Miller, Hugh T.

For more than two decades Congress has failed to pass the DREAM Act, a legislation intended to secure a pathway to legal status for undocumented youth brought to the United States as children. Within the broader U.S. immigration domain, the case of the DREAMers (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) is particularly apt for exploring the dynamics of the policymaking process. Bringing together the theoretical framework of the Multiple Streams (MSF) and the methodology of the Narrative Policy Analysis (NPA) this research illuminates how narrative construction affects policy action. This dissertation integrates the two frameworks through collection and analysis of opposing policy narratives of legislators and other stakeholders involved in immigration policy debates over a twelve-year period.
To advance this research objective, this study sought to understand how problem framing affects policy making, how competing policy coalitions construct policy narratives regarding immigration, and how immigration policy narratives affect the enactment of legislation. In addition, extending the critical examination of the narratives of opposing coalitions illuminates how political and professional elites use language to reinforce existing power structures and advance divergent views of immigration.

This dissertation examines the varied ways that government action is portrayed through different newspapers across the political spectrum. Most of the existing literature about the relationship between media and government is focused on media power, fictional portrayals of government, or on specific issues or topics. While more recent studies have examined the idea that presentations of government may be vastly different from one news outlet to the next, no one has examined different portrayals of government action. Furthermore, there seems to be a belief that political bias affects how news is presented, but very little study of why or how that came to be. This dissertation fills that gap by analyzing how different newspapers portray government action (specifically EPA regulations). The findings help determine how each news outlet manipulates the stories they present and why news media behaves this way.
A Burkean Cluster Analysis was conducted on articles from three newspapers, one from the left of the political spectrum, one from the center, and one from the right, as well as on press releases from the Environmental Protection Agency. News articles about EPA regulations were read and indexed. Indexing an article allows the researcher to find relationships between EPA regulations and commonly occurring themes across a newspaper’s coverage, as well as the structures that bind those relationships together. These themes and structures act as the data for the rest of the study. An analysis of the themes and structures was conducted to find each news outlet’s most featured ratios. These were then generalized to determine a news outlet’s motive or motives, the rationale for why they choose to frame news stories about government action in specific ways.

The dissertation is about the significance for, and impact upon public administration of the correspondence theory of truth or veridicality, and its underlying epistemological assumptions. The underlying thesis is that, unduly influenced by the success of the natural sciences, and naive in accepting their claims to objectivity, many disciplines have sought to emulate them. There are two principle objections. Firstly, all other considerations aside, the supposedly objectivistic methodologies apparently applied to the explanation and prediction of the behavior of interactions of physical objects, may simply be inappropriate to certain other areas of inquiry; and more specifically objectivist methodologies are indeed inappropriate to understanding of human subjects, and their behavior, relations and interactions, and thus to public administration. The second objection is that it is of course logically impossible for any supposedly empirical discipline, as the natural sciences claim to be, to justify the belief in a supposedly objective realm of things-in-themselves existing outside, beyond, or independently of the changing, interrupted and different 'appearances' or experiences, to which an empirical science is qua empirical, necessarily restricted. Correspondence of any empirical observations or appearances (and the consequent or presupposed theoretical explanations) to an objective realm, upon which the claim to objectivity is based, is unverifiable. In light of the above it becomes evident that far from being objective, the natural sciences themselves, and the empirical observations upon which they are supposedly grounded, are subject to conceptual mediation and subjective interpretation; subjective and inter-subjective coherence replacing objective correspondence as the criterion of veridicality. Consequently it becomes clear that the presuppositions and prejudices of the observers enter, in the forms of concepts and preconceptions, into the very observations, and even more so into the theoretical constructions, or theories, of the natural, and indeed human and social sciences, and their claims to be authoritative and true. Subsequent discussion is then focused on both the coherence of individuals' experiences and understanding, and their inter-subjective coherence - which both rises from and constitutes, a "community". The role of language facilitates such coherence.

