Environment All Other*

All Other*

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Percentage of Total Federal Percentage of All State–Local
Spending for Various Functions Spending for Various Functions
*Includes science, energy, agriculture, housing, *Includes housing and community development,
community development, international affairs, parks and recreation, governmental administration,
and general government. and interest.
4 Chapter 1
government spends more on senior citizens—in
­Social Security and Medicare outlays—than on
any other function, including national defense.
Federal welfare and health programs account for
substantial budget outlays, but federal financial
support of education is very modest. State and ­local
governments in the United States bear the major
burden of public education. Welfare and health
functions consume larger shares of their budgets
than highways and law enforcement do.
1.2: Why Study Public
Policy?
Political science is the study of politics—the study
of “who gets what, when, and how?”2 It is more
than the study of governmental institutions, that
is, federalism, separation of powers, checks and
balances, judicial review, the powers and duties
of Congress, the president, and the courts. And
political science is more than the study of political
processes, that is, campaigns and elections, vot-
ing, lobbying, legislating, and adjudicating.
Political science is also the study of public
­policy—the description and explanation of the causes
and consequences of government activity. This focus in-
volves a description of the content of public policy;
an analysis of the impact of social, economic, and
political forces on the content of public policy; an
inquiry into the effect of various institutional ar-
rangements and political processes on public pol-
icy; and an evaluation of the consequences of public
policies on society, both intended and unintended.
1.3: What Can Be
Learned from Policy
Analysis?
Policy analysis is finding out what governments
do, why they do it, and what difference, if any, it
makes. What can be learned from policy analysis?
1.3.1: Description
First, we can describe public policy—we can
learn what government is doing (and not do-
ing) in welfare, defense, education, civil rights,
health, the environment, taxation, and so on.
A factual basis of information about national
policy is really an indispensable part of every-
one’s education. What does the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 actually say about discrimination
in employment? What did the Supreme Court
rule in the Bakke case about affirmative action
programs? What do the Medicaid and Medicare
programs promise for the poor and the aged?
What is actually mandated in the Patient Protec-
tion and Affordable Care Act—"Obamacare"—
and what has the Supreme Court said about it.
What agreements have been reached between
the United States and Russia regarding nuclear
weapons? How much money are we paying
in taxes? How much money does the federal
government spend each year, and what does it
spend it on? These are examples of descriptive
questions.
1.3.2: Causes
Second, we can inquire about the causes, or de-
terminants, of public policy. Why is public pol-
icy what it is? Why do governments do what
they do? We might inquire about the effects of
political institutions, processes, and behaviors
on public policies (Linkage B in Figure 1–3).
For example, does it make any difference in
tax and spending levels whether Democrats or
Republicans control the presidency and Con-
gress? What is the impact of lobbying by the
special interests on efforts to reform the federal
tax system? We can also inquire about the ef-
fects of social, economic, and cultural forces in
shaping public policy (Linkage C in Figure 1–
3). For example: What are the effects of chang-
ing public attitudes about race on civil rights
policy? What are the effects of recessions on
government spending? What is the effect of an
 Policy Analysis 5

Figure 1–3 Studying Public Policy, Its Causes and Consequences

This diagram (sometimes referred to as the “systems model”) classifies societal conditions, political system
characteristics, and public policies, and suggests possible linkages between them.

Society Political System Public Policy

Institutions,
processes,
behaviors
A B
E F

Social and C Public

economic policies
conditions D

Including: Including: Including:

Wealth and income Federalism Civil rights
Inflation, recession, unemployment Separation of powers Educational policies
Educational achievement Checks and balances Welfare policies
Environmental quality Parties Health care policies
Poverty Interest groups Criminal justice
Racial composition Voting behavior Taxation
Religious and ethnic make-up Bureaucracy Spending and deficits
Health and longevity Power structures Defense policies
Inequality, discrimination Congress, president, courts Homeland security

Linkage A: What are the effects of social and economic conditions on political and governmental
institutions, processes, and behaviors?
Linkage B: What are the effects of political and governmental institutions, processes, and behaviors
on public policies?
Linkage C: What are the effects of social and economic conditions on public policies?
Linkage D: What are the effects (feedback) of public policies on social and economic conditions?
Linkage E: What are the effects (feedback) of political and governmental institutions, processes, and
behaviors on social and economic conditions?
Linkage F: What are the effects (feedback) of public policies on political and governmental institutions,
processes, and behaviors?

increasingly older population on the Social
Security and Medicare programs? In scientific
terms, when we study the causes of public pol-
icy, policies become the dependent variables,
and their various political, social, economic,
and cultural determinants become the indepen-
dent variables.
1.3.3: Consequences
Third, we can inquire about the consequences,
or impacts, of public policy. Learning about the
consequences of public policy is often referred
to as policy evaluation. What difference, if any,
does public policy make in people’s lives? We
might inquire about the effects of public policy
on ­political institutions and processes (Linkage
F in Figure 1–3). For example, what is the effect
of continuing high unemployment on Republi-
can party fortunes in Congressional elections?
What is the impact of economic policies on the
president’s popularity? We also want to exam-
ine the impact of public policies on conditions
in society (Linkage D in Figure 1–3). For ex-
ample, does capital punishment help to deter
crime? Does existing unemployment benefits
discourage people from seeking work? Does in-
creased educational spending produce higher
6 Chapter 1
student achievement scores? In scientific terms,
when we study the consequences of public ­policy,
­p olicies become the independent variables,
and their political, social, economic, and cul-
tural ­i mpacts on society become the dependent
­variables.
1.4: Policy Analysis
and Policy Advocacy
It is important to distinguish policy analysis from
policy advocacy. Explaining the causes and con-
sequences of various policies is not equivalent
to prescribing what policies governments ought
to pursue. Learning why governments do what
they do and what the consequences of their ac-
tions are is not the same as saying what govern-
ments ought to do or bringing about changes in
what they do. Policy advocacy requires the skills
of rhetoric, persuasion, organization, and ac-
tivism. Policy analysis encourages scholars and
students to attack critical policy issues with the
tools of systematic inquiry. There is an implied
assumption in policy analysis that developing
scientific knowledge about the forces shaping
public policy and the consequences of public pol-
icy is itself a socially relevant activity, and that
policy analysis is a prerequisite to prescription, ad-
vocacy, and activism.
It must be remembered that policy issues are
decided not by analysts but by political actors—
elected and appointed government officials,
interest groups, and occasionally even voters.
Social science research often does not fare well
in the political arena; it may be interpreted, mis-
interpreted, ignored, or even used as a weapon
by political combatants. Policy analysis some-
times produces unexpected and even politically
embarrassing findings. Public policies do not al-
ways work as intended. And political interests
will accept, reject, or use findings to fit their own
purposes.
1.5: Policy Analysis
and the Quest for
Solutions to America’s
Problems
It is questionable that policy analysis can ever
“solve” America’s problems. Ignorance, crime,
poverty, racial conflict, inequality, poor housing,
ill health, pollution, congestion, and unhappy
lives have afflicted people and societies for a long
time. Of course, this is no excuse for failing to
work toward a society free of these maladies. But
our striving for a better society should be tem-
pered with the realization that solutions to these
problems may be very difficult to find. There are
many reasons for qualifying our enthusiasm for
policy analysis.
1.5.1: Limits on Government
Power
First, it is easy to exaggerate the importance,
both for good and for ill, of the policies of gov-
ernments. It is not clear that government pol-
icies, however ingenious, can cure all or even
most of society’s ills. Governments are con-
strained by many powerful social forces—pat-
terns of family life, class structure, child-rearing
practices, religious beliefs, and so on. These
forces are not easily managed by governments,
nor could they be controlled even if it seemed
desirable to do so. Some of society’s problems
are very intractable.
1.5.2: Disagreement over the
Problem
Second, policy analysis cannot offer solutions
to problems when there is no general agree-
ment on what the problems are. For example, in
­educational policy some researchers assume that

