Powerpoint presentation: Concept of Power in Policy

The Saint wrote:Read this Case Study Carefully and Answer the Questions Given at the end

In the 1960s, Matthew Crenson sought to explain why air pollution remained a ‘non-issue’ in many American cities. In particular, he attempted to identify relationships between the neglect of air pollution and characteristics of political leaders and institutions.
Crenson’s approach, examining why things do not happen, contrasted with that of Robert Dahl’s which looked at why they do (1961). Crenson adopted this strategy to test whether or not the study of political inactivity (or non-decision making) would shed new light on ways of thinking about power. He also wondered if this different approach would support the claims made by Dahl that the policy making process was open to many groups in society.
Crenson began by demonstrating that action or inaction on pollution in US cities could not be attributed to differences in actual pollution level or to differences in social attributes of the populations in different cities. The study involved two neighbouring cities in Indiana which were both equally polluted and had similar demographic profiles. One of the cities, East Chicago, had taken action to deal with air pollution in 1949, while the other, Gary, did nothing until 1962. Crenson argues that the difference arose because Gary was a single- employer town dominated by U.S. Steel, with a strong political party organization, while Chicago was home to a number of steel companies and had no strong party organization when it passed air pollution legislation. In Gary, anticipated negative reactions from the company were thought to have prevented activists and city leaders from placing the issue on the agenda. Crenson also interviewed political leaders from 51 American cities. These suggested that ‘the air pollution issue tends not to flourish in cities where industry enjoys a reputation for power’.
Crenson’s major findings were that, first, power may consist of the ability to prevent some items from becoming issues. Second, that power does not need to be exercised for it to be effective: the mere reputation for power can restrict the scope of decision making. Third, those affected by political power, ‘the victims’, may remain invisible, because the power or
reputation of the powerful may deter the less powerful from entering the policy making arena. He concluded that ‘non-issues are not politically random oversights but instances of politically enforced neglect’

1 Which dimension of power is described?
2 Does the study indicate that power as thought control may also have been in play?