Open June 17A 2011 Draft--Final
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of Education FY 2010: THE RESPONSE OF THE IN-HOUSE LOBBYISTS AT THE STATE- RELATED RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES OF PENNSYLVANIA TO AN ECONOMIC CRISIS A Dissertation in Higher Education by Tyrone H. Glade © 2011 Tyrone H. Glade Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education August 2011 The dissertation of Tyrone H. Glade was reviewed and approved* by the following: Dorothy Evensen Professor of Education Professor-in-Charge of the Higher Education Program Dissertation Adviser Chair of Committee Robert Hendrickson Professor of Education Nona Prestine Professor of Education Jacqueline Edmondson Associate Dean for Undergraduate and Graduate Studies, College of Education *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. ii ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to understand: 1) how the in-house lobbyists of Pennsylvania‘s state-related public research universities dealt with an economic crisis as it affected the FY 2009-2010 appropriation process; and 2) how the in-house lobbyists at the state- related public research universities of Pennsylvania defined successful lobbying during an economic crisis? The state-related public research universities of Pennsylvania include: Penn State University, Temple University, and the University of Pittsburgh. The political perspective as described by Pfeffer (1981; 1992), Bolman and Deal (2008), Oliver (1991), and others served as the conceptual framework for this study. The political perspective views conflict between individuals and/or organizations as normal because of heterogeneous goals and scarce resources. Power becomes an important asset in determining what goals are pursued and allocation of resources. Resolution of conflict in not emphasized in the political perspective whereas the use of tactics and strategies to increase power are. To answer the questions, a qualitative case study was used. A document analysis was used to describe the economic crisis as it affected Pennsylvania, the FY 2009-2010 appropriation process, and the state-related public research universities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the in-house lobbyists at the state-related public research universities of Pennsylvania to gain their perspectives on the economic crisis and defining success. Analysis of the data revealed that the in-house lobbyist used a number of tactics and strategies to influence legislators during the contentious FY 2009-2010 appropriation process. They used rational arguments in value creation or value claiming terms; and given the economic realities being faced in the Commonwealth and the antagonistic proposals of the governor, many iii of the arguments were value claiming in nature. The importance of allies and friends at the statehouse, at the institution, and outside of the institution became apparent. The in-house lobbyists defined the FY 2009-2010 budgetary process as successful given the context of the economic crisis. Many of the successes achieved during the appropriation process were defensive in nature. Underlying successful lobbying was the importance of building relationships with legislators and other government officials. iv Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ xi CHAPTER I: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1 Appropriations for Higher Education in the United States ...........................................................6 Higher Education Lobbying ..........................................................................................................8 Research Questions and Methodological Considerations ...........................................................11 Conceptual Framework ...............................................................................................................13 Significance of Study ..................................................................................................................14 CHAPTER II: Review of Literature and Conceptual Framework .................................................16 What is Lobbying? .....................................................................................................................16 What is a Lobbyist? ....................................................................................................................17 A Brief History of Lobbying in the United States .....................................................................18 Lobbying Success in the Legislative Branch .............................................................................20 Lobbying Success in the Legislative Branch at the State Level ........................................24 Research on the Lobbyists Themselves .....................................................................................24 What Lobbyists Do—The Nature of Their Work ..............................................................25 What Lobbyists Do—Tactics They Use ............................................................................27 What Lobbyists Do—Explaining Their Actions to the Organizations They Serve ..........27 Research on Higher Education Lobbying and Lobbyists ...........................................................28 Higher Education Lobbying and State Appropriations ......................................................29 Dissertations that Examine Higher Education Lobbying...................................................29 Research on Higher Education Lobbyists ..........................................................................30 Tactics Used by Higher Education Lobbyists ...................................................................30 The State Environment and its Effect on State Higher Education Appropriations ....................31 Effect of Economic and Demographic Variables on State Appropriations .......................32 Effect of Political Variables on State Appropriations........................................................33 Summary of Research ................................................................................................................34 Conceptual Framework ..............................................................................................................35 Sources of Power: Strategies and Tactics to Gain or Increase Power ...............................40 Sources of Power ...................................................................................................41 Strategies and Tactics ............................................................................................45 Summary of Conceptual Framework ..........................................................................................47 CHAPTER III: Method ..................................................................................................................49 Case Study Method .....................................................................................................................49 Participant Selection ...................................................................................................................51 Data Collection ...........................................................................................................................52 Data Analysis ..............................................................................................................................56 Data Verification ................................................................................................................57 Role and Placement of the Researcher........................................................................................58 v Researcher Bias ..................................................................................................................59 Summary .....................................................................................................................................59 CHAPTER IV: The Context ..........................................................................................................61 Creating a State Budget in Pennsylvania ....................................................................................61 Passing a Bill in Pennsylvania ....................................................................................................66 Historical Financial Relationship between Pennsylvania and the State-Related Universities ...69 Appropriations for the State-Related Universities Today ...........................................................75 Higher Education in Pennsylvania Today...................................................................................76 The State-Related Universities ..........................................................................................79 Competition for State Dollars and Students Among Public Institutions ...........................82 The Financial Crisis in Pennsylvania and its Effect on FY 2010 ...............................................85 The Passage of the FY 2009 Budget .................................................................................85