living democracy, national edition, 3/emyresource.phoenix.edu/.../livingdemocracy_3e_ch08.pdfthe...

ISB

N1-256-75663-6

Living Democracy, Third Edition, by Daniel M. Shea, Joanne Connor Green, and Christopher E. Smith. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2011 by Pearson Education, Inc.

251

CH

APT

ER 8Bureaucracy

Adeadly explosion on April 20,

2010, aboard the Deepwater

Horizon, an offshore oil drilling

platform owned by British

Petroleum (BP), sent oil gushing into the Gulf

of Mexico from the ocean floor. Fifteen oil

workers were killed in the blast. During the

three months that it took BP to figure out

how to successfully cap such a deepwater

well, an estimated five million barrels of oil

spilled into the ocean. The oil spill devastated

the fishing and tourism industries in coastal

areas of Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and north Florida. The

spill also illustrated the benefits and risks of the operation of

federal government agencies.

On the one hand, local public officials pleaded with federal

agencies to help stop the leak, contain the damage, and force

BP to clean up the oil and compensate people for financial

losses. Among the many agencies involved, the U.S. Coast

Guard coordinated efforts to contain the oil and the Environ-

mental Protection Agency (EPA) monitored the use of chemicals

that BP used to disperse oil slicks on the water. On the other

hand, many critics pointed to the Minerals Management Service

(MMS)—an agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior—for

failing to do its job of enforcing safety

regulations to prevent such explosions and

oil spills from occurring. During the Bush

administration, scandals erupted in which

MMS employees were caught accepting gifts

from oil companies, permitting oil companies

to do their own safety inspection reports,

and even using drugs and engaging in sexual

affairs with oil-company employees. The

Obama administration’s Secretary of the Inte-

rior, Ken Salazar, was criticized for moving

too slowly in replacing the leadership within

the MMS and forcing the agency to perform its duties properly.

Ultimately, the Obama administration abolished the MMS

during the oil spill crisis and transferred its duties to other fed-

eral agencies.

What does this case show us about government agencies?

Clearly, Americans expect government agencies to provide serv-

ices and respond to crises, including tasks ranging from deliver-

ing mail and directing traffic to cleaning up major environmental

disasters. Yet, the connections between government officials,

interest groups, and politics—as well as other issues, such as lim-

ited funding and overwhelming tasks—create risks that agencies

will not operate effectively.

KEY OBJECTIVES

After completing this chapter, you should be prepared to:

Trace the development of specific federal departments and agencies.

Analyze the debate over whether the heads of federal agencies shouldbe policy experts or loyal political appointees.

Describe the image people have of the federal bureaucracy, and evaluatethe bureaucracy’s advantages and disadvantages.

Assess the mechanisms and processes that influence and oversee thefederal bureaucracy.

8.4

8.3

8.2

8.1

Is thebureaucracy an essential

contributor tothe success ofgovernment or a barrier to effective

government?

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6


Resource Center• Glossary• Vocabulary Example• Connect the Link

252 CHAPTER 8 BUREAUCRACY

world of politics. Because the bureaucracy is part of the exec-utive branch—and, thus, under the president’s authority—policymaking decisions within government agencies can beaffected by partisan political considerations. Moreover, the presi-dent’s political appointees assume the top positions in eachagency. In making their decisions, agency officials may be influ-enced by lobbying from legislators, state and local officials, andinterest groups.Thus the bureaucracy becomes another arena ofaction for the policy-shaping pathway that relies on the lobbyingof decision makers.

PATHWAYS of actionArsenic Standards for Drinking Water

The Safe Drinking Water Act was passed by Congress in 1974to protect the quality of drinking water in the United States.The act authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) to create regulations that establish purity standards for

The Federal BureaucracyTrace the development of specific federaldepartments and agencies.

(pages 252–257)

In this chapter, we’ll examine the agencies of the executivebranch of the federal government that are collectively known as“the bureaucracy.” The word bureaucracyn refers to an organ-ization with a hierarchical structure and specific responsibilitiesthat operates on management principles intended to enhanceefficiency and effectiveness. Bureaucracies exist in businesses,universities, and other organizational contexts; however, thegeneral term bureaucracy is most frequently used to refer togovernment agencies. Action or inaction by these agenciesdetermines whether and how policies are implemented andhow these policies will affect the lives of Americans.

The departments that comprise the executive branch ofthe federal government work under the direction of the presi-dent to carry out the nation’s laws. For example, disaster assis-tance provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) is directed by laws enacted by Congress. These laws listthe kinds of assistance to be provided by the federal governmentand authorize the spending of federal funds for disaster relief inspecific locations. FEMA and other agencies do not simply de-cide for themselves when and where they will help.They mustact within the guidelines set by Congress and the president.These guidelines typically leave room for agency officials tomake specific decisions, but these officials cannot act beyond thescope of their authority as defined by law. For example, FEMAofficials may decide that certain disaster-area counties needmore money or other specific kinds of assistance than other dis-aster-affected counties. In essence, Congress and the presidentwrite laws to define public policy; the officials who work in fed-eral agencies then act to carry out those laws and policies.