This dissertation suggests that network governance theory may have reached an impasse, and in order to pursue its advance, new methods need to be used. It tests the viability of actor-network theory on providing new insights on network governance, which could contribute to the strengthening of network governance theory. The author suggests that actor-network theory may offer both an epistemology and ontology that intents to not impose current definitions and divisions of traditional social science. By doing so, actor-network theory focuses on the performance of associations rather than on the traditional categories of structures, institutions, individuals or groups -- characteristic of most network governance studies.

This dissertation examines environmental policymaking as more of a symboldriven ideological contest over meaning than a rationally discursive democratic process through two interpretive modes of research: historical narrative analysis and text analytic frame mapping. Both are applied to the case example of the city of San Diego’s controversial policy innovation of indirect potable reuse via reservoir augmentation, or “toilet-to-tap,” as it became known through local news media. The dissertation develops its theoretical foundation from the literature pertaining to political communication in public policy, including the role of signs and symbols, media theory, frames and framing, and agenda setting. Electronic documents are used as data.

This study explores the connections of public procurement official
perceptions of public-private partnerships and their contracting decisions for
public infrastructure projects. Detailed discussion of previous scholarship and its
focus on policymaking and project evaluation of public-private partnerships
leaves a gap in the public policy process – implementation. Procurement officials
are presented in the role of policy implementers rather than agents in a principalagent
approach. This attempts to address a shortcoming of the description that
these officials do nothing more than purchase. Arguments are put forth that these
officials are given additional levels of discretion when faced with contracting
decisions. Specifically, procurement officials observe that public-private
partnerships provide sets of project consequences. A survey instrument is designed to explore the differences in perceptions
that procurement officials have with respect to public-private partnerships and
traditional contracting out. Survey failures result in findings only being able to
attempt a more general view of public-private partnerships. Results allow
perceptions to be placed in a decision-making model based on a project phase
approach that develops on the assumption that tasks contracted to private
vendors produce project consequences. Furthermore, analysis of significant
consequence perceptions indicate that those perceptions do not provide a
rationale for a procurement official’s decision-making on whether to contract
using a public-private partnership for public infrastructure projects. Independent
sample t-tests, controlled correlations, multiple ANOVA and linear regression
analyses show that perceptions of consequences, the perceptions of differences
of those consequences across project phases, relationships of consequences to
perceptions of efficiency and effectiveness proxies and a bounded rationalitybased
model of decision-making for procurement officials are all inconclusive.
Discussion focuses on the development of consequences and phases as
defining and clarifying public-private partnerships. Further discussions are
presented for procurement officials with respect to their decision-making and
possible role as policy implementers. Conclusions fail to uncover any inferential
results. The research finds its primary contribution in the conceptual discourse of
public procurement official roles and public-private partnership definitions.

Narratives are a very important part of public policy negotiations and
deliberations. Public policy research has shown that policy narratives are manipulated to
fit the motives of the creators and enforcers of that narrative (Stone, 2002). The creators
and enforcers of these narratives use symbols, language, and other techniques to ensure
that the narrative survives and dominates the political and social environment by
becoming the favored policy prescription (Stone, 2002; Miller, 2012; Jones & McBeth,
2010; Schneider & Ingram, 1993). This study employs a qualitative content analysis to trace the genealogy of the following narratives that make up the “Stand Your Ground” discourse from 2005-2013: (1) Prosecutorial Discretion Narrative, (2) Vigilante Justice Narrative, (3) Race Narrative, and (4) Law-abiding Citizen Narrative. The “Stand Your Ground” discourse is used to test what this dissertation terms the “institutionalized policy narrative” thesis which
states, Policymakers and policy advocates use policy narratives which consist of powerful
symbols, politically motivated language, and ideographs to both shape and respond to
public opinions by appealing to both the heart and intellect of the public. Once a
winning narrative becomes institutionalized it is nearly impossible to replace that
winning narrative even in the wake of a powerful new emerging narrative.