raising achievement levels (measures of verbal
and quantitative abilities) is the problem to which
our efforts should be directed. But educators often
argue that the acquisition of verbal and quantita-
tive skills is not the only, or even the most import-
ant, goal of the public schools. They contend that
schools must also develop positive self-images
among pupils of all races and backgrounds, en-
courage social awareness and the appreciation of
multiple cultures, teach children to respect one
another and to resolve their differences peace-
fully, raise children’s awareness of the dangers of
drugs and educate them about sex and sexually
transmitted diseases, and so on. In other words,
many educators define the problems confronting
schools more broadly than raising achievement
levels.
Policy analysis is not capable of resolving
value conflicts. If there is little agreement on what
values should be emphasized in educational pol-
icy, there is not much that policy research can con-
tribute to policymaking. At best it can advise on
how to achieve certain results, but it cannot deter-
mine what is truly valuable for society.
1.5.3: Subjectivity in
Interpretation
Third, policy analysis deals with very subjective
topics and must rely on interpretation of results.
Professional researchers frequently interpret the
results of their analyses differently. Social science
research cannot be value-free. Even the selection
of the topic for research is affected by one’s values
about what is important in society and worthy of
attention.
1.5.4: Limitations on Design
of Human Research
Another set of problems in systematic policy
analysis centers around inherent limitations
in the design of social science research. It is
Policy Analysis 7
not really possible to conduct some forms of
controlled experiments on human beings. For
­example, researchers cannot order children to go
to overcrowded or underfunded schools for sev-
eral years just to see if it adversely impacts their
achievement levels. Instead, social researchers
must find situations in which educational depri-
vation has been produced “naturally” in order
to make the necessary observations about the
causes of such deprivation. Because we cannot
control all the factors in a r­ eal-world situation,
it is difficult to pinpoint precisely what causes
educational achievement or nonachievement.
Moreover, even where some experimentation
is permitted, human beings frequently modify
their behavior simply because they know that
they are being observed in an experimental sit-
uation. For example, in educational research it
frequently turns out that children perform well
under any new teaching method or curricular
innovation. It is difficult to know whether the
improvements observed are a product of the
new teaching method or curricular improve-
ment or merely a product of the experimental
situation.
1.5.5: Complexity of Human
Behavior
Perhaps the most serious reservation about pol-
icy analysis is the fact that social problems are so
complex that social scientists are unable to make
accurate predictions about the impact of proposed
policies. Social scientists simply do not know enough
about individual and group behavior to be able to give
reliable advice to policymakers. Occasionally policy-
makers turn to social scientists for “solutions,” but
social scientists do not have any. Most of society’s
problems are shaped by so many variables that a
simple explanation of them, or remedy for them,
is rarely possible. The fact that social scientists
give so many contradictory recommendations is
an indication of the a­ bsence of reliable scientific
8 Chapter 1
knowledge about social problems. Although some
scholars argue that no advice is better than con-
tradictory or inaccurate advice, policymakers still
must make decisions, and it is probably better that
they act in the light of whatever little knowledge
social science can provide than that they act in the
absence of any knowledge at all. Even if social sci-
entists cannot predict the impact of future policies,
they can at least attempt to measure the impact
of current and past public policies and make this
knowledge available to decision makers.
1.6: Policy Analysis as
Art and Craft
Understanding public policy is both an art and a
craft. It is an art because it requires insight, cre-
ativity, and imagination in identifying societal
problems and describing them, in devising pub-
lic policies that might alleviate them, and then in
finding out whether these policies end up making
things better or worse. It is a craft because these
tasks usually require some knowledge of eco-
nomics, political science, public administration,
sociology, law, and statistics. Policy analysis is re-
ally an applied subfield of all of these traditional
academic disciplines.
Summary: Policy Analysis
There are a variety of definitions of public policy.
But we say simply that public policy is whatever
governments choose to do or not to do.
1. Policy analysis is finding out what govern-
ments do, why they do it, and what differ-
ence it makes.
2. The scope of public policy has expanded as
governments do more things and grow in
size.
We doubt that there is any “model of choice”
in policy analysis—that is, a single model or
method that is preferable to all others and that
consistently renders the best solutions to public
problems. Instead we agree with political scientist
Aaron Wildavsky, who wrote:
Policy analysis is one activity for which
there can be no fixed program, for pol-
icy analysis is synonymous with creativ-
ity, which may be stimulated by theory
and sharpened by practice, which can be
learned but not taught.3
Wildavsky goes on to warn students that
solutions to great public questions are not to be
expected:
In large part, it must be admitted,
knowledge is negative. It tells us what
we cannot do, where we cannot go,
wherein we have been wrong, but not
necessarily how to correct these errors.
After all, if current efforts were judged
wholly satisfactory, there would be little
need for analysis and less for analysts.
There is no one model of choice to be found in
this book, but if anyone wants to begin a debate
about different ways of understanding public
­policy, this book is a good place to begin.
3. A systems model relates societal conditions
to political institutions and processes, and to
policy outcomes.
4. Policy analysis is often limited by disagree-
ments over the nature of societal problems,
by subjectivity in the interpretation of re-
sults, by limitations to the design of policy
research, and by the complexity of human
behavior.
Chapter 2
Models of Politics
Some Help in Thinking
About Public Policy

Food Stamp Expansion The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known as food stamps, is
America’s fastest growing welfare program. As recently as 2010, only 17 million people received food stamps. Today
over 50 million people do so. This “non-incremental” growth in a federal program challenges the notion that public
policies change slowly. (StockAB/Alamy)

2.1: Models for Policy plane, for e­ xample, or the tabletop buildings
that ­p lanners and ­a rchitects use to show how