Agency officials can shape public policy through theirauthority to create rules for administering programs and forenforcing laws enacted by Congress and the president. They are also the source of information and ideas for members ofCongress who wish to propose new statutes about various policyissues.The policy preferences of individual agency officials affectthe day-to-day actions that these bureaucracies undertake, as dothose officials’ interactions with representatives from outsideinterest groups.

Ideally, the officials who work in federal agencies possessknowledge and experience concerning the policy matters thatthey handle.We want them to be expert professionals who arededicated to public service for all Americans.We do not wantthem to be politicians who serve the interests of a particularpolitical party. Despite this idealistic vision of governmentworkers, these officials are not necessarily removed from the

8.1

n Bureaucracy: An organization with ahierarchical structure and specific responsibilitiesintended to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.In government, it refers to departments andagencies in the executive branch.

EXAMPLE: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency inthe federal bureaucracy that carries out the national tax laws throughcollection of income taxes and investigation of individuals and businessesthat fail to pay the taxes required under the laws enacted by Congress.

Many Americans may take for granted that theirdrinking water is safe and clean, yet it is governmentagencies that set standards and inspections to ensurethe safety of our water. —Do you trust governmentagencies to make sure that Americans enjoy a healthy,safe environment?

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY CHAPTER 8 253

drinking water systems. Exactly what those purity standardswill be, however, can present a thorny issue affecting the safetyand welfare of every person in the country. It’s a good illustra-tion of the politics of the federal bureaucracy.

A 1999 report by the National Academy of Sciences saidthat arsenic in drinking water can cause various kinds of cancer.In 2000, an environmentalist interest group, the Natural Re-sources Defense Council, sued the EPA over arsenic standards,seeking to have the regulations changed to mandate arsenic levelsat only 3 parts per billion (ppb) rather than the existing standardof 50 ppb.As a result of the lawsuit, EPA officials in President BillClinton’s administration proposed a new standard of 5 ppb.

Objections poured in from the mining and wood-preservativeindustries that use and produce arsenic. Local water systems alsoraised concerns about the costs of meeting the proposed standard.As a result, the EPA adopted a standard of 10 ppb.This was in thewaning days of the Clinton administration—but when PresidentGeorge W. Bush came into office in early 2001, his officials post-poned the effective date of the new rule for one year. Criticscomplained that the Bush administration, which was perceived tobe less concerned than the Clinton administration about waterpollution and other environmental issues, was sacrificing publichealth in favor of the interests and profits of the manufacturingand mining industries.

Several months later, at the Bush administration’s request, acommittee of the National Academy of Sciences produced a newreport that reconfirmed the health risks from arsenic in drinkingwater.So the Bush administration moved forward on the regulationlimiting arsenic in drinking water to 10 ppb or less.The new ruleangered the National Rural Water Association, an interest grouprepresenting small communities. It argued that the new standardwould impose excessive costs on small towns that must upgradetheir water systems. Nor did the rule satisfy the Natural ResourcesDefense Council and other environmentalist groups.They awaitednew studies with the hope of convincing the EPA to amend theregulation and require an even lower level of arsenic. And therematters rest,with no party truly satisfied with the outcome.

This story is typical of today’s regulatory politics. Officialsin the bureaucracy make decisions about a policy rule that af-fects water systems throughout the country—but their rule isshaped by the officials’ interactions with and responses to otheractors involved with the issue of water quality. Scientists pro-vide influential information for the bureaucracy, and interestgroups apply pressure through lobbying and litigation.2

Development of the FederalBureaucracyThe roots of the federal bureaucracy go back to the originalU.S. Constitution of 1787.Article I, Section 8, gives Congressthe power to enact laws for specified purposes.These include

matters such as “lay and collect taxes,”“coin Money,”“establishPost Offices,” and “provide and maintain a Navy.”The presi-dent, as the head of the executive branch, is responsible for car-rying out the nation’s laws.

It soon became apparent that agencies must be created toadminister specific policies and programs. Post offices, tax agen-cies, and mints (where money is coined) handle tasks thatrequire specialized personnel and facilities. Indeed, ArticleI makes reference to congressional authority to “make all lawsnecessary and proper for carrying into Execution . . . all otherPowers vested by this Constitution in the Government of theUnited States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”Thusthe founding document explicitly acknowledged that govern-ment agencies, called “departments,” would be established tocarry out laws and programs.

Article II of the Constitution, which discusses the presi-dent and executive power, provides further acknowledgment ofthe need to create governmental departments that will executethe laws under the president’s supervision and control. For ex-ample,Article II says that the president “may require the Opin-ion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executiveDepartments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of theirrespective Offices.”

Although the Constitution thus clearly anticipated the ex-istence of executive departments, the actual development andorganization of those departments over the course of Americanhistory were shaped by social developments and the country’sresponse to emerging policy issues and priorities.

