The Evergreen State College
Fall, 1999

[LAST UPDATED October 16, 1999]

II. Program Description

Our purpose is to explore fiscal issues in the broader frameworks provided by gender, race, and class. To these have been added some topical issues: globalization and corporate welfare. Among the prominent areas we expect to focus on are budgetary processes, fiscal outcomes, and trends at the federal and state levels, and the interplay of politics and economics in the budgetary arena.

III. Requirements and Assignments

As members of a learning community, we are expected to be engaged in the program activities. Students are required to attend class sessions regularly, prepare fully for discussion of the readings, and complete the assignments in a timely manner. If you must miss a class, please telephone your seminar leader in advance; more than one absence will require submission of additional work. Late written work will be read only under extraordinary circumstances, such as illness or emergency.

An important part of our learning in Fiscal Policy will consist of understanding of, and engagement with, the assigned readings. We hope that will be facilitated by

Note: We are convinced that skimming many readings does not facilitate learning as much as thorough understanding of some of them. It is for that reason that there are both fewer readings and only one other assignment (see below) in addition to these C&R papers. Additional help in writing the C&R papers will be provided in separate handouts.

A sample conclusion and response paper is available.

Working in teams of two or three, students will prepare a 10-page report, including a three-page literature review, on how a budget cut of 10 percent should be absorbed by a political jurisdiction. After selecting a state agency, a major division in a large department, or a county/local government, the team will be expected to collect the budget documents and interview appropriate public officials, before preparing the project report. The report will provide, in addition to the literature review, relevant background information, a review of the agency’s mission and goals, past budget priorities and how they might change in view of the agency’s budget reductions, and the gender, race, and class implications of the proposed cuts.

The written reports are due on December 9th. Arrangements are being made for oral presentations to be videotaped in our television studio on December 7th and 9th. When making these presentations, assume that they are being made before a legislative body or a central budget office.

IV. Required readings list

A. Books

1. Alterman, E. (1998, May 25) Making one and one equal two. The Nation, 10.
   
   
2. Broom, C. (1995) Performance based government models: building a track record. Public Budgeting and Finance, 15 (4), 3-17.
   
   
3. Fukuyama, F. (1999, May) The great disruption. The Atlantic Monthly, 55-80.
   
   
4. Fishman, T.C., Garten, J.E., and Greider, W. (1999, June) Global roulette. Harper’s Magazine, 39-50.
   
   
5. Haugen, J., and McIntire, J. (1998, October) Assessing the impact of the 1998 congressional budget resolution. Seattle: University of Washington Fiscal Policy Center. Statewide summary paper -- 11 county papers wIll be distributed in class / students need to read one.
   
   
6. Haugen, J. (1999, November) Review of 1999 budget actions. Seattle: University of Washington Fiscal Policy Center. WIll be distributed in class.
   
   
7. Lefberg, I. (1999, October) Joint Office of Financial Management / Fiscal Policy Center study of Washington state fiscal trends. Seattle: University of Washington Fiscal Policy Center. WIll be distributed in class.
   
   
8. Krugman, P. (1994) Preface and Chapter 2, "Income distribution." In Krugman, P. The age of diminished expectations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   
   
9. McIntire, J. (1997, July) Living within the limits. Seattle: University of Washington Fiscal Policy Center.
   
   
10. Poyster, T. and Streib, G. (1999) Performance measurement in municipal government: assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review, 59 (4), 325-335.
    
    
11. Reich, R.B. (1999, March/April). We are all third wayers now. The American Prospect, 46-51.
    
    
12. Stein, H. (1996, May 1) The income inequality debate. The Wall Street Journal, A14.
    
    
13. Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP): TBA.
    
    
14. Rieff, D. (1999, February 22) The false dawn of civil society. The Nation, 11-16.
    
    
15. Clough, M. (1999, February 22) Reflections on civil society. The Nation, 16-18.

V. Evaluation and Credit

A. Credit

Students will receive graduate credit based on satisfactory and on-time completion of all program requirements and assignments. Credit denial decisions will be made by the faculty team. Plagiarism, failing to complete one or more assignments, completing one or more assignments late (i.e., without having made special arrangements before the due date), or more than two unexcused absences may constitute automatic denial of credit for the program.

B. Evaluations

All students will receive a written evaluation of their academic performance by one of the members of the faculty team. Student evaluations will be based on class attendance, seminar contributions, C&R papers (and the feedback provided to other students), and the budget cutting project (both the written report and oral presentation).

Each student is expected to participate in an evaluation conference and prepare, and bring to the evaluation conference, a written self-evaluation and an evaluation of the faculty member. If the student feels uncomfortable about bringing the faculty evaluation to that conference, s/he may leave it with the program secretary (Pam Udovich, Lab I, Room 1020, ext. 6600).

VI. Additional Covenants

In furtherance of the objectives of our learning community, we expect students and faculty to (a) act in accordance with the Evergreen Social Contract and the Student Conduct Code; (b) promote a cooperative and supportive atmosphere which gives every one the opportunity for self-reflection and expression; and (c) use high standards in reading the texts and preparing C&R papers, lectures, and comments in seminar.

Faculty agree to (a) provide timely feedback; (b) handle all dispute in a spirit of goodwill; and (c) make time available for individual conferences with students, and (d) arrive on time prepared for lectures, seminars, and other program activities.

Note: Except when it is clearly specified, there will be a seminar session during each class meeting.