Issue Definition, Conflict Expansion, and Tort Reform: Lessons from the American General Aviation Industry |
| |
| Authors: | Scott E Tarry |
| |
| Institution: | associate professor of aviation and public administration at the University of Nebraska at Omaha where he is holds a joint appointment in the Aviation Institute and the Department of Public Administration. Dr. Tarry has authored a number of articles related to aviation policy and administration and is currently examining the policy implications of NASA's Small Aircraft Transportation System. |
| |
| Abstract: | This article examines the concepts of issue definition and conflict expansion through an analysis of the debate over tort reform in the general aviation industry. More specifically, the article studies the efforts of the general aviation manufacturers to define the issue of tort reform in ways that strengthened their unlikely coalition with important consumer groups and minimized opposition from organized labor, which typically sides with the plaintiffs bar in the tort reform debate. The case is intriguing because it provides more than just a snapshot of the industry's efforts. The analysis begins by examining some of the manufacturers' less successful strategies and traces the evolution of their campaign, which culminates in the rather clever use of issue definition and conflict expansion strategies for which the trial lawyers were unprepared to match. In the end, effective use of these strategies overcame what appeared to most observers to he a classic political mismatch. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