THE FIRST DEPARTMENTS During the nation’s first cen-tury, the federal government was involved in only a limitedrange of policy areas.The original departments of the federalgovernment focused on policy matters related to specific pow-ers granted by the Constitution to Congress and the president.Most policy issues came under the authority of state govern-ments. This explains why the federal government after 1789had only four departments:

Department of State—responsible for diplomacy andforeign affairs

Department of War (in 1947 consolidated, along withthe Department of the Navy, a later creation, into the De-partment of Defense)—responsible for military mattersand national defense

Department of Justice—responsible for legal mattersunder federal law

Department of the Treasury—responsible for tax rev-enues and government expenditures

Note how many of these agencies focused on matters that had motivated the Constitutional Convention to replacethe Articles of Confederation with the new U.S. Constitution.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



Num

ber

of

Fed

eral

Em

plo

yees

(in m

illio

ns)

4.5

4

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

01800 1850 1900 1950 2000 20501750

Year

Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs in effect;end of World War II then leads to sudden drop-off

Great Society program goes intoeffect under Lyndon Johnson

Bush maintains Clintonadministration’s reductions

Clintonadministration

cuts sizeof federalwork force

Obamaadministrationincreases the

number ofdefense,

homelandsecurity,

and censusworkers

Department of Agriculture formedDepartments of War, State, and Treasury

formed; first federal departments

FIGURE 8.1 n Growth in the Size of the Federal BureaucracyThe Roosevelt administration’s programs to address the Depression and World War IIdramatically increased the size of the federal bureaucracy. —After these crises had passed,why didn’t the government shrink back to its size in the early years of the twentieth century?

Under the Articles, the national government had lacked author-ity to handle taxation and the military. As Congress and thepresident expanded the scope of federal activities in law andpolicy, departments were created to operate in new areas. Firstcame the Department of the Navy.Then, in the mid-nineteenthcentury, Congress created the Department of the Interior tomanage federal lands and the Department of Agriculture to as-sist the nation’s most important industry.

During the last decades of the nineteenth century, theUnited States began to undergo significant changes. Industrial-ization, urbanization, and immigration shaped a new economy inwhich people moved to cities to work in factories and serviceoccupations. Congress became increasingly assertive in using itsconstitutional authority to enact laws regulating interstate com-merce to prevent business monopolies, control the exploitationof child labor, improve dangerous working conditions, and dealwith other problems created by the new industrial economy.In the first decade of the twentieth century, Congress created the Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor toaddress these emerging issues.

THE NEW DEAL AND ITS AFTERMATH The Great De-pression, which began with the stock market crash of 1929,brought years of record-high unemployment and economicproblems.At the depth of the Depression in 1932, Franklin D.Roosevelt was elected to the presidency. He believed that thefederal government had to take an active role in the economy

in order to overcome the economic stagnation and correct theunderlying causes of the Depression. He called his program theNew Deal. The Roosevelt administration (1933–1945) con-tributed enormously to the growth in the federal bureaucracyby initiating various governmental programs, first in responseto the Great Depression and later to wage World War II.

For example, in 1935, Congress created Social Security toprovide income for senior citizens and dependents of deceasedworkers. It later added coverage for disabled workers and theirdependents. Other New Deal programs created jobs for the un-employed and regulated economic activity.The size and com-plexity of the federal government increased tremendouslyduring the Roosevelt administration (see Figure 8.1). By theend of FDR’s presidency in 1945, not only had the public ac-cepted the federal government’s involvement in a variety of pol-icy issues, many Americans had come to expect federal action onimportant matters, eventually including such areas as educationand criminal justice, which had traditionally been the exclusivepreserve of state and local governments. Moreover,World War IIhad demonstrated the necessity of combining the War and Navydepartments (as well as the newly created Air Force department)within a single structure, the Department of Defense.

In the 1950s, expanded public expectations of the federalgovernment and the consequently broader range of legislativeactivity undertaken by Congress led to the creation of the De-partment of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). (In the1970s, HEW was split into two agencies, the Department of

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



Education and the Department of Health and Human Ser-vices.) The framers of the Constitution never expected thefederal government to become increasingly involved in policyareas that were traditionally under the control of states.

Heightened public awareness of urban decay, racial con-flict, and poverty during the 1960s produced a new socialwelfare federal bureaucracy, the Department of Housing andUrban Development (HUD). Similarly, the Department ofTransportation, created during the same decade, reflected con-cerns about urban mass transit as well as a recognition that airtravel was expanding.

Organization of the FederalBureaucracyToday, the federal bureaucracy consists of four types of organi-zational entities: departments, independent agencies, independ-ent regulatory commissions, and government corporations (seeTable 8.1). Departmentsn typically are large organizations re-sponsible for a broad policy realm, such as education, nationaldefense, or transportation. Independent agencies have narrow

TABLE 8.1 Cabinet Departments and Examples of Other Agencies

Departments

AgricultureCommerceDefenseEducationEnergyHealth and Human ServicesHomeland SecurityHousing and Urban

DevelopmentInteriorJusticeLaborStateTransportationTreasuryVeterans Affairs

Independent Agencies

Environmental Protection Agency

Peace CorpsSocial Security Administration

Independent Regulatory Commissions

Federal Communications Commission

Federal Trade CommissionFederal Reserve System

and Board of GovernorsNuclear Regulatory Commission

Government Corporations

National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Overseas Private Investment Corporation

United States Postal Service

SOURCE: LSU Libraries Federal Agencies Directory, accessed athttp://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/fedgov.html

responsibilities for a specific policy issue, such as the environ-ment.They are independent in the sense that they are not sub-units of a larger department, but like departments, their leadersare appointed by and under the control of the president.

