The 9/11 terrorist attacks triggered the dramatic escalation of severe and destructive attacks in the country. Although America has intensified its defense, the rise of domestic terrorism is proving to be an urgent public policy issue. Hate and extremist groups are the leading perpetrators of numerous domestic attacks experienced in America within the last decade. America has seen the occurrence of multiple mass shootings such as the Pulse Night Club in Florida, Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, and the Route 91 Festival in Nevada that revived the debate about gun control.
However, the recent attacks experienced during and after the presidential elections renewed the debate about domestic terrorism (Jones et al., 2020). The worst part was the attack experienced at the U.S Capitol by groups of far-right militia waving Confederacy flags and wearing clothes with Neo-Nazi symbols. The hate and extremist groups issue threat is increasingly becoming one of the leading security menaces to America. Dealing with internal terror requires measures instigated by the change in public policy measures. The institutional theory influences the process towards the enactment of a policy to prevent domestic terror.
The Constitution guarantees security for all citizens, and American law enforcement agencies and personnel have been at the forefront dealing with terror groups. The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), which is dedicated to fighting and ending terrorism in America, warned the citizens about the rise of domestic terrorism, especially the white supremacy groups (Jones et al., 2020). Such information indicates that America is experiencing a new and lethal threat owing to the fact that the perpetrators are among the citizens and even the most trusted individuals with security clearance.
Lately, Congress has been under pressure from the intense public outcry, compulsion from interest groups, and the worrying figures from FBI and Homeland Security to enact laws against the rising internal terror. Interest groups purport that the FBI has numerous terrorism-related statutes to investigate and prosecute criminal behavior, including hate crimes and white supremacist violence. At the same time, proponents of the policy argue that the rise of domestic terrorism is due to the failure of holding accountable and confronting the perpetrators by the responsible authorities and not a case of lack of appropriate tools.
Ideally, the institutional theory proves effective in the development phase of the policy as it explains how the organizational structures, practices, values, and norms are linked to the broad social and cultural environment. Here, institutional theory shows that the institutional constituents are vital in influencing the enactment of public policies. For instance, interest groups, professions, departments, or public opinion can compel the responsible bodies to change or adopt certain laws. In the case of domestic terrorism, various factors contributed to the force that propagated the idea to prominence.
Agencies in charge of making policies act only when they have evidence or utter conviction that the policy issue is of significant public importance. Unlike other policy theories, such as the elite theory, the institutional theory is effective on the development stage. It explains the roles of various aspects of society, such as political, social, and cultural, in influencing change (Mohamed, 2017). On the contrary, the elite theory only explains how the political class, a minority group in the society, impacts laws.
Specifically, the most preferred theory during the development phase is institutional theory. First, the body in charge of policymaking is the parliament, which is an institution. Such an agency has well-defined roles, practices, and procedures to follow while formulating laws. At the development stage, the main idea is to identify the problem and ascertain if it is a salient issue and deserves attention. Usually, challenges facing a significant population get more attention than problems facing a few individuals in society. For example, domestic terrorism threatens the country’s security, which qualifies it for consideration as a public policy issue.
The various institutional structures, norms, values, and relationship patterns are considered in the initial phase of policymaking. Institutionalism guides policy making since the various elements of agencies understands the tasks or responsibilities within their jurisdictions. Each nation, state, or an acted develop programs to pursue specific functions related to laws of a nation or a specified body, organization, or agency, which fulfils the provisions of institutional theory. Thus, there is no doubt that institutional theory informs by a significant margin the processes of the development phase, making it the most preferred approach.
In short, many problems exist in the country, with domestic terrorism among the current leading public policy issues. The recent insurgence shows that the issue is more severe than perceived. Terror groups such as the white supremacists and other far-right militia are wreaking havoc and threatening security. Concerned individuals perceive that the complacency among the responsible law enforcement agencies is giving terror groups the much-needed opportunity to cause violence. However, due to public opinion and pressure from interest groups, the responsible bodies are working on policies against domestic terrorism. The institutional theory, which focuses on the roles of economic, political, and social systems in public policy, plays a central role in the development phase of the policymaking process.
References
Jones, S. G., Doxsee, C., & Harrington, N. (2020). The escalating terrorism problem in the United States. Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1-7. Web.
Mohamed, I. A. (2017). Some issues in the institutional theory: A critical analysis. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 6(09), 150-156.