The Case for Bipartisan Consensus on Economic Policy. Partisan warfare and gridlock in Washington threaten to squander America's opportunity to show the world that democracy can deal constructively with serious economic challenges. Instead of working together to mitigate destabilizing problems-slow growth, exploding inequality, climate change, rising debt-our elected leaders are sabotaging our economic future by blaming and demonizing each other in hopes of winning big in the next election. They are weakening America's capacity for world leadership and the case for democracy here and abroad. Alice M. Rivlin, with decades of experience in economic policymaking, argues that there are economic policies that could lead to sustainable American prosperity more widely shared, but crafting them requires the tough, time-consuming work of consensus building and bipartisan negotiation. Political leaders are acting as though our Constitution embodied a winner-take-all parliamentary system, when in fact our constitutional separation of powers rightly requires compromise and consensus building. Rivlin believes that Americans can and must save our hyperpartisan politicians from themselves. She makes the case that on many practical economic issues the public is far less divided than partisan politicians and sensationalist media would have us believe. She draws attention to numerous hopeful efforts to bridge partisan and ideological divides in Washington, in state capitols and city governments, and communities around the country, and advocates a major national effort to enable citizens and future leaders to learn and gain practice in the art of listening to each other and working together to find common ground. This book is a practical guide for Americans across the political spectrum who are agonizing over partisan warfare, incivility, and policy gridlock and looking for ways they can help to get our democratic policy process back on a constructive track before it is too late.

"Exceeding $2 trillion annually, health care spending in the United States is growing significantly faster than the national economy. If left unchecked, this health spending crisis will threaten Americans' ability to pay for other essential services. Driven primarily by the cost of benefits promised to seniors under Medicare and Medicaid, federal health expenditures will force lawmakers to make stark policy decisions. In this third volume of Restoring Fiscal Sanity, policy experts suggest ways to slow the growth of federal spending on health care. Unless federal health spending can be brought under control, Americans will face substantially higher taxes, sharp reductions in other government programs, and cuts in benefits to the elderly. Families, businesses, and communities will be forced to make agonizing choices between health care and other needs. Focusing on policies that do not shift costs to the states or the private sector, the authors of Restoring Fiscal Sanity 2007 suggest reforms in federal programs that have the potential to reduce the growth of spending for the entire health system, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the care provided, and enhance health outcomes. Drawing on years of government and public policy experience, they stress the need for innovative approaches and cooperation between the private and public sectors. "

The American dream is fading: for nearly two decades, the economy has been performing below par, the quality of life has deteriorated, and the government has not confronted the public problems that concern citizens most. In this provocative book, Alice Rivlin offers a straightforward, nontechnical look at the issues threatening the American dream and proposes a solution: restructure responsibilities between the federal and state government. Under her plan, the federal government would eliminate most of its programs in education, housing, highways, social services, economic development, and job training, enabling it to move the federal budget from deficit toward surplus. States would pick up these responsibilities, carrying out a " productivity agenda" to revitalize the American economy. Common shared taxes would give the state adequate revenues to carry out their tasks and would reduce intrastate competition and disparities. The federal government would be freer to deal with increasingly complex international issues and would retain responsibility for programs requiring national uniformity. A primary federal job would be the reform of health care financing to ensure control of costs and to mandate basic insurance coverage for everyone. Published in the summer of 1992, Reviving the American Dream was read by presidential candidate Bill Clinton; by year's end, President Clinton appointed its author, Alice Rivlin, as deputy budget director. Today, the ideal in Rivlin's book--and Rivlin herself--are having an impact inside the administration. Selected as one of Choice magazine's Outstanding Books of 1993

Caring for the Disabled Elderly analyzes the major options for reforming the way long-term care is financed. It first explores the potential market for private long-term care insurance and other private sector initiatives. Then it turns to the advantages and disadvantages of various public sector programs. The study recommends both a greatly expanded role for the private sector in financing long-term care and a new public insurance program.

How can we identify who benefits from government programs aimed at solving our social problem and who pays for them? With so many problems, how can we allocate scarce funds to promote the maximum well-being of our citizens?In this book, originally presented as the third series of H. Rowan Gaither Lectures in Systems Science at the University of California (Berkeley). Alice M. Rivlin examines the contributions that systematic analysis has made to decisionmaking in the government's ""social action"" programs education, health, manpower training, and income maintenance. Drawing on her own experience in government, Mrs. Rivlin indicates where the analysts have been helpful in finding solutions and where because of inadequate data or methods they have been no help at all. Mrs. Rivlin concludes by urging the widespread implementation of social experimentation and acceptability by the federal government. The first in such a way as to permit valid conclusions about their effectiveness; the second would encourage the adoption of better ways of delivering services by making those who administer programs responsive to their clients. Underlying both is the requirement from comprehensive, reliable performance measures.