By contrast, independent regulatory commissions arenot under the control of the president or a department.Theyhave a focused policy mission governing a specific issue area,but they are run by a body of officials drawn from both politi-cal parties and appointed in staggered terms over the course of more than one presidential administration. Governmentcorporations have independent boards and are intended torun like private corporations.They handle a specific function,such as the postal system or the passenger railroad, which Con-gress believes would not be handled effectively by private busi-nesses, either because of the huge scope of the operation orbecause of issues of profitability.

As you consider the role and operation of each of thesecomponents of the federal bureaucracy, ask yourself whetherthere might be a better way to organize the government.Alter-natively, consider whether some of the bureaucracy’s functionscould be handled effectively and appropriately by private busi-nesses without the expenditure of taxpayers’ money.

Changes Since the 1960sAs the nation faced changing political and economic circum-stances, Congress reacted to specific issues that it perceived tobe the most difficult, immediate challenges by creating new

During the Depression, the Roosevelt administrationexpanded the size of government by creatingprograms to permit unemployed workers to earnmoney while repairing roads and undertaking otherpublic service projects. —In light of recent economicdifficulties, should the federal governmentmaintain permanent programs to employ peoplewho cannot find jobs?

n Department: Any of the 15 majorgovernment agencies responsible for specific policy areas whose heads are usually calledsecretaries and serve in the president’s cabinet.

EXAMPLE:The U.S. Department of State is responsible for managing relationships with foreigngovernments, issuing passports to U.S. citizens, and providing assistance to Americans traveling inforeign countries. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former U.S. senator from New York, wasappointed by President Barack Obama in 2009 to be the head of the Department of State.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



departments to address those matters.The creation of a newdepartment represents an opportunity to reorganize the use ofgovernmental resources and apply expertise to address pressingconcerns. It also represents a method of showing constituentsthat Congress is taking action even if members of Congress areunsure about whether the new department will be effective.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY In 1973, the energy crisisstruck.That year, the nation’s ever-growing thirst for oil, natu-ral gas, and other fossil fuels collided with the determination ofthe oil-producing countries to increase their profits. ManyAmericans found themselves waiting in long lines at gas sta-tions and paying skyrocketing prices to fill up their gas-guzzling cars. Responding to the crisis atmosphere, Congresscreated the Department of Energy to implement new laws anddevelop policies designed to encourage fuel efficiency, developnew sources of energy, and relieve the nation’s dependence onforeign oil producers.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS At the end of the1980s, the Veterans Administration (created in 1930) was elevatedto the status of a separate department called the Department ofVeterans Affairs. By the 1980s, a huge group of World War II vet-erans had become senior citizens, and they looked to the federalgovernment for health care and other benefits. Korean War vet-erans and middle-aged Vietnam War veterans followed closelybehind, increasingly in need of benefits and services.

When an agency gets the status of an executive depart-ment, its head becomes a member of the president’s cabinet andis literally “at the table” when the president’s top executive ap-pointees discuss policies and budgets.As you saw in Chapter 7(pages 222–223), the cabinet plays an especially important andinfluential role in advising the president. Creation of the De-partment of Veterans Affairs implied a promise that veterans’interests would be taken into account in those discussions.Congress symbolically demonstrated its concern about veteransand simultaneously sought the political benefits of granting in-creased attention and stature to an important constituency.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY After terror-ists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon onSeptember 11, 2001, public shock and congressional demandsfor action resulted in the creation of the federal government’snewest department: the Department of Homeland Security(DHS). Like other departments, the DHS represented a re-sponse to a policy issue that had moved to the top of thenation’s priorities.

The creation of the DHS involved the development of newagencies, such as the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA),and the consolidation of existing agencies from other depart-ments, to better coordinate government actions related to domes-tic security issues. Many observers recognized that creating a newdepartment that included agencies from elsewhere in governmentwould inevitably pose a variety of problems. Would agencies

CONNECT THE LINK(Chapter 7, page 222–223) The members of the president’s

cabinet are the most visible and publicly recognizable

individuals who work in the federal bureaucracy.

During the 1960s, President Lyndon B. Johnsontried to expand the activity and influence offederal governmental agencies in order toaddress poverty and racial discrimination. TheDepartment of Housing and UrbanDevelopment (HUD) was created during hispresidency. —Has expanded action by thefederal government actually helped to solvesocial problems?

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



PRACTICE QUIZ: UNDERSTAND AND APPLY

1. The first departments of the federal bureaucracy werecreated as a result ofa. the requirements of the Declaration of

Independence.b. the original constitutional design of the federal

government.c. the Civil War.d. President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal

program.

2. President Franklin Roosevelt expanded the federalbureaucracy as a response toa. settlers moving westward and taking lands from

Native Americans.b. the first development of a national railroad system

and large corporations.c. the Great Depression and World War II.d. the development of urban problems and Americans’

need for new housing.