This dissertation evaluates the veracity of Richard Scott’s three pillars of
institutionalization: regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive. The test of his theory is
whether the processes and practices within the environments of the three pillars can
account for differences between academic performance and athletic performance in
Miami-Dade County, Florida public schools. Scott’s model of institutionalization works
better in predicting academic success than it does athletic success in the context of this
study as evidenced by the majority of the findings coming from the scholastic realm.
The primary methodological approach was to obtain publicly available measures
of academic performance and resources for 31 high schools in Miami-Dade County, FL,
and then evaluate relationships between these academic indicators and measures of 􀀃
􀀃school athletic performance. Pearson (parametric) and Spearman (non-parametric)
correlation coefficients were calculated to estimate the strength of association between
school characteristics and measures of academic and athletic performance. These
analyses further informed the construction of stepwise multiple linear regression models
that regressed the dependent variable (a measure of academic or athletic performance)
with a range of possible independent variables all related to individual school
characteristics.
Improvement in the academic categories included in this dissertation (math,
science, reading, and writing) has been the goal of a great deal of legislation that deals
with education at the federal, state, and local level. The top indicator of a school’s
academic performance was the number of highly qualified teachers within a school.
Cultural-cognitive pillar indicators of socioeconomic status, including minority rate and
percentage of students in a school who are eligible for free lunch, were negatively
associated with academic performance. Thus, normative and cultural-cognitive processes
can have a significant impact on whether laws and legislation have their intended effect.
In the end, it is reasonable to conclude that all three pillars complement each other in
interdependent ways within Scott’s institutional framework with different pillars taking
prominence as time and circumstances change.

This dissertation investigates the potential for discourse between citizens and front-line administrators---those who directly deal with citizens. It focuses on the ability and willingness of public servants to be responsive to citizens with whom they interact. There are two methods of investigation used in this dissertation: theoretical and quantitative. Citizen ability and willingness to participate in this discourse is examined using existing theory. Administrator willingness and ability is examined using theoretical and quantitative methods. The purpose of this dissertation is two-fold. First, it identifies a point of access to administration at which the public is willing and able to participate. In doing so, it attempts to find a point of access and a form of participation that would give able and willing citizens some power in the process. This dissertation examines the concept of citizen "talk back" to administrators at the service delivery stage in public bureaucracies. Second, it examines theoretical assumptions about administrator willingness and ability to act on citizen feedback. According to critiques of technical rational organizations, administrators might be neither willing nor able to process and act upon citizen feedback. First, the dissertation explores the questions of why citizens participate, which citizens participate, how citizens participate, and different manifestations of citizen participation in the field of public administration. Meaningful participation empowers citizens at the same time that it provides information about citizen preferences. Willingness and ability of citizens to participate in the policy and administrative process is essential for meaningful citizen participation. To examine these assumptions, the dissertation presents the results of an analysis of brief interviews with ten citizens. Second, the dissertation explores theoretical arguments about organizational rationality and the effect of the "bureaucratic experience," resulting from administrator-bureaucracy interaction, on administrator willingness to be responsive to citizens. A structural equation model is used to test these theoretical arguments. Data from 147 administrators are collected using a survey instrument of 38 questions. The research results show that the structure of technical rational organizations constrains the ability of administrators to be responsive to citizens. The research also examines the effect of structural enablers, or ability of administrators to respond to citizen talk back, on personal enablers, or the willingness of administrators to respond to citizen talk back.

Modern societies are increasingly becoming more culturally diverse. In theories of multiculturalism and governance two approaches to government involvement in managing the dynamics of multicultural interactions prevail, majoritarian and consociational models of democracy. The discursive model of democracy is offered in this study as an alternative model that allows for citizen engagement in public deliberations of conflicting issues. I argue that government has an active role in facilitating multicultural discourses in communities. In facilitation of multicultural discourses I consider public recognition of cultural differences as one important element for citizen inclusion in public deliberations. The practices of three county governments in South Florida in facilitation of multicultural discourse are investigated and comparatively examined. The individual cases are investigated and compared on nine dimensions of multicultural discourse, into three broader categories: forms of discourses, components of discourses, and implications of discourses. The comparative examination shows that government facilitation of multicultural discourse assists in resolution of multicultural conflicts in communities and in building awareness and tolerance of cultural specificities of others. It also provides for larger inclusion of socially marginalized cultural groups in policy processes. The extent of the involvement of county governments in South Florida in facilitation of multicultural discourses is often influenced by and contingent on the commitment and receptivity of legislators.