Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- List of Abbreviations -- Introduction: Disharmonious Allies -- Part One: ORIGINS -- 1. Defence Problems in the Pacific -- 2. Japan, ANZAM, and the Bomb -- 3. Movement Toward an Alliance -- 4. ANZUS Negotiations -- Part TWO: ANZUS IN FORCE -- 5. Post-Treaty Issues -- 6. Crisis in Southeast Asia -- 7. A Horrible Dilemma in the Taiwan Straits -- 8. Suez -- Conclusion -- Bibliography -- List of Illustrations -- Index -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack -- _GoBack.

This thesis examines the use of Facebook by police and the opportunities it affords for increasing public involvement in policing and enhancing public perceptions of police and police legitimacy. It draws on both qualitative and quantitative data to understand how and why police are using Facebook, to identify and explain the factors that shape police online communication practices, and to determine the impact of these practices on policing. A case study analysis of the NSW Police Force's Project Eyewatch program found that police generally did not engage with the public via Facebook beyond one-way communication and there was no correlation between the level of engagement by police on Facebook and public perceptions of police in terms of confidence, trust, legitimacy, and fear of crime. In drawing from the theoretical framing analytical approach of Orlikowski and Gash (1994) and in applying a framework that regards social media as a form of technology whose use is shaped by social, political, and organisational factors, this study identified incongruences between the community policing focussed aspirations that police managers had for Project Eyewatch and the actions of the police officers who had responsibility for the daily administration of the program and their organisation's more than 100 Facebook sites. It was observed that police exerted considerable control over the nature and extent of engagement taking place on police-administered Facebook sites, with police eschewing opportunities to capitalise on the technology's potential for transforming police-citizen engagement. Nevertheless, police did make limited use of Facebook in constructive ways that supported organisational and operational goals. This research reaffirms previous findings that technological change will not necessarily lead to changes in policing unless there is a fundamental transformation in policing approach and strategy. The research makes a unique contribution to the field by providing an empirically rich and theoretically informed ...

This article examines Australian responses to successive military coups in Fiji as well as the 2014 Fijian election. In each of Fiji's three military coups, Australia failed to strike an appropriate balance between simultaneously condemning these military takeovers and taking positive steps toward restoring Fiji to normal democratic processes. Accordingly, this article argues that Australia has habitually viewed Fiji's military coups through a broader strategic lens which has done little to encourage political change in Suva. Recent positive steps by the Abbott government to normalise relations and assist with Fiji's 2014 election inspired some degree of confi dence about the future of Fiji and its relationship with Australia. Nevertheless, for Australia to fi nd long-term stability in Fiji, the Abbott government must learn from past mistakes, tread cautiously, and encourage stronger dialogue between the two countries.

The ANZUS Alliance was a defence arrangement between Australia, New Zealand and the United States that shaped international policy in the aftermath of the Second World War and the early stages of the Cold War. Forged by influential individuals and impacting on global events including the Japanese Peace Treaty, the Korean War and the Suez Crisis, the ANZUS Alliance was a crucial factor in the seismic changes that took place in the second half of the twentieth century. In this compact and accessible study, Andrew Kelly lays out the tensions that underpinned the formation of the Alliance, as each power sought to extract maximum influence and prestige. He examines how the ANZUS powers worked together (or failed to do so) when responding to massive global events including the rise of the People's Republic of China and the waning of the British Empire. Kelly comprehensively explores the reasons why Australia and New Zealand disagreed so regularly about mutual security issues, how US global leadership shaped ANZUS, and the British impact on the trilateral relationship, and outlines how these issues set the foundations for today's world order.

AbstractIn 2019, nearly 70 percent of Medicaid beneficiaries received their health insurance coverage through a private, managed care organization (MCO). Twenty-five years earlier, 9.5 percent of Medicaid beneficiaries were enrolled in MCOs. This dramatic growth in Medicaid managed care enrollment represents the delegation of significant power by federal and state governments over a critical social program to private actors and market forces. Medicare, too, experienced a similar pattern of transformation. Together, Medicaid and Medicare, two critical pillars of American social policy, paid more than half a trillion dollars to private insurance companies in 2019 to provide public health insurance to 75 million people. This manuscript examines the policy consequences of building private firms directly into the structure of American social policies. In contrast to existing work on "submerged" or "delegated" policies, this manuscript highlights the structural power that such policies bestow on the government's private partners and develops a new theory of structural power in which firms are able to constrain health policy reform through their threats to disrupt the delivery of public policies and social benefits to millions of people across the United States.