3. What department was created in the 1980s in responseto growing needs for medical care among a specificsegment of the U.S. population?a. Department of Disease Control and Preventionb. Department of Health and Human Servicesc. Department of Medicinal Artsd. Department of Veterans Affairs

4. In response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in 2001,a. Congress combined existing departments as part of

the formation of a new Department of HomelandSecurity.

b. the Department of Defense created a SpecialLiberation Force and immediately launched theinvasion of Iran.

c. Congress reduced the number of departments inthe federal government in order to create bettercoordination.

d. Congress changed the name of the Department ofState and made it the Department of HomelandSecurity.

ANALYZE

1. Based on the U.S. Constitution and the nature of theearly federal government, what kind of bureaucracydid the founders intend to construct?

2. What societal changes and historic events led to the cre-ation of new departments in the federal bureaucracy?

IDENTIFY THE CONCEPT THAT DOESN’TBELONG

a. Article I of the U.S. Constitutionb. Article II of the U.S. Constitutionc. Department of Stated. War of 1812e. Urban problems of the 1960s

The Federal Bureaucracy

Trace the development of specific federal departments and agencies.8.1

8.1

engage in “turf wars” over who should be in charge of specifictasks? Would employees resist a move to an unfamiliar departmentwith unproven leadership and a still-developing mission?

To give you an idea of the scope of the reorganization,this short list identifies a few of the agencies absorbed into thenew department as well as their previous homes within thebureaucracy.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—previously an independent agency

Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)—previously in the Department of Justice

Coast Guard—previously in the Department ofTransportation

Secret Service—previously in the Department of theTreasury

The slow response and general ineffectiveness of FEMAduring and after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 led many critics tocomplain that the DHS was too big.They claimed that individ-ual agencies within the department had lost resources and suf-fered from diminished focus on their domestic mission in lightof the department’s broader concerns about preventing attacksby international terrorists.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6




the agencies housed in each. You’ll notice many familiaragency names on the list, but you may be surprised withinwhich department each agency operates. For example, manypeople don’t realize that the National Weather Service is in theDepartment of Commerce and that the Financial Crimes En-forcement Network belongs to the Department of the Trea-sury rather than to the primary law enforcement department,the Department of Justice.The location of some agencies is aproduct of history and politics as much as of topical focus.

Table 8.2 also indicates the number of people employed in each executive department. The Office of PersonnelManagement reported in 2009 that 2,859,724 civilians wereemployed in the executive branch of government. Nearly1.9 million of these worked in the executive departments, andan additional 900,000 were employed in independent agenciesthat we’ll discuss later in this chapter.Although people’s percep-tions of impersonal, impenetrable bureaucracies often lead themto believe that all federal government agencies are huge, the de-partments actually vary significantly in size.They range from theDepartment of Education, which has under 4,200 employees, tothe Department of Defense, which has more than 718,000 civil-ian employees in addition to 1.4 million active-duty militarypersonnel and 1.2 million who serve in various reserve units.

There are also approximately 1,700 people who work di-rectly for the president in the Executive Office of the Presidentand its constituent agencies. Because they come under the di-rect control of the White House, these employees and agenciesare typically considered an arm of the presidency rather thanagencies within the federal bureaucracy.

The varying sizes of the bureaucracy’s departmentsdepend, in part, on whether they provide services at instal-lations in far-flung locations and employ agents who workin the field or primarily oversee the distribution of federalfunds to state and local governments from a central office inWashington, D.C. For example, the Department of Housing

Departments andIndependent Agencies

Analyze the debate over whether theheads of federal agencies should be policyexperts or loyal political appointees.

(pages 258–263)

In order to understand how the bureaucracy operates, you mustrecognize the policy areas that fall under the authority of thedepartments (governmental units) run by the president’s cabinet.By contrast, other kinds of agencies exert more independentinfluence over certain policy issues, because they are not di-rectly under the supervision of the president and the cabinet.

DepartmentsDuring every presidential administration, the president’s cabinetconsists of the heads of the executive departments.These depart-ment heads typically have the title of secretary, such as secretary ofdefense for the head of the Department of Defense.The head ofthe Department of Justice,however, is known as the attorney gen-eral of the United States. Because new departments have beencreated over time, the cabinet has grown to include 15 depart-ments as well as the administrators of three agencies within theExecutive Office of the President: the Office of Management andBudget (OMB), the Office of National Drug Control Policy, andthe Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. The head of oneindependent agency, the EPA, also has cabinet rank.

At earlier points in American history, the members of thecabinet would advise the president, debate policy options, and de-velop ideas to determine the president’s agenda. In recent admin-istrations, presidents have relied most heavily on their staffs andkey cabinet members for advice. Cabinet meetings now serve thefunction of reporting to the president on the activities of eachdepartment. Cabinet members are expected to be loyal to thepresident to avoid any public indication that they question thepresident’s agenda or actions. Presidents need agency leaders whoare willing to support and implement the president’s policies.Thus top department and agency leaders are political appointeeswho serve during one president’s administration rather than aspermanent employees. However, political appointees sometimesdo not have sufficient expertise about the policy issues addressedby their agencies, and their relatively short terms in office can in-hibit the effective development and implementation of programs.

The various departments are divided according to areasof policy responsibility.Within each department, various agen-cies are assigned to implement laws, keep detailed records, andmake consistent decisions in accordance with established rules.Table 8.2 lists the 15 cabinet-level departments and some of

8.2

Not all government employees are hidden awayin office buildings. Some, like this national parkranger, interact directly with the public every dayand provide valuable services, such as preservingnatural resources and protecting public land. —Which agencies provide services directly to you?

