Therefore, through the support of various articles on the subject, I strongly agree that ‘perhaps a major factor that creates hurdles in dealing with these public policy issues is democracy itself’. As emphasized by Liverani (2009) that “democracies can be notoriously shortsighted when dealing with long term issues” (par. 4). The rationale for this could be that there are enumerable external factors that could influence diverse issues and so policy makers opt to decide on the most pressing issues given the resources and current macro environmental status of the time.
The post was also in response to Dinesh Sah’s Post where we both saw the issue of seeing democracies as recommending policies more on a short-term leash (Liverani, 2009). Sandra’s contention, however, focused on the culture of "instant gratification"; which is also a valid point. According to Rivenburg (2004), “part of the problem is that technology and pop culture have trained people to expect instant gratification of their desires. So when a temptation comes along, theyre inclined to indulge it” (par. 12). There is so much focus on immediate outcome and results with little foresight being accorded to long term vision of the effects of one’s course of action. Therefore, to see policy-makers in a democratic society to manifest behaviors which exhibit the culture of instant gratification would also explain the lack of forbearance and foresight to resolve climate action on a more lasting and effective manner.
De Yudice’s post was interesting in terms of illuminating the power of democracy at its best. Despite the apparent support from various policymakers and different stakeholders of the DREAM Act, the Senate reportedly made the firm decision of seeing it as a threat to being a precursor to invite more illegal aliens and encourage illegal immigration. As policymakers, democratic forces encourage making