Gilson Sistrom Maria
Oregon Health & Sciences University, School of Nursing, Portland, OR 97239, USA.
Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2010 Feb;11(1):29-35. doi: 10.1177/1527154410370786.
In response to striking rates of childhood obesity in Oregon, advocates led by a nurse lobbyist proposed legislation in 2005 to regulate junk foods in public schools. Several theories propose to explain the policy-making process, yet Senate Bill 560 (SB 560) followed a twisted course through rule making, legislative and political processes that are not well articulated in policy theory. Three overlapping mechanisms were identified in content analysis of documents and interviews with participants in the SB 560 policy process. Strategically placed legislative "banana peels," proponents' amateur advocacy, and legislative outflanking by professional lobbyists more fully characterize this policy process and better account for the failure of SB 560. Subsequent passage of the Oregon Healthy School Foods bill in the more politically conducive 2007 legislature suggest that advocacy and incremental change frameworks are less predictive of successful passage than is the ability to take advantage of political opportunities to change public health policy.
针对俄勒冈州儿童肥胖率惊人的情况，由一名护士游说者牵头的倡导者们于2005年提出立法，以规范公立学校的垃圾食品。有几种理论试图解释决策过程，但参议院第560号法案（SB 560）在规则制定、立法和政治过程中却走上了一条曲折的道路，而这些过程在政策理论中并未得到充分阐述。在对文件的内容分析以及对SB 560政策过程参与者的访谈中，确定了三种相互重叠的机制。策略性放置的立法“香蕉皮”、支持者的业余倡导以及专业游说者的立法侧翼包抄，更全面地描述了这一政策过程，并更好地解释了SB 560的失败。2007年，在政治环境更为有利的立法机构中，俄勒冈州健康学校食品法案随后获得通过，这表明倡导和渐进式变革框架对于成功通过法案的预测性不如利用政治机会改变公共卫生政策的能力。
