University of Nebraska at Omaha DigitalCommons@UNO Barbara A. Holland Collection for Service Learning Dissertation and Thesis and Community Engagement (SLCE) 1995 A Policy Study of Youth Service: Synthesizing Analysis of Policy Content and Policy Process Over Time Jean Shumway Warner University of Oklahoma Norman Campus Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/slcedt Part of the Service Learning Commons Recommended Citation Warner, Jean Shumway, "A Policy Study of Youth Service: Synthesizing Analysis of Policy Content and Policy Process Over Time" (1995). Dissertation and Thesis. 3. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/slcedt/3 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Barbara A. Holland Collection for Service Learning and Community Engagement (SLCE) at DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertation and Thesis by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. J .I UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA I GRADUATE COLLEGE I I A POLICY STUDY OF YOUTH SERVICE: SYNTHESIZING ANALYSIS OF I POLICY CONTENT AND I POLICY PROCESS OVER TIME I I I A DISSERTATION I SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE I DEGREE OF I DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY I National Information Center for S rvice earning 1954 Bufor Av , Room R290 I St. Paul, 551 08-6197 1-aoo·-eoa-sERVE I By I JEAN SHUMWAY WARNER Norman, Oklahoma 1995 NSLC I c/o ETR Associates 4 Carbonero Way I Scotts Valley, CA 95066 I This is a doctoral dissertation submitted to I the Graduate College, University of Oklahoma. Spacing and pagination have been changed I to facilitate reproduction. I I I I I I I I I I I I I c Copyright by Jean Shumway Warner 1995 I All Rights Reserved. -I I I I I Acknowledgements I Many people contributed in numerous ways to the completion of this dissertation. Gary Copeland chaired my dissertation committee and provided I valuable direction and encouragement. The other members of my dissertation committee, Larry Hill, Allen Hertzke, David Ray, and economist Don Murry, I also provided helpful suggestions. David Wilsford and Don Kash offered constructive advice in the early stages of the study. Through her teaching, research, and numerous conversations over the years, Anne Schneider I contributed in countless way to this dissertation. The Political Science Department and the Carl Albert Congressional I Research and Studies Center at the University of Oklahoma provided me with financial support and a superb environment for scholarly pursuit. My special I thanks go to Ron Peters, Don Maletz, and LaDonna SWlivan. For my year on Capitol Hill, I am grateful to the American Political I Science Association's Congressional Fellowship Program. The hard work of Catherine Rudder and Kay Sterling was evident in the remarkable opportunities available to participants throughout the year. Both I Congresswoman Mary Rose Oakar and Senator Frank Lautenberg gave me full staff status while permitting time to pursue my dissertation research. I I must acknowledge the many individuals in Washington, D.C. and around the nation who generously consented to be interviewed for this I research. A small number of these people are quoted directly in this study; unattributed quotations are from those individuals who preferred to speak off the record. I thank all of those whom I interviewed for their time and I wisdom and insight. Special thanks are due to those who gave me complete I access to their youth service files including Donald J. Eberly, John Glenn, Bob Graham, Edward Kennedy 1 Barbara Kennelly, Will Marshall, Dave McCurdy, Barbara Mikulski, Claiborne Pell, and Peg Rosenberry. I Sarah Flanagan, Ron Grimes, Sam Halperin, Eric Jensen, Roger Landrum, Nick Littlefield, Chuck Ludlum, Catherine Milton, Don Mathis, D. I Gray Maxwell, Charles Moskos, Julie Abbott Murphy, Gretchen Pagel, Glenn Roberts, Rocky Rosacker, Shirley Sagawa, Alden Schacher 1 Gene Sofer, I Frank Slobig and Tom Wolanin provided me with particularly valuable iii I I Sofer 1 Frank Slobig and Tom Wolanin provided me with particularly valuable I information. Chris Murphy made it possible for me to attend Senator Kennedy's Senate receptions for members of the Points of Light Commission I and the Commission on National and Community Service. I especially thank the members of Congress who took time to talk to me; my interview with I Congressman Martinez was particularly memorable. Throughout my research 1 Don Eberly was a constant source of information I insight I and encouragement; this dissertation and the youth service movement are I greatly indebted to his vision and tenacity. I absolve all of these individuals of any direct responsibility for what appears in this study. All errors in fact I and interpretation are mine alone. Finally~ I owe my greatest debt of gratitude to three academic scholars I who have guided and counseled me over the years: my husband I economist Larkin Warner, whose unfailing confidence sustained me; my father 1 historian Floyd Shumway, whose prodigious example inspired me; and my I father-in-law, political scientist Earl E. Warner, whose unwavering faith motivated me and in whose memory this work is dedicated. I I I I I I I I I I iv I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS I Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . iii I LIST OF TABLES vii I ABSTRACT ix I CHAPTERS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 I 2. A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING POLICY DEVELOPMENT . 