Analysis things will look when proposed projects are

A model is a simplified representation of
some ­a spect of the real world. It may be an
actual physical representation—a model air-
­c ompleted. Or a model may be a diagram—a
road map, for ­e xample, or a flow chart that
­p olitical scientists use to show how a bill
­becomes law.
9
10 Chapter 2
2.1.1: Uses of Models
The models we shall use in studying policy
are c­ onceptual models. These are word models that
try to
• Simplify and clarify our thinking about poli-
tics and public policy.
• I d e n t if y i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s o f p o l i c y
­problems.
• Help us to communicate with each other by
focusing on essential features of political
life.
• Direct our efforts to understand public policy
better by suggesting what is important and
what is unimportant.
• Suggest explanations for public policy and
predict its consequences.
2.1.2: Selected Policy Models
Over the years, political science, like other scien-
tific disciplines, has developed a number of mod-
els to help us understand political life. Among
these models are the following:
• Process model
• Institutional model
• Rational model
• Incremental model
• Group model
• Elite model
• Public choice model
• Game theory model
Each of these terms identifies a major conceptual
model that can be found in the literature of po-
litical science. None of these models was derived
especially to study public policy, yet each offers a
separate way of thinking about policy and even
suggests some of the general causes and conse-
quences of public policy.
These models are not competitive in the sense that
any one of them could be judged “best.” Each one
provides a separate focus on political life, and
each can help us to understand different things
about public policy. Although some ­policies ap-
pear at first glance to lend t­ hemselves to expla-
nation by one particular model, most policies are
a combination of rational planning, incremen-
talism, interest group activity, elite preferences,
game playing, public choice, political processes,
and institutional influences. Following is a brief
description of each model, with particular atten-
tion to the separate ways in which public policy
can be viewed.
2.2: Process
Policy as Political Activity
Political processes and behaviors are a cen-
tral focus of political science. Political science
studies the activities of voters, interest groups,
­legislators, presidents, bureaucrats, judges,
and other political actors. One of the main pur-
poses is to discover patterns of activities—or
­“ processes.” Political scientists with an inter-
est in policy have grouped various activities
­according to their relationship with public pol-
icy. The result is a set of policy processes, which
usually follow the general outline shown in
­Table 2-1.
The process model is useful in helping us to
understand the various activities involved in pol-
icymaking. We want to keep in mind that policy-
making involves problem identification (defining
problems in society that deserve public atten-
tion), agenda setting (capturing the attention of
policymakers), formulating proposals (devising
and selecting policy options), legitimating policy
(developing political support; winning congres-
sional, presidential, court approval), implement-
ing policy (creating bureaucracies, spending
money, enforcing laws), and evaluating policy
(finding out whether policies work, whether they
are popular).
 Models of Politics 11

Table 2-1 The Policy Process

• Problem Identification. The identification of policy problems through demand from individuals and groups for government
action.
• Agenda Setting. Focusing the attention of the mass media and public officials on specific public problems to decide what
will be decided.
• Policy Formulation. The development of policy proposals by interest groups, White House staff, congressional committees,
and think tanks.
• Policy Legitimation. The selection and enactment of policies through actions by Congress, the president, and the courts.
• Policy Implementation. The implementation of policies through government bureaucracies, public expenditures, regulations,
and other activities of executive agencies.
• Policy Evaluation. The evaluation of policies by government agencies themselves, outside consultants, the media, and the
general public.

of the Land” (Article VI). Its key structural

Processes: Applying
the Model
Political processes and behaviors are
considered in each of the policy areas studied
in this book. Additional commentary on the
impact of political activity on public policy is
found in Chapter 3, “The Policymaking Process:
Decision-Making Activities,” and Chapter 4,
“Policy Evaluation: Finding Out What Happens
After a Law Is Passed.”
2.3: Institutionalism
Policy as Institutional Output
Government institutions have long been a cen-
tral focus of political science. Political activities
generally center around particular government
institutions—Congress, the presidency, courts,
bureaucracies, states, municipalities, and so on.
Public policy is authoritatively determined, im-
plemented, and enforced by these institutions.
The Constitution of the United States es-
tablishes the fundamental institutional struc-
ture for policymaking. It is “the supreme Law
­components—­separation of powers and checks
and balances among the legislative, executive, and
judicial branches of the national government—
together with ­f ederalism—dividing power be-
tween the nation and the states—were designed
by the Founders in part “to form a more perfect
Union.” These institutional arrangements have
changed significantly over more than two centu-
ries, yet no other written constitution in the world
has remained in place for so long. Throughout
this v­ olume we will be concerned with the effect
of these institutional arrangements on public pol-
icy. And, in Chapter 5, we shall explore in some
detail on the effect of federalism.
Federalism recognizes that both the national
government and the state governments derive
independent legal authority from their own citi-
zens (Figure 2-1): both can pass their own laws,
levy their own taxes, and maintain their own
courts. The states also have important roles in
the selection of national officeholders—in the
apportionment of congressional seats, in the al-
location of two U.S. senators to each state, and
in the allocation of electoral votes for president.
Most important, perhaps, both the Congress
and three-quarters of states must consent to any
changes in the Constitution itself.
12 Chapter 2
Figure 2-1 An Institutional Model: American Federalism
Governmental institutional arrangements affect public policy, including federalism—the distribution of money and power
among federal, state, and local governments. (Henryart/Fotalia)
FEDERAL SYSTEM
Federal government and
states derive authority
independently from the people.
Institutionalism:
Applying the Model
In Chapter 5, “Federalism and State Policies:
Institutional Arrangements and Policy
Variations,” we shall examine some of the
problems of American federalism—the
distribution of money and power among federal,
state, and local governments.
2.4: Rationalism
Policy as Maximum Social Gain
A rational policy is one that achieves “maximum
social gain”; that is, governments should choose
policies resulting in gains to society that exceed
costs by the greatest amount, and g ­ overnments
National Government
States
People
should refrain from policies if costs exceed
gains.
Note that there are really two important
guidelines in this definition of maximum social
gain. First, no policy should be adopted if its costs
exceed its benefits. Second, among policy alterna-
tives, decision makers should choose the policy
that produces the greatest benefit over cost. In
other words, a policy is rational when the differ-
ence between the values it achieves and the values
it sacrifices is positive and greater than any other
policy alternative. One should not view rational-
ism in a narrow dollars-and-cents ­framework, in
which basic social values are sacrificed for dollar
savings. Rationalism involves the calculation of
all social, political, and economic values sacrificed
or achieved by a public policy, not just those that
can be measured in dollars.
To select a rational policy, policymakers must
(1) know all the society’s value preferences and