In January 1970 Alice M. Rivlin spoke to an audience at the University of California-Berkeley. The topic was developing a more rational approach to decision-making in government. If digital video, YouTube, and TED Talks had been inventions of the 1960s, Rivlin's talk would have been a viral hit. As it was, the resulting book, Systematic Thinking for Social Action, spent years on the Brookings Press bestseller list. It is a very personal and conversational volume about the dawn of new ways of thinking about government. As a deputy assistant secretary for program coordination, and later as assistant secretary for planning and evaluation, at the Department of Health, Education and Welfare from 1966 to 1969, Rivlin was an early advocate of systems analysis, which had been introduced by Robert McNamara at the Department of Defense as PPBS (planning-programming-budgeting-system). While Rivlin brushes aside the jargon, she digs into the substance of systematic analysis and a "quiet revolution in government." In an evaluation of the evaluators, she issues mixed grades, pointing out where analysts had been helpful in finding solutions and where - because of inadequate data or methods - they had been no help at all. Systematic Thinking for Social Action offers important insights for anyone interested in working to find the smartest ways to allocate scarce funds to promote the maximum well-being of all citizens.

America's complex system of multi-layered government faces new challenges as a result of rapidly changing economic, technological, and demographic trends. An aging population, economic globalization, and homeland security concerns are among the powerful factors testing the system's capacity and flexibility. Major policy challenges and responses are now overwhelmingly intergovernmental in nature, and as a result, the fortunes of all levels of government are more intertwined and interdependent than ever before. This volume, cosponsored by the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), defines an agenda for improving the performance of America's intergovernmental system. The early chapters present the current state of practice in intergovernmental relations, including discussion of trends toward centralization, devolution, and other power-sharing arrangements. The fiscal underpinnings of the system are analyzed, along with the long-term implications of current trends in financing at all levels. The authors identify the principal tools used to define intergovernmental management-grants, mandates, preemptions -in discussing emerging models and best practices in the design and management of those tools. Intergovernmental Management for the 21st Century a pplies these crosscutting themes to critical policy areas where intergovernmental management and cooperation are essential, such as homeland security, education, welfare, health care, and the environment. It concludes with an authoritative assessment of the system's capacity to govern, oversee, and improve. Contributors include Jocelyn Johnston (American University), Shelley Metzenbaum (University of Maryland), Richard Nathan (SUNY at Albany), Barry Rabe (University of Michigan), Beryl Radin (American University), Alice Rivlin (Brookings Institution), Ray Sheppach (National Governors Association), Frank Shafroth (George Mason University), Troy Smith (BYU-Hawaii), Carl Stenberg (University of North Carolina), Carol Weissert (Florida State University), Charles Wise (Indiana University), and Kenneth Wong (Brown University).

"The United States is standing at a critical juncture in its fiscal outlook. After experiencing a brief period of budget surpluses at the turn of the century, the federal government will run deficits that add about $4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Substantial deficits will likely continue long into the future because the looming retirement of the baby boom generation will raise spending in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. At the same time, the federal government appears to be neglecting spending in key areas of social and economic policy. The nation thus faces a vital choice: continue down a path toward future fiscal crisis while under investing in critical areas, or increase resources in high-priority areas while also reducing the overall budget deficit. This choice will materially affect Americans' economic status and security in the immediate future as well as over long horizons. In R estoring Fiscal Sanity, a group of Brookings scholars with high-level government experience provide an overview of the country's likely medium- and long-term spending needs and the resources available to pay for them. They propose three alternative fiscal paths that are more responsible than the current path. One plan emphasizes spending cuts, the second emphasizes revenue increases, and a third is a balanced mix between the two. The contributors address the policy choices in such areas as defense, homeland security, international assistance, and programs targeted to the less advantaged, the elderly, and other domestic priorities. In the process, they provide an understanding of the short- and long-run trade offs and illustrate how the budget can be reshaped to achieve high priority objectives in a fiscally responsible way. "