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


DEPARTMENTS AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES CHAPTER 8 259

TABLE 8.2 Departments in the Executive Branch of the Federal Government with SelectedSubunits and Total Number of Employees, 2009

Department of Agriculture (100,125 employees)

Agricultural Research Service

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

Economic Research Service

Farm Service Agency

Forest Service

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Department of Commerce (118,429 employees)

Bureau of the Census

Bureau of Export Administration

International Trade Administration

National Institute of Standards and Technology

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Weather Service

Patent and Trademark Office Database

Department of Defense (718,802 civilian employees)

Air Force

Army

Defense Contract and Audit Agency

Defense Intelligence Agency

Marine Corps

National Guard

National Security Agency

Navy

Department of Education (4,100 employees)

Educational Resources and Information Center

National Library of Education

Department of Energy (15,601 employees)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Los Alamos Laboratory

Southwestern Power Administration

Department of Health and Human Services (65,680 employees)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Food and Drug Administration

National Institutes of Health

Department of Homeland Security (179,380 employees)

Coast Guard

Customs and Border Protection

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Secret Service

Department of Housing and Urban Development (9,630 employees)

Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control

Public and Indian Housing Agencies

Department of the Interior (74,362 employees)

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Bureau of Land Management

Fish and Wildlife Service

Geological Survey

National Parks Service

Office of Surface Mining

Department of Justice (111,458 employees)

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

Drug Enforcement Administration

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Federal Bureau of Prisons

United States Marshals Service

Department of Labor (16,192 employees)

Mine Safety and Health Administration

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Department of State (36,821 employees)

Department of Transportation (56,355 employees)

Federal Aviation Administration

Department of the Treasury (116,647 employees)

Bureau of Engraving and Printing

Bureau of Public Debt

Internal Revenue Service

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

United States Mint

Department of Veterans Affairs (290,908 employees)

SOURCE: Office of Personnel Management, Federal Civilian Workforce Statistics—Employment and Trends, accessed at http://www.opm.gov/feddata/

and Urban Development, with only 10,000 employees, over-sees the distribution of money, while the Department of Veter-ans Affairs, which runs veterans’ hospitals and maintains otherservice offices, has 245,000 employees. Obviously, the large sizeof the Department of Defense is related to the number of basesand other facilities on which American military personnel servethroughout the United States and the world.

The organizational chart for the U.S. Department ofHomeland Security in Figure 8.2 illustrates the complexity

of departments in the federal government. Within eachdepartment, there are various offices responsible for specificaspects of the department’s administration and mission.Bear in mind that all of the agencies within the Departmentof Homeland Security, especially those listed along thebottom row of the organizational chart, each have theirown organizational structure with various internal officesthat would look similar to that of the overall chart for thedepartment.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



Political Appointees in the BureaucracyPresidential appointees who run federal executive departmentsare expected to be loyal members of the president’s team.Thismeans that they will defend the administration’s policies andavoid public disagreements with the president.After being ap-pointed by the president, they must be confirmed by the U.S.Senate.These appointees work directly for the president and tryto guide and push the bureaucracy to act in accordance withthe president’s policy preferences.

Secretaries and assistant secretaries who are appointed bythe president do not necessarily possess expertise on the policyissues and laws administered by their departments. For exam-ple, a former member of Congress or former governor from

the president’s political party may be chosen to run an agency,in part as a reward for political loyalty. However, they may alsobe chosen because the president thinks the person will be aneffective spokesperson or good administrator.

Other high-level appointments in the departments, suchas assistant secretaries and inspector generals, may go to peoplewith policy experience, but they may also go to party loyalistsor to the children of prominent political figures. Critics havecited President George W. Bush’s appointment of MichaelBrown as the director of FEMA as an example of an appoint-ment based on political connections and loyalty rather than onqualifications and experience. Brown’s lack of experience inemergency management received widespread news attentionamid the federal government’s slow and ineffective response tothe destruction, death, and human suffering in New Orleans

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

MANAGEMENTUnder Secretary

SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGYUnder Secretary

NATIONALPROTECTION

AND PROGRAMSUnder Secretary

POLICYAssistantSecretary

GENERALCOUNSEL

LEGISLATIVEAFFAIRS

Assistant Secretary

PUBLIC AFFAIRSAssistant Secretary

INSPECTORGENERAL

HEALTH AFFAIRSAssistant Secretary/

Chief MedicalOfficer

ChiefFinancialOfficer

* Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis title created by Public Law 110-53, Aug 3, 2007.

