Energy policy is on everyone's mind these days. The U.S. presidential campaign focused on energy independence and exploration ("Drill, baby, drill "), climate change, alternative fuels, even nuclear energy. But there is a serious problem endemic to America's energy challenges. Policymakers tend to do just enough to satisfy political demands but not enough to solve the real problems, and they wait too long to act. The resulting policies are overly reactive, enacted once damage is already done, and they are too often incomplete, incoherent, and ineffectual. Given the gravity of current economic, geopolitical, and environmental concerns, this is more unacceptable than ever. This important volume details this problem, making clear the unfortunate results of such short-sighted thinking, and it proposes measures to overcome this counterproductive tendency.

All of the contributors to "Acting in Time on Energy Policy" are affiliated with Harvard University and rank among America's pre-eminent energy policy analysts. They tackle important questions as they pertain to specific areas of energy policy: Why are these components of energy policy so important? How would "acting in time" --i.e. not waiting until politics demands action --make a difference? What should our policy actually be? We need to get energy policy right this time --Gallagher and her colleagues help lead the way.

Mary Jo Bane and David Ellwood examine the American welfare system-its recipients, its providers, and the swirl of policy ideas surrounding it-with objectivity and clarity. Focusing on the AFDC Program (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), they examine the composition of the populations receiving assistance, the duration of that assistance-who receives benefits for a long time and who only briefly, during important transitional periods-and the prospects facing AFDC recipients within the administrative culture of the system. The authors identify three models that have been used to explain "welfare dependency" and test them against an accumulating body of evidence They offer suggestions for identifying potential long-term recipients so that resources can be targeted to encourage self-sufficiency. Finally, they review policy options.