Donald J. Trump's unexpected victory in the 2016 presidential election cast a long shadow over the American welfare state. With continued Republican control of the House and Senate, Trump's occupancy of the Oval Office removed a critical constraint on Republican efforts to dismantle key Democratic social policy achievements—both old and new. Despite the absence of these important institutional veto-points, the policies that were first identified and targeted by Republicans during the Trump era have proved to be more robust than many observers and policymakers initially believed. By applying the theoretical insights and methodological tools of American Political Development, this article explores how long-running policy processes have altered the political landscape in often underappreciated ways to narrow the prospects for large-scale policy reform. More specifically, this article examines the political dynamics of Medicare and the Affordable Care Act in the early days of the Trump administration. The pressures exerted on both programs by an unpredictable president and unified Republican control of Congress provides a unique opportunity to differentiate between and assess the prospects for policy sustainability and policy stability.

AbstractIn 2009, Medicare Advantage became a prime target in the Obama Administration's efforts to pay for the Affordable Care Act (ACA). After securing substantial cuts to a program the President described as a failure, the Obama administration was compelled to take unprecedented administrative steps to put billions of dollars back into Medicare Advantage. These developments demonstrate how Medicare Advantage's support constituency, which has come to include Democrats, Republicans, beneficiaries, and the managed care industry, has maintained more political influence in the aftermath of the ACA than some initially believed. The continued and growing influence of the Medicare Advantage constituency does not, however, mean that Medicare is primed for a more conservative turn toward vouchers or premium support. With the provision of generous benefits and increasing evidence that Medicare Advantage produces higher quality health outcomes than traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage appears to be secure in its current form.

When well directed, science is the greatest agency for the welfare of mankind. John Wesley Powell, the director of the United States Geological Survey (USGS), delivered this message to Congress in 1884. The purpose of Powell's testimony to Congress was not to argue for the erection of an organizational framework for American science, but to defend the one that had been put in place decades earlier. At the time of Powell's testimony, the United States had already begun to assume the mantle of the greatest scientific nation on the planet. "I have studied the question closely," declared W. H. Smyth, the president of the Royal Geographical Society of London, "and do not hesitate to pronounce the conviction that though the Americans were last in the field, they have, per saltum, leaped into the very front of the rank." The organizational structure at the heart of America's rapid scientific rise was initially constructed by scientists serving in the nineteenth-century American bureaucracy—by men like John W. Powell. Often seen as a source of stateincapacity, in this instance, the federal bureaucracy was the most important force in American scientific development.

For more than fifty years, political scientists have questioned whether citizens are sufficiently informed about politics to ensure representation and democratic accountability. On the one hand, surveys suggest that most voters are poorly informed about politics and policy, have inconsistent policy preferences, and suffer from deep-seated biases that hinder rational political judgment. On the other, aggregate studies of representation and collective opinion have produced evidence that voters do hold officials accountable when they fail to represent their interests, and that public opinion tends to reflect national events. These micro and macro patterns present something of a puzzle: how can political accountability exist when overall levels of citizen competence are low? More recent research has argued that while citizens are not encyclopedias of political knowledge, they can often learn what they need to know to make rational choices. These studies focus on the dynamics of political learning and the role of the information environment in providing voters with useful cues and policy information. When examined through this lens, citizens often appear more capable than was previously thought. But important questions about information effects and political learning remain. Some studies find that citizens will update their beliefs in predictable ways when they learn something new. Others find that political misperceptions are hard to erase, even in the face of efforts to correct them. Under what conditions will citizens learn from new political information? Are some messages more potent than others? And do simple cues always help voters navigate the political world? This dissertation contributes to these debates by examining information effects across three different venues: electoral politics, attitudes toward government programs, and social policy markets. Using three different data sources, I explore whether the political environment helps citizens to become more informed and whether new information prompts them to revise their preferences and perceptions in rational ways. I begin with intuitions from a rational learning model that help to explain the divergent findings in the literature and serve as a guide for the empirical chapters that follow. I find considerable evidence of information effects across all three venues. Citizens in the context of an election campaign are more informed about the party identification of their senator, and this party cue helps them to make inferences about the senator's issue positions. Importantly, however, this increase in accuracy is only evident on votes where the senator voted the party line. When senators defected to vote with the other party, citizens' reliance on party cues led them astray. Similarly, I show how providing citizens with information about the performance of social programs like Food Stamps and Head Start has a significant effect on their perceptions and preferences. Negative performance information appears to be more potent than positive, but the findings show no evidence of ideological bias. Finally, I find that citizen-consumers in the market for public colleges use additional information about student outcomes to update their preferences. The dissertation concludes by returning to the rational learning model in an effort to reconcile these findings with those in the existing literature. I argue that the divergent findings are largely due to different assumptions about the precision of new political information, the strength of prior beliefs, and the probability that citizens receive political messages.