search/ContentSearchResults1.asp). These are just a few excerpts from articles representing the many different ideological analysis/views about President Bill Clinton's final budget of his presidency for the fiscal year 2001. From Democrat to Republican, n

g is a "fact?" Facts are extremely difficult to deduce when trying to make a decision. There are many "uncertain facts," or uncertainty with facts. The reason for this confusion is because each ideology wants to, if not does, believe that they are correct. Also, there is a great controversy over numbers and statistics. Each side of an argument will somehow find numbers and statistics to support their views. "The balanced federal budget ranks as one of the premiere political accomplishments of the decade. From the public's perspective, tax hikes and spending cuts put the government back in the black. But within the corridors of power, many who follow the budgeting process claim that White House and congressional negotiators used creative arithmetic to make the federal budget appear balanced" (http://www.policy.com/news/dbrief/ dbriefarc540.asp). This discrepancy of correct statistics leads to much confusion and uncertainty when trying to make an educated decision regarding publ!

sion that is made. There is no 100% guarantee that something will work or that a decision will be "correct." First of all, it's impossible to get all the information needed to make perfect choice. Not only are there conflicting views, but our current societal frame-of-mind is that we want answers and solutions now! In an ideal setting, the best way to make a choice would be to try something out for a while, see if it works or doesn't, and then either change it completely, fix what mistakes are wrong with it, or try out another proposed method. Unfortunately, in our existing structure, procedure and views of government show us that this optimistic model of trial-and-error rarely if ever actually happens and satisfy's our problem. Rarely do we hear legislators and bureaucrats saying, "Whoops. We made a mistake when we enacted 'such-and-such' piece of legislation. We're sorry and we are now going to try the other/another solution." Since we can't predict the output of any piece o!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

tionality, irrationality, uncertainty, facts, risks, and values in there analyses. The first two characteristics of public policy are almost more alike than they are unlike, even though they are antonyms. Rationality and Irrationality are rather simple to define, yet almost impossible when one attempts to apply their definitions, especially to public policy. The Corel Dictionary defines them as the following: Rationality - what is sound or of reason; Irrationality - the absence of reason (or rationality) However, in application, these two antonyms with simple definitions

Some common words found in the essay are:
Clinton Administration, Jackson President, President Clinton's, Heritage Foundation, Federal Budget, Granted President, Corel Dictionary, White House, President Clinton, public policy, Social Security, federal budget, public policy makers, policy makers, rationality irrationality, president clinton's, risks values, characteristics public, white house, who's budget, piece legislation, characteristics public policy, president 1966 entering, free experiencing surplus, 1966 entering nation,
Approximate Word count = 1762
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)