Few have studied differences between how women and men lead, particularly at the local level. This article addresses this gap by reporting the results of a unique study of 192 female mayors and 192 male mayors in cities with populations of over 30,000 to consider whether the female mayors emphasized different policy issues and whether the women in local leadership created alternative decision-making processes in allocating resources. Overall, the results show similarities on policy issues, the use of power, and budget issues. However, some key gender differences emerge. Female mayors were far more willing to change the budget process, be more inclusive, and seek broader participation. Finally, more women mayors than men were willing to admit fiscal problems and discuss changes in their goals. Women mayors were also more likely than their male counterparts to believe that women face gender-based obstacles in the exercise of leadership.

No abstract

New public management (NPM) assumes that government should be run as a business and is based on a set of interrelated principles applied to reduce the costs of government by encouraging privatization and managed competition of government services. The author analyzes the viability of NPM as a governing strategy by examining the extent of implementation of NPM policies by New York City’s Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, an aggressive proponent of the NPM agenda. Close examination reveals that Mayor Giuliani’s success in implementing his NPM agenda has been limited. The mayor’s difficulties in achieving his goals are identified and are illustrative of the reform/accommodation cycle facing Mayor Giuliani and other urban mayors who attempt to implement abstract reform principles in a politicized environment.

In response to the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the accompanying block grant, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, broad-based advocacy coalitions formed in many states to lobby for meaningful college programs for welfare recipients. State by state, these coalitions wrestled with creating programs that would allow welfare recipients to remain in 4-year colleges, but only a few states managed to develop such programs. This article compares the advocacy coalitions in two states, Maine and New York, where welfare advocates struggled to achieve progressive state welfare higher educational policies and, in some instances, succeeded in keeping welfare recipients in 4-year colleges.

This study examines placement patterns in New York, Louisiana, and New Jersey to determine why these states place nearly half of their students with disabilities in separate classrooms, when most states place the vast majority of students with disabilities in general classrooms. Using regression analysis and interviews, several factors were examined including the influence of the states 'prior practices and policies, economic and social variables, the consequences of state-funding formulas, and the effectiveness of federal monitoring. New York, Louisiana, and New Jersey have maintained a high proportion of separate placements regardless of disability far longer than most states. Each of these states has a large percentage of African American students and of students from poor families. Each of these states provides fiscal incentives for segregated placements. Federal monitoring is ineffective; the U.S. Department of Education is slow to act on placement variability across the states.