their relative weights, (2) know all the policy
alternatives available, (3) know all the conse-
quences of each policy alternative, (4) calculate
the ratio of benefits to costs for each policy al-
ternative, and (5) select the most efficient pol-
icy alternative. This rationality assumes that
the value preferences of society as a whole can be
known and weighted. It is not enough to know
and weigh the values of some groups and not
others. There must be a complete understanding
of societal values. Rational policymaking also re-
quires information about alternative policies, the
predictive capacity to foresee accurately the conse-
quences of alternate policies, and the intelligence
to calculate correctly the ratio of costs to bene-
fits. Finally, rational policymaking requires a
­decision-making system that facilitates rationality
in policy formation. A diagram of such a system
is shown in Figure 2-2.
However, there are many barriers to rational
decision making, so many, in fact, that it rarely
takes place at all in government. Yet the model re-
mains important for analytic purposes because it
helps to identify barriers to rationality. It assists
in posing the question, Why is policymaking not
a more rational process? At the outset we can
­hypothesize several important obstacles to rational
policymaking:
• Many conflicting benefits and costs cannot
be compared or weighed; for example, it is
difficult to compare or weigh the value of
­individual life against the costs of ­regulation.
• Policymakers may not be motivated to make
decisions on the basis of societal goals but
instead try to maximize their own rewards—
power, status, reelection, and money.
• Policymakers may not be motivated to maxi-
mize net social gain but merely to satisfy de-
mands for progress; they do not search until
they find “the one best way”; instead they
halt their search when they find an alterna-
tive that will work.
Models of Politics 13
• Large investments in existing programs and
policies (sunk costs) prevent policymakers
from reconsidering alternatives foreclosed by
previous decisions.
• There are innumerable barriers to collect-
ing all the information required to know
all possible policy alternatives and the con-
sequences of each, including the cost of in-
formation gathering, the availability of the
information, and the time involved in its
­collection.
• Neither the predictive capacities of the so-
cial and behavioral sciences nor those of the
physical and biological sciences are suffi-
ciently advanced to enable policymakers to
understand the full benefits or costs of each
policy alternative.
• Policymakers, even with the most advanced
computerized analytical techniques, do not
have sufficient intelligence to calculate accu-
rately costs and benefits when a large num-
ber of diverse political, social, economic, and
cultural values are at stake.
• Uncertainty about the consequences of vari-
ous policy alternatives compels policymakers
Rationalism: Applying
the Model
Chapter 4, “Criminal Justice: Rationality
and Irrationality in Public Policy,” shows
that rational policies to deter crime—
policies ensuring certainty, swiftness, and
severity of punishment—have seldom been
implemented. The problems of achieving
rationality in public policy are also discussed
in Chapter 7, “Welfare and Inequality:
The Search for Rational Strategies,” and
in Chapter 8, “Health Care: Attempting a
Rational-Comprehensive Transformation.”
14

Figure 2-2 A Rational Model of a Decision System

The rational model assumes complete agreement on goals, knowledge of alternative policies, and the ability to calculate and select the policies with the
greatest benefits and least costs.

1. Establishment
of complete set of
Input operational goals
All resources with weights
needed for
pure rationality
process 4. Preparation of 6. Comparison of
complete set of net expectations
3. Preparation of predictions of 5. Calculation of and identification Output
complete set of benefits and net expectation for of alternative(s) Pure rationality
alternative policies costs for each each alternative with highest net policy (policies)
alternative expectation

All data
2. Establishment
needed for
of complete
pure rationality
inventory of other
process
values and of
resources with
weights
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 “That’ll have to do,” he thought. “It doesn’t really matter it being a
bit short.”
He poured himself out a cupful of hot water for shaving. It was
one of the advantages of living alone that he could shave in the
kitchen if he liked.
Curiously enough he paused after pouring out the water.
“Shall I or shall I not?” he pondered. He examined his chin in the
mirror. “I suppose I’ll do,” he decided, “it won’t be noticed in the gas-
light.”
Then he saw the water he had poured out.
“Oh, well,” he thought, “perhaps I will, after all....”
He took out his razor, one of the old-fashioned kind, stropped it
carefully and lathered himself.
While he was shaving he thought: “I wish I hadn’t told that boy
Jones I’d send him to Clotters on Monday morning. Clotters won’t
like it much....”
Suddenly, and seemingly without any premeditation, he thrust the
soapy razor into his throat, just above the windpipe....

§7
At the Duke Street Methodist Schoolroom a select audience of
eleven waited until half-past eight for Mr. Weston to deliver his paper
on “Shakespeare.”
“Perhaps he’s ill,” suggested Miss Picksley.
“No, he’s not, because he was at school this afternoon. My
brother’s in his class,” said one of the Gunter girls.
“Where does he live?”
“Kitchener Road ... 24 or 25 ... I forget which.”
“Well, it’s not far away. Somebody might go round and see. He
may have forgotten all about it.”
 “I’ll go,” said Mr. Sly, the treasurer.
“I’ll come too,” said Miss Picksley, who had designs on Mr. Sly.
“We’ll all come,” chorused the Gunter girls.
“No, don’t,” said Miss Picksley. “We don’t want a crowd. It doesn’t
look nice.”
Through the refuse of a Friday evening’s marketing Mr. Sly and
Miss Picksley walked to Kitchener Road. They did not mind the walk
They did not even go the quickest way.
At No. 26 old father Jopson was standing at the front gate with
his monstrous goitre hanging down.
“It must be 24,” said Mr. Sly, “because this is 26.”
“Yes,” agreed Miss Picksley. She walked up to the porch of No.
24 and knocked.
“Does Mr. Weston live here?” enquired Mr. Sly.
Jopson nodded profoundly.
“He must be out,” said Miss Picksley.
“Do you know if he’s out?” enquired Mr. Sly.
Jopson raised his eyes sagaciously.
“’E’s in, ’cos I seed ’im come in couple ’v ars ago, an’ I bin ’ere or
in the fron’-rum ever since.”
“Perhaps he’s in the garden.”
“’E don’t go in the gawden nardays.”
“Lives by himself, doesn’t he?”
“Yus, lives by ’imself.”
“I’m sure he must be out,” said Miss Picksley. As unostentatiously
as possible she peeped through the letter-box. (She was not quite
certain whether this was really a ladylike proceeding.)
“’E ain’t aout, ’relse I should ’a seen ’im go aout.”
 “His hat and coat are on the hall-stand, too.... Perhaps he’s ill.”
“Try again. Maybe he was in the garden and didn’t hear the first
knocks.”
They tried again, but to no purpose. Eventually they went away in
the direction of Cubitt Lane.
“Nine o’clock,” said Miss Picksley. “Surely nobody’ll be waiting in
the schoolroom. I don’t think it’s much good going back.”
“Nor do I,” said Mr. Sly. “In fact, we might go for a walk....”
Miss Picksley did not object, so they strolled past the King’s Arms
into the Forest and forgot all about Mr. Weston and his promised
paper on William Shakespeare....