TRANSPORTATIONSECURITY

ADMINISTRATIONAssistant Secratary/

Administrator

U.S. CUSTOMSAND

BORDERPROTECTIONCommissioner

U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND

IMMIGRATIONSERVICESDirector

U.S. IMMIGRATIONAND

CUSTOMSAssistantSecretary

U.S. SECRETSERVICEDirector

FEDRALEMERGENCY

MANAGEMENTAGENCY

Administrator

U.S. COAST GUARDCommandant

INTELLIGENCEAND ANALYSISUnder Secretary*

OPERATIONSCOORDINATION

Director

CITIZENSHIP ANDIMMIGRATION

SERVICESOMBUDSMAN

FEDERAL LAWENFORCEMENT

TRAININGCENTERDirector

DOMESTICNUCLEAR

DETECTIONOFFICEDirector

NATIONALCYBER SECURITY

CENTERDirector

CHIEF PRIVACYOFFICER

CIVIL RIGHTS ANDCIVIL LIBERTIES

Officer

COUNTER-NARCOTICS

ENFORCEMENTDirector

Chief of Staff

ExecutiveSecretariat

MilitaryAdvisor

DEPUTYSECRETARY

SECRETARY

FIGURE 8.2 n Organization of the Department of Homeland SecurityThe Department of Homeland Security contains a variety of governmental agencies that are not necessarily closelyconnected with each other —How would you decide if a department of the federal government was too large andtherefore needed to be divided into two or more smaller departments?

SOURCE: Organizational Chart, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Accessed at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/DHS_OrgChart.pdf on April 11, 2010.

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



when Hurricane Katrina struck the city in August 2005. Beforegaining a political appointment to a senior leadership positionat FEMA in 2001, Brown had previously been a lawyer for theInternational Arabian Horse Association and had little, if any,training or experience in emergency management.3

PATHWAYS of change fromaround the world

Are there any decisions by government officials in thebureaucracy that could make you angry enough toprotest? In December 2005, students at the government den-tal college in Kozhikode, India, staged a protest against an or-der from the undersecretary of the government’s Departmentof Health and Family Welfare.4 In the students’ view, the ordersought to change the existing procedures for placing dentalstudents in residency programs as part of their training. Al-though residencies at government dental colleges were sup-posed to be reserved for students who studied at governmentcolleges, the order sought to place a student from a privatedental college in the government institution. Reportedly, thestudent in question was the daughter of an influential leader ofa political organization.

Officials in government bureaucracies control valuable re-sources, and their decisions help to determine who gains benefitsfrom government programs. Is there a risk that these benefits willbe granted based on political connections, especially in a systemlike that of the United States, in which the heads of many gov-ernment agencies are political appointees? Think about policyissues of importance to you, such as the environment, education,or other matters. Can you think of decisions by federal officialswith which you disagree? If not, do you think the decisions ofsuch officials either have little impact or are not sufficiently visi-ble to the public?

In the confirmation process, senators may expect that thesecretaries and other appointed officials in specific departmentspossess relevant experience and expertise.This is most likely tobe true for the departments of State, Defense, and the Treasury,owing to the overriding importance of foreign affairs, nationalsecurity, and the economy. For other positions, senators lookless closely at the nominees’ qualifications because they believethat presidents should generally be permitted to choose theirown representatives to lead government agencies. Even thepresident’s political opponents in the Senate may vote to con-firm nominees simply because they would like other senatorsto show the same deference for appointments by future presi-dents from a different political party.

Presidents do not merely reward loyalists in their appoint-ments.They also use the upper-level appointed positions to placeabove the bureaucracy knowledgeable political figures who will

vigorously enforce the laws and regulations with which thepresident agrees—or alternatively, will fail to enforce, enforceweakly, or attempt to change the laws and regulations with whichthe president disagrees.These elite actors influence the use of thebureaucracy’s power and resources in shaping public policy.

Since the final decades of the twentieth century, presidentshave also used their appointment power to demonstrate a com-mitment to diversity as a means of pleasing their constituenciesand attracting more voters.Women and members of minoritygroups increasingly receive appointments to highly visible po-sitions at the top of executive departments. Presidents also seekgeographic diversity so that the cabinet can be regarded as rep-resenting the nation. The composition of President BarackObama’s cabinet illustrates this aspiration for diversity.Amongthe heads of the 15 major executive departments were threeformer governors and four former members of Congress.Therewere four women, including former First Lady and New YorkSenator Hillary Clinton.There were two Hispanic members,most notably former congresswomen Hilda Solis—the firstHispanic woman to be Secretary of Labor—and one AfricanAmerican member, Attorney General Eric Holder. Asian-American men were chosen as the secretaries of the Energy,Veterans Affairs, and Commerce departments. Finally, as pastpresidents have done, President Obama attempted to demon-strate bipartisanship by appointing two Republicans to his cab-inet: Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover from theBush administration, and former congressman Ray LaHood asSecretary of Transportation.

Only a half-dozen cabinet-level nominees have ever beenrejected in the confirmation process by the U.S. Senate.Themost recent instance was the Senate’s vote against John Tower,President George H.W. Bush’s nominee for defense secretaryin the late 1980s, after allegations surfaced regarding Tower’sexcessive drinking and other aspects of his personal life. Gen-erally, senators believe that the president ought to be able tochoose the heads of government agencies. However, senatorsmay oppose someone who is viewed as patently unqualifiedfor a specific position or whose political beliefs are viewed astoo extreme.