15 I 3. PROPOSALS FOR NATIONAL SERVICE WRIT LARGE ... 27 4. PROPOSALS MODELED ON THE CIVILIAN CONSERVATION I CORPS. 55 5. SERVICE-LEARNING PROPOSALS AND YOUTH SERVICE I AMERICA. 75 6. CIVICS, CITIZEN SOLDIERS, AND THE DEMOCRATIC I LEADERSHIP COUNCIL . 93 7. YOUTH SERVICE BILLS IN THE 101ST CONGRESS. 113 I 8. ENACTING YOUTH SERVICE LEGISLATION IN THE 101ST CONGRESS . 139 I 9. CONCLUSIONS .. 163 I APPENDIX . 175 I REFERENCES 177 I I I v I I I LIST OF TABLES 1. Select Youth Service Bills and Amendments I Introduced in the U.S. Congress, 1960-1990. 5-9 2. Participants, First National Service Conference, I May 7, 1966. ..•............ 34 3. Original Members, National Service Secretariat I Advisory Board . • . 35 4. Conservation and Service Corps Programs in the United States, Total Dollars and Number of I Enrollees, By Type of Program, 1986-1989 ..... 71 5. Conservation and Service Corps Programs in the United States, Number of Programs by Type of I Program, 1986-1989 ............... 72 6. Summary of Major Characteristics of Select I Full-Time National Service Writ Large Youth Service Bills in the lOlst Congress • . 128 7. Summary of Major Characteristics of Select I Part-Time National Service Writ Large Youth Service Bills in the lOlst Congress . • 130 I 8. Summary of Major Characteristics of Select CCC­ Type Youth Service Bills in the lOlst Congress 131 9. Summary of Major Characteristics of Select I Student Aid Related Youth Service Bills in the lOlst Congress . • • • . • • 133 I 10. Summary of Major Characteristics of Select School­ Based Youth Service Bills in the lOlst Congress •• 134 I 11. Chronology of Events Leading to Passage of PL 101-610 During the lOlst Congress . • • . 140 12. Members of the House Committee on Education I and Labor Who Chaired a Subcommittee and Also Introduced a Youth Service Bill I During the lOlst Congress . • . 147 13. Original Members, Commission on National and Community Service ...•..• 156 I 14. Youth Service Bills in the U.S. Congress . 164-165 I 15. The Continuum of Youth Service Opportunities. 167 16. Target Funding Levels for Select Youth I Service Bills in the lOlst Congress 171 vii I I I A POLICY STUDY OF YOUTH SERVICE: I SYNTHESIZING ANALYSIS OF POLICY CONTENT AND POLICY PROCESS OVER TIME I BY: JEAN SHUMWAY WARNER I MAJOR PROFESSOR: GARY COPELAND I I This dissertation uses a case study of youth service proposals to examine how policy is formulated. For this study, youth service refers to federal programs that provide America's youth with opportunities to I participate in domestic, non-military, full- or part-time community service activities. A theory is proposed that synthesizes two complementary I approaches to the study of policy - process analysis (Kingdon 1984, 1994) and the analysis of policy content (Schneider and Ingram 1990, 1993) --and I advocates analyzing policy over time. Four theoretical categories of data­ actors, ideas, opportunities, and strategies -- guide the study. I Three versions of youth service- national service writ large, team oriented programs modeled on the New Deal Civilian Conservation Corps, and school-based service-learning-- are identified. Analysis of policy I content underscores the importance of the social construction of target populations (Schneider and Ingram 1993) • The youth service policy I community's efforts to change the public perception of youth illustrate how policy entrepreneurs understand and use this policy tool. In the late 1980's, I when the target population, youth, was successfully portrayed as positive (i.e., deserving and potentially powerful) rather than as negative (i.e., deviant and/or politically weak) the U.S. Congress passed PL 101-610, the I 1 National and Community Service Act of 1990. I Youth service policy entrepreneurs are assertive and manipulative. They frame policies 1 use rationales to link their ideas to problems receiving Congressional attention 1 and create opportunities to advance their I proposals. For the youth service case study, Kingdon's description of policy I entrepreneurs as mostly reactive underestimates the role of these ix I I individuals. The theory advanced here reveals the process of public policy I formulation to be less random than research by Kingdon suggests. Patterns emerge when policy is studied over time. A review of youth I service bills in the U.S. Congress over thirty years identified only marginal change from one Congress to the next.