§8
On Saturday morning at half-past nine the rent-man came to No.
24, Kitchener Road to collect his weekly seven-and-sixpence. His
customary treble knock begat no reply. Simultaneously he noticed
the milk-can on the step. It was full, and the conclusion was that Mr.
Weston was still in bed.
Never as long as the rent-man could remember (and that was a
very long time) had the household at No. 24 been asleep at 9.30 on
a Saturday morning.
He went his rounds and returned to No. 24 on his way home
about ten past one. The milk-can was still there on the step. Its
solitude was now shared by a loaf of bread which the baker had left.
Receiving no answer to his knocks, the rent-man went to No. 26.
There the garrulous Mrs. Jopson recounted the visit of the two
callers on the previous evening.
“They knocked an’ knocked an’ knocked, but couldn’t git no anser
... an’ my ’usband swears ’e ’adn’t seen ’im go aout.”
Eventually it was decided that the rent-man should climb over the
fence in Jopson’s back garden and effect an entrance into No. 24 by
the back way. Jopson, morbidly curious, was to go with him.
You picture this strange couple standing in the tiny back scullery
of No. 24, Jopson with his huge face-monstrosity all mottled and pink
and shining with sweat, and the rent-man sleek and dapper,
fountain-pen behind his ear, receipt-book stuffed in his side pocket.
“Gow on strite through,” said Jopson thickly, “it leads inter the
kitchin.”
Slowly and almost apprehensively the rent-man turned the
handle....
 CHAPTER VIII
POST-MORTEM
§1
IT seemed to Catherine the most curious thing in the world that she
should be sitting with George Trant inside a taxi. There was no light
inside, and only the distant glimmer of London came in through the
window. All was dim and dark and shadowy. Yet somewhere
amongst these shadows sat George Trant. Perhaps he was thinking
that somewhere amongst those shadows sat she, Catherine Weston.
A voice said out of the shadows: “We shan’t be long now.”
Catherine said: “How far are we going?”
“You’re going home ... to your lodgings, that is.... You fainted, I
suppose you know....”
“Did I?” And she thought: “He killed himself out of loneliness. He
couldn’t live without me. I am the cause, I am the reason.”
“Feeling all right now?”
“Oh yes ... must have been the excitement.”
“Probably.” His voice was cold, unsympathetic. She felt that he
was deliberately looking away from where he thought she was.
“You needn’t take me all the way, you know. I can walk from the
Ridgeway corner.”
“I shall take you all the way,” he said crisply.
With strange instinct she sensed his antagonism.
“I believe you’re angry with me,” she said. Yet all the while she
was thinking: “I suppose there’ll be an inquest and a big fuss and all
that. And the furniture and stuff will have to be sold.”
No answer.
“You are,” she repeated, and was surprised by her own
persistence. After all, she didn’t care twopence whether he was
angry with her or not. Only she would have been gratified if he were
angry with her. It was something to come into a man’s life enough to
make him angry. And it was rather an amusing pastime, this flirting
with George Trant.
“Perhaps I am,” he said coldly.
“Why?” It would interest her to know why. At any rate she might
as well know why.
“You’ve disappointed me.”
That was all. It satisfied her. He had evidently been building
ideals around her. He had dreamed dreams in which she had been
epic and splendid and magnificent. He had thought of her sufficiently
for her to have the power of disappointing him. She was gratified.
After all, she did not like him, so there was no reason why she
should mind disappointing him. And he had paid her the subtle
compliment of being disappointed with her.
She did not particularly want to know how she had disappointed
him. Yet the conversation seemed incomplete without the question:
“In what way?”
She could feel him turning round to face her.
“Various ways,” he said vaguely, but his tone seemed to invite her
to pursue the subject. For that very reason she kept silent. It was not
a matter of sufficient importance for her to ask the same question
twice over. And if he did want her to repeat her question, that was all
the more reason for her not doing so.
After a moment’s silence he said: “You’ve changed a good deal
since I last knew you.”
“Yes, haven’t I?” There was an almost triumphant jauntiness in
her voice.
 “And you haven’t changed for the better, either,” he went on.
“That’s what you say.”
“Precisely. That’s what I say.” He was trying to be sarcastic, yet
she knew that he was feeling acutely miserable. There was
something in his voice that told her he was feeling acutely miserable.
And she had no pity. She was even exhilarated. He was miserable
about her. In some way she was invested with the power of making
him miserable.
“Oh, I can’t tell you——” he began bitterly, and stopped.
A queer thrill went down her spine. For the first time in her life
she was conscious of the presence of passion in another person. It
was quite a novel experience, yet it called to mind that scene in the
Duke Street Methodist Schoolroom when she and Freddie McKellar
had come to blows.... A flash of realization swept over her. He was in
love with her. He was really in love with her. She had so often
wondered and thought and speculated, and now she knew. His voice
had become transfigured, so to speak, out of passion for her. What a
pity he could not see her hair! She did not care for him one little bit.
She knew that now. She had not been quite certain before, but now,
in the very moment of realizing his love of her, she thought: “How
funny, I believe I really dislike him.... I don’t even want to flirt with him
again.”
Yet she was immensely gratified that he had paid her the terrific
compliment of falling in love with her.
A sort of instinct warned her that she should deflect the
conversation into other channels. She was immensely interested in
this curious phenomenon, yet she feared anti-climax. He might try to
kiss her and grope round in the dark searching for her. That would
be anti-climax. And also (this came as a sudden shaft of realization)
she did not want him to kiss her. Many a time of late she had
thought: “What shall I do if he kisses me?” She had resigned herself
to the possibility that one day he might kiss her. She had been
annoyed at his dalliance. “I wish to goodness he’d do it, if he’s going
to,” had been her frequent thought, and she had provoked him
subtly, cunningly, deliberately.... Now it came to her as an
unwelcome possibility. She did not in the least desire him to kiss her.
She knew she would actively dislike it if he did.
“Getting chilly,” she remarked nonchalantly, and she knew how
such an observation would grate upon him. She was fascinated by
this new miraculous power of hers to help or to hurt or to torture.
Every word she said was full of meaning to him: talking to him was
infinitely more subtle than ordinary conversation. It was this subtlety
that partly fascinated her. For instance, when she said, “Getting
chilly,” she meant, “We’ll change the subject. I know what you’re
driving at, and I don’t like it. It doesn’t please me a bit.” And what
was more, she knew that he would interpret it like that, and that he
would feel all those feelings which the expansion of her remark
would have aroused.
“I’ll shut the window,” he said, and did so.
It was so subtle, this business, that his remarks, too, could be
interpreted. For instance, his words, “I’ll shut the window,” meant
really, “Is that so? Well, I guessed as much. You’re utterly heartless. I
shall have to resign myself to it, anyway. So, as you suggest, we’ll
change the subject.”
The taxi turned into the Bockley High Street.
Catherine was like a child with a new toy. And this toy was the
most intricate, complicated, and absorbingly interesting toy that had
ever brought ecstasy to its possessor. How strange that he should
be in love with her! How marvellous that there should be something
strange and indefinable in her that had attracted something strange
and indefinable in him!
And she thought, in spasms amidst her exhilaration: “Probably
Ransomes will sell the furniture for me.... He killed himself for me.
I’m the reason....”
It tickled her egoism that he should have done so. He must have
done so. It could only have been that.
Here was George Trant, head over heels in love with her. And
here was her father, stupid, narrow-minded, uncompromising bigot,
yet committing suicide because she had run away from home. She
preferred to regard herself as a runaway rather than as a castaway.
Truly she was developing into a very marvellous and remarkable
personage!...

§2
As she entered the side door of No. 14, Gifford Road at the
improper hour of three a.m., the thin voice of Mrs. Carbass called
down the stairs: “That you, Miss Weston?”
“Yes.”
“There’s a telegraph for you on the table....”
“Righto!” How jaunty! How delightfully nonchalant! As if one were
used to receiving telegrams! As if one were even used to arriving
home at three a.m.!
Catherine turned the tap of the gas, which had been left burning
at a pin-point in the basement sitting-room. Her hand must have
been unsteady, for she turned it out. That necessitated fumbling for
matches....
The telegram was addressed to the Upton Rising Cinema, and
had been handed in at Bockley Post Office some twelve hours
before. It ran:
Father had accident. Come at once.—may.
Now who was May?
After much cogitation Catherine remembered an Aunt May, her
mother’s sister, who lived at Muswell Hill. Catherine had seen her but
once, and that was on the occasion of her mother’s funeral. She had
a vague recollection of a prim little woman about fifty, with a high-
necked blouse and hair done up in a knob at the back.
Catherine decided to go as soon as possible the following day.
She went quietly to bed, but found it impossible to sleep. She was
strangely exhilarated. She felt like a public-school boy on the eve of
the breaking-up morning. New emotions were in store for her, and
she, the epicure, delighted in new and subtle emotions. Yet even
with her exhilaration there was a feeling of doubt, of misgiving, of
uneasiness as to the nature of her own soul. Was she really
heartless? How was it she had never grieved at her mother’s death?
Try as she would, she could not detect in her feelings for her father
anything much more than excitement, curiosity, amazement, even in
a kind of way admiration, at what he had done. She felt he had done
something infinitely bigger than himself. For the first time in her life
she felt towards him impersonally, as she might have done towards
any stranger: “I should like to have known that man.”
The exact significance of her attitude towards George Trant came
upon her. She was playing with him. She knew that. It was not so
much in revenge for what had happened long before; it was from
sheer uncontrollable ecstasy at wielding a new and
incomprehensible power. She would have played ruthlessly with any
man who had been so weak and misguided as to fall in love with her.
She knew that perfectly well. Therefore it was a good thing the man
was George Trant, for at least in his case she might conceivably
justify herself. And yet she knew that justifying herself had really
nothing at all to do with the matter; she knew that there was in her
some mysterious impulse that prompted her to do and to say things
quite apart from any considerations of justice or justification. Cruel?
Yes, possibly.
She pondered.
No. She was not cruel. If she heard a cat mewing in the street
she would scarcely ever pass it by. A child crying filled her with
vague depression. She was not cruel. But she was immensely,
voraciously curious, a frantic explorer of her own and other people’s
emotions, a ruthless exploiter of dramatic possibilities. She had not
developed these traits by reading novels or seeing plays or any such
exterior means. They were inherent in herself.
Suddenly she remembered the note that had been given her that
evening. By the light of a candle she sat up in bed and tore open the
thin, purple-lined envelope.
 She read:
dear madam,
Will you come and see me to-morrow (Sunday) at three p.m.,
“Claremont,” the Ridgeway, Upton Rising?—Yrs., etc.,
emil razounov.
Razounov!
She actually laughed, a little silver ripple which she immediately
stifled on reflecting that Mrs. Carbass slept in the room below.
Razounov!
Truly she was developing into a very marvellous and remarkable
personage! ...

§3
The door of No. 24, Kitchener Road was opened by Mrs. Jopson.
“Do come in,” she began effusively. “I’ve jest bin clearin’ up a
bit....” Then she added mysteriously: “Of course, they’ve took ’im
away....”
Nothing had seemingly changed in the interior aspect of the
house. Her father’s overcoat and bowler hat hung sedately as ever
upon the bamboo hall-stand. The Collard and Collard piano
presented its usual yellow grin as she looked in through the parlour
door. Catherine could not explain this yellow grin: there had been
something in the instrument’s fretwork front with the faded yellow silk
behind that had always suggested to her a demoniac leer. Now it
seemed to be leering worse than ever.... The morning sunlight struck
in through the drawn Venetian blinds and threw oblique shadows
over the grin. Every article in that room Catherine knew almost
personally. Even the unhorticultural flowers on the carpet were
something more to her than a mere pattern: they were geographical,
they held memories, they marked the topography of her earliest
days. And the mantelpiece was full of memories of seaside holidays.
A present from Southend, from Margate, from Felixstowe, a
photograph of Blackpool Tower framed in red plush, an ash-tray with
the Folkestone coat-of-arms upon it....
Mrs. Jopson related the story of the tragedy in careful detail. She
revelled in it as a boy may revel in a blood-and-thunder story. She
emphasized the mystery that surrounded the motives of the tragedy.
He had been getting livelier again. Everybody was noticing that. He
had been seen smoking his pipe in the Forest on a Sunday morning
with the complacency of one to whom life is an everlasting richness.
He had started taking out library books from the Carnegie library. He
had even had friends in his house—presumably colleagues from the
Downsland Road Council School. And he had bought a
gramophone. That was the strangest thing of all, perhaps. What on
earth did he want with a gramophone? At one time the gramophone
had been his pet aversion. All music bored him, but the sound of a
gramophone used to call forth diatribes against the degeneracy of
the modern world.... And yet it was there, in the tiny front parlour,
with its absurdly painted tin horn sticking up in the air and a record
lying flat on the circular platform. The record was one of a recent and
not particularly brilliant ragtime. Catherine, accustomed
professionally to such things, knew it well. And Mrs. Jopson said
they had heard that ragtime night after night since he had bought the
gramophone. Sometimes it was played over and over again. Really,
Mr. Jopson had thought of complaining, only he did not wish to
interfere with Mr. Weston’s efforts to liven himself up....
When Mrs. Jopson departed and left Catherine alone in the
familiar house, the atmosphere changed. The very furniture seemed
charged with secrets—secrets concerning the manner in which Mr.
Weston had spent his evenings. Whether he had gone out much, or
read books or merely moped about. Only the gramophone seemed
anxious to betray its information, and the tin horn, cocked up at an
absurdly self-confident angle, had the appearance of declaring:
“Judge from me what sort of a man he was. I was nearly the last
thing he troubled about. I am the answer to one at least of his
cravings.” From the gramophone Catherine turned to the writing-
desk. That at any rate guarded what it knew with some show of
modesty. It was full of papers belonging to Mr. Weston, but they all
seemed to emphasize the perfect normality of his life. Algebra
papers marked and unmarked, catalogues of educational book
publishers, odd cuttings from newspapers, notes from parents asking
that children should be allowed to go home early, printed lists of
scholarship candidates, and so forth. Everything to show that Mr.
Weston had gone on living pretty much as he had been accustomed.
Everything to make it more mysterious than ever why he should
suddenly cut his throat while shaving. Catherine was puzzled. She
had been constructing a grand tragedy round this pitifully
insignificant man; under the stimulating influence of her own
imagination she had already begun to sympathize; doubtless if her
imagination had discovered anything substantial to feed on she
might have ended by passionate affection for her own dead father.
Several times recently she had been on the verge of tears, not for
him personally, but out of vague sympathy with the victim of a
poignant tragedy. For to her it did indeed seem a poignant tragedy
that a man so weak, so fatuous as he was should be left entirely
alone at a time when he most needed the companionship of
someone stronger. She did not in the least regret leaving him. That
was inevitable. He wanted to boss the show. He was so pitifully
weak, so conscious of weakness that he manufactured a crisis rather
than yield on what he regarded as a crucial point. Afterwards, no
doubt, he had regretted his hastiness. Yet that strange interview on
the train to Liverpool Street seemed incapable of being fitted in....
Catherine had often thought of him sorrowing, regretting, mourning.
She had regarded his suicide as a tragic confirmation of his misery.
And now the interior of his writing-desk seemed to say: “Oh, he was
much the same—you’d scarcely have noticed any difference in him.”
And the gramophone chuckled and declared: “As a matter of fact the
old chap was beginning to have rather a good time....”
In a drawer beneath the desk she discovered his pocket diaries.
Every night before retiring it had been his custom to fill a space an
inch deep and two inches across with a closely written pencilled
commentary on the day’s events. For ten, twelve, fifteen—perhaps
twenty years he had done this. Catherine turned over the pages of
one of them at random. They contained such items as: “Sweet peas
coming up well. Shall buy some more wire-netting for them....
Clotters away at a funeral. Did his registers for him.... Gave paper on
‘Tennyson’ to Mutual Impr. Soc. Have been asked to speak at Annual
Temperance Social....” Nearly all the entries were domestic, or
connected with Mr. Weston’s labours in the school, the chapel or the
garden. Catherine searched anxiously for any mention of herself.
There were not many. Sometimes a chance remark such as: “C.
came with me to chapel ...” or “C. out to tea.” And once the strange
entry: “C. been misbehaving. But I think L. knows the right way to
manage her.” (L. was, of course, Laura, his wife.) ...
Catherine looked up the entry for November 17th, the day on
which she had left Kitchener Road. It ran: “Clotters away again this
morning. Had to take IVa in mensuration. Feel very tired. Cold wind.
Did not go to night-school.”
That was all! No mention of her!
And on the day he met her in the train to Liverpool Street he
wrote: “Warm spring sort of day. Went to Ealing to see Rogers.
Rogers got a job under the L.C.C. Two boys and a girl. Mrs. R. rather
theatrical....” And in the corner, all cramped up, as if he had stuck it
in as a doubtful after-thought: “Met C. in train to L’pool St. Seems
well enough.”
Grudging, diffident, self-reproachful, sardonic, that remark
—“Seems well enough.” With the emphasis no doubt on the
“seems.”
Lately the entries had been getting more sprightly.
“Met Miss Picksley to-day. Promised her a paper on W.
Shakespeare for the Mut. Impr. Soc....” “Walked to High Wood after
chapel. Beautiful moonlight. Saw motor-bus collision in B. High St.
coming back....” “Bought gramophone sec. hand off Clayton. £2 10.
Like a bit of music. No piano now, of course....”
“Of course.”
Catherine was immensely puzzled by that entry. She realized its
pathos, its tragic reticence, its wealth of innuendo, yet she could not
conceive his feelings when setting it down. For he had never taken
any pleasure in her “strumming,” as he called it. He had accused her
of interrupting his work. He had said: “Not quite so much noise,
please. Shut both doors....” And sometimes he had hinted darkly: “I
don’t know whether it’s you or the piano, but——” And yet he had
missed those piano noises. Vaguely, perhaps almost unconsciously,
yet sufficiently to make him conquer a carefully nurtured hatred of
the gramophone. The gramophone, viewed in the light of this new
discovery, was the tangible, incontrovertible evidence of his sense of
loss. He had missed her. He had been lonely. He had wanted her to
come back. And because of that he had bought a gramophone.
Catherine felt the presence of tragedy. Yet the ingredients were
all wrong. Gramophone buying, even in the most extravagant
circumstances, does not lend itself to sophistication. And yet, that
gramophone—absurd, insignificant, farcical though its presence was
—was the evidence of tragedy. Once more Catherine’s melodramatic
ideals crumbled. Her artistic sense was hurt by the deep significance
of that gramophone. She felt a gramophone had no right to be the
only clue she had to the tragedy of her own father. She felt
humiliated. And then for a swift moment a passion swept over her.
The false ideals collapsed into ruins, the sham sentiment, no less a
sham because it was not the sham sentiment of other people, the
morbid seeking after emotional effect, the glittering pursuit of
dramatic situations, tumbled into dust and were no longer worth
while. Nothing was left in her save a sympathy that was different
from anything she had previously called sympathy, something that
overwhelmed her like a flood. It was a pleasurable sensation, this
sympathy, and afterwards she tried to analyse the sweet agony it
had wrought in her. But at the time she did not realize either its
pleasure or its pain, and that is the truest testimony that it was
something more real and sincere than she had felt before. Tears
welled up in her eyes—tears that she did not strive either to summon
or to repress, tears that were the natural, spontaneous outpouring of
something in her that she knew nothing about. She did not think in
her egoistical, self-analysing way: “What a strange emotion I am
experiencing!” She thought kaleidoscopically of her childhood and
girlhood, and of one particular evening when her father had crept
into her room at night and asked her to kiss him. It was terrible to
remember that she had replied: “Oh, go away! ...” Terrible! All her life
it seemed to her that her attitude towards him had been—“Oh, go
away! ...” And now he had gone away out of her reach for ever. She
sat down in front of the writing-desk with the diary in front of her and
cried. She cried passionately, as a child who is crying because by his
own irrevocable act something has been denied him. She bowed her
head in her hands and gave herself up to an orgy of remorse. She
was truly heartbroken.
For a little while.
The transience of her brokenheartedness may be gauged by the
fact that on her way home she was strangely elated by a single
thought. That thought—occurring to her some half-way down the
Ridgeway—was begotten of her old ruthless habit of self-analysis.
“I’m not heartless,” she told herself. “I can’t be. Nobody could have
acted as I did who hadn’t got a heart. I believe I’ve got as much heart
as anybody, really....”
She was rather proud of the tears she had shed.... Delicious to
have such proof that she was a human being! Reassuring to find in
herself the essential humanities she had at times doubted.
Comforting to think that tragedy could move her to sympathy that
was more than merely æsthetic.... Splendid to know that deep down
in her somewhere there was a fount of feeling which she could not
turn off and on at will like a water-main....
 CHAPTER IX
NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH
§1
“CLAREMONT,” the Ridgeway, was a corner detached house well
set back from the road. A high evergreen hedge impeded the view
from the footpath, and a curving carriage drive overhung with
rhododendron bushes hid all suggestion of a house until the last
possible moment. Then all that you saw was a tiny porch and a
panorama of low-hanging eaves, diamond window-panes and
russet-brown roofs of immense steepness. A telephone bracket
affixed to one of the rafters and an electric bell in the porch
convinced you that all this parade of antiquarianism was really the
most aggressive modernity. A motor-garage, suitably disguised,
stood at one side of the house. Behind was a vista of tennis-courts,
conservatories, and an Italian pergola.
Beneath the tiny porch in the middle of a hot Sunday afternoon
Catherine paused and pressed the button of the bell. She was
excited. Her visit savoured of the miraculous. This was the house of
the famous Emil Razounov The famous Emil Razounov had
arranged this appointment to meet her. She was actually ringing the
bell of Emil Razounov’s house. In another minute she and Emil
Razounov would be face to face.
A maid opened the door. “What name, please?” she asked pertly,
and Catherine replied.
Catherine passed into a wide hall, furnished with all sorts of
queer furniture that she contrasted mentally with the bamboo hall-
stand and the circular barometer that had graced the hall of No. 24,
Kitchener Road. At one side a door was half open, and through this
Catherine was ushered into what was apparently the front room of
the house.
It was a long, low-roofed apartment, with dark panelling along the
walls and rafters across the ceiling. The furniture was sparse, but
bore signs of opulence: there were several huge leather armchairs
and a couple of settees. Apart from these there was nothing in the
room save a small table littered with music in manuscript, and a full-
size grand piano. At first Catherine thought the room was
unoccupied, but two winding coils of smoke rising upwards from two
of the armchairs—the backs of which were towards her—seemed to
proclaim the presence of men.
“Miss Weston,” announced the maid, and closed the door behind
her.
One of the coils of smoke gyrated from the perpendicular. This
was the preliminary to a slow creaking of one of the armchairs. A
figure rose from the depths, and its back view was the first that
Catherine saw of it. It was tall, attired in a light tweed jacket, grey
flannel trousers, and carpet slippers of a self-congratulatory hue.
Altogether, it was most disreputable for a Sabbath afternoon. It was
difficult to recognize in this the spruce, well-groomed man of the
world who had pushed his way into the Forest Hotel on the previous
night. Yet Catherine did recognize him, and was rather astonished at
her own perception in so doing. He faced her with the graceless
langour of one who has just got out of bed at an early hour. Yet in his
extreme ungainliness perhaps there was a certain charm. And as for
his face—Catherine decided that it was not only lacking in positive
good looks, but was also well endowed with extremely negative
characteristics. To begin with, the lie of his features was not
symmetrical. His hair was black and wiry, lustreless and devoid of
interest. The whole plan and elevation of his face was so
unconventional that he would probably have passed for being
intellectual....
He bowed to her slightly. There was no doubt of his ability to bow.
Whether he were ungainly or not, his bowing was so elegant as to
savour of the professional. It was consciously a performance of
exquisite artistry, as if he were thinking: “I know I’m ugly, but I’ve
mastered the art of bowing, anyway. Put me in evening clothes, and
I’ll pass for an ambassador or a head-waiter.”
He did not offer his hand.
“Ah,” he said, “M’sieur Razounov will be ready in a moment.
Please take a seat.”
Catherine sat down in one of the easy chairs. From this position
she could see that another chair contained the recumbent form of
Emil Razounov. He was reading a Sunday paper and taking
occasional puffs at a large cigar. Catherine had heard much gossip
about Razounov’s eccentricities, yet compared with his companion
he seemed to her to be disappointingly ordinary. For several
moments the two men sat in silence, while Catherine made ruthless
mental criticisms. She was piqued at the lack of enthusiasm
accorded her.
Suddenly Emil Razounov spoke. The voice came from the depths
of the chair like a female voice out of a gramophone horn. It was
almost uncanny.
“I say, Verreker, hass not the young lady come?”
The man addressed as Verreker replied somewhat curtly: “Oh
yes, she’s here.”
“Zhen perhaps she weel go to the piano and play.”
Catherine left her chair and went to the instrument. Before sitting
down she took off her hat—which was a species of tam-o’-shanter—
and placed it on the table beside the piano. She did this from two
reasons: first, she did not feel comfortable with it on; and second,
she was proud of her hair, and conscious that it was the most
impressive thing about her.
“What shall I play?” she asked nonchalantly. She could not help
betraying her annoyance at her unceremonious reception.
There was a pause. It seemed almost as if both men were struck
dumb with astonishment at her amazing question. Then Verreker
said carelessly, as if it were a matter of no consequence at all: “Oh,
whatever you like.” She took several moments to adjust the music-
stool to her final satisfaction and prepare for playing. The time was
useful to decide what she should play. Strange that she should not
have decided before! She had decided before, as a matter of fact:
she had decided to play some Debussy. But since entering the room
she had changed her mind. She would play Chopin.
She played “Poland is Lost.” She played it well, because she was
feeling defiant. She played with the same complete disrespect for
her audience as had won her the first prize at the musical eisteddfod.
Where she wanted to bang, she banged. She did not care that she
was in a low-roofed dining-room and not a concert hall. She did not
care if she pleased or displeased them. They were contemptuous of
her: she would be contemptuous of them. The result was that she
was not in the least nervous. Yet when she had struck the last note
she could not help remarking to herself: “I did play that well. They
must have been rather impressed.”
An awkward pause ensued. Then Verreker said very weakly:
“Thank you.” His “thank you” was almost ruder than if he had said
nothing at all.
“Well?” said Razounov.
Catherine thought he was speaking to her. She was meditating
something in reply when Verreker spoke, showing that the word had
been addressed to him. A feeling of exquisite relief that she had not
spoken came over her.
“She oughtn’t to play Chopin,” remarked Verreker.
“No,” agreed Razounov.
Catherine’s face reddened. It was the subtle innuendo of their
remarks that hurt her. Also, by all the standards she had learnt at the
Bockley High School for Girls there was something impolite in their
criticizing her coolly in the third person as if she were not present.
She resented it. She was not a stickler for etiquette, but she would
not be insulted. “I don’t care who they are,” she thought rebelliously,
“they’ve no right to treat me like that. I’m as good as they are, every
bit!”