Independent Agencies,Independent RegulatoryCommissions, and GovernmentCorporationsThe executive branch includes nearly 100 independent agen-cies, independent regulatory commissions, and governmentcorporations that operate outside the 15 executive depart-ments.Table 8.3 provides examples of some of the independentorganizational entities in the federal government.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



names imply, they are led by a group of officials.The heads ofthese agencies often serve staggered terms so that no newpresident can replace the entire commission or board upontaking office. For example, the members of the Board ofGovernors of the Federal Reserve Board serve 14-yearterms, with one new member appointed to the seven-mem-ber board every two years.The Federal Reserve Board actsindependently to shape monetary policy by, for example, set-ting certain interest rates that affect the cost of borrowingmoney.

For some other commissions, the authorizing legislationrequires that the appointees contain a mix of Republicans andDemocrats. For example, the Federal Communications Com-mission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) eachhave five members, but the law requires that no more thanthree members can be from one political party. The FCCregulates television, radio, cell phones, and other aspects ofcommunications. It also investigates and imposes sanctions forviolations of law and policy.The FTC enforces consumer pro-tection laws, such as fining companies that do not complywith rules concerning the fair treatment of applicants forcredit or loans.

Some independent agencies are government corpora-tions with their own boards of directors. For example, theNational Railroad Passenger Corporation manages Amtrak,the nation’s national system of passenger trains.These agen-cies generate their own revenue through the sale of productsor services, fees, or insurance premiums.They must convinceCongress to provide them with whatever operating fundsthey need beyond what they can raise from customers. Somemembers of Congress see Amtrak, the U.S. Postal Service,and similar agencies as providing services that could be han-dled more efficiently by private businesses.This explains whyarguments are sometimes made for cutting off governmentfunding for such enterprises. Defenders of these agencies ar-gue that these essential services must be maintained and thatprivate businesses may cut back or eliminate unprofitableenterprises.

Independent agencies are responsible for governmentfacilities, such as the national museums in Washington, D.C.,administered by the Smithsonian Institution, or specificprograms, such as the Peace Corps, which sends Americanvolunteers to teach and provide community service around theworld. Such facilities and programs are likely to be consideredtoo unique and important to ever be subjected to privatization.Similarly, special agencies, such as the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA), the space exploration agency,may do things that are so expensive and important that privateorganizations cannot match the federal government’s ability topursue the agency’s goals.

These agencies do not have identical functions. Someprovide government grants or administer a specific govern-ment facility, such as a museum. Others are regulatory agen-cies that exert significant influence over public policy,because Congress has delegated to them broad authority tointerpret statutes, create regulations, investigate violations oflaw, and impose sanctions on violators.The regulatory agen-cies are typically called commissions or boards, and as such

TABLE 8.3

Examples of IndependentAgencies, Independent RegulatoryCommissions, and GovernmentCorporations, by Type

Independent Agencies: Facility or Program Administration

General Services Administration

National Archives and Records Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Peace Corps

Selective Service System

Smithsonian Institution

Social Security Administration

Independent Agencies: Grants of Funds

Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation

National Endowment for the Arts

National Endowment for the Humanities

National Science Foundation

Independent Regulatory Commissions

Consumer Product Safety Commission (toys, appliances, otherproducts)

Federal Communications Commission (radio, television, cellphones)

Federal Elections Commission (campaign contributions, campaignadvertising)

Federal Trade Commission (consumer credit, deceptiveadvertising)

National Labor Relations Board (labor unions, union voting, unfairpractices)

National Transportation Safety Board (collisions involving aircraft,trains, trucks, other vehicles)

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (nuclear materials)

Securities and Exchange Commission (stock market, financialinvestments)

Government Corporations

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Overseas Private Investment Corporation

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

United States Postal Service

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



8.2

Ben Bernanke (left), chairman of the independent FederalReserve Board, meets with members of the Federal ReserveSystem’s Board of Governors to regulate banks and control themoney supply. These officials have significant control overaspects of the nation’s economy, and they receive significantattention in the news during times of economic difficulty.—What advantages, if any, flow from having these powerfuldecision makers be appointed rather than elected?

Departments and Independent Agencies

Analyze the debate over whether the heads of federal agencies should be policy experts or loyal political appointees.

8.2


1. Most members of the president’s cabinet are heads of what kinds of organizational entities in thebureaucracy?a. departmentsb. independent agenciesc. independent regulatory commissionsd. government corporations

2. Members of the cabinet area. elected by voters.b. appointed by the president and confirmed by

Congress.c. appointed by the president and confirmed by

the Senate.d. selected through civil service tests and interviews.

3. What is the advantage of using the current systemfor selecting cabinet members?a. Top leaders within the bureaucracy are usually

accountable to the voters.b. Top leaders within the bureaucracy are usually

policy experts.c. Top leaders with the bureaucracy are usually

experienced administrators.d. Top leaders within the bureaucracy usually seek

to carry out the president’s policy agenda.

4. What is the disadvantage of using the current systemfor selecting cabinet members?a. Top leaders within the bureaucracy are too eager

to satisfy the voters.b. Top leaders within the bureaucracy are often not

policy experts.c. Top leaders with the bureaucracy are never

experienced administrators.d. Top leaders within the bureaucracy always fight

against the president’s policy agenda.

ANALYZE

1. What types of people are selected to be members ofthe president’s cabinet? In your view, does this improveor detract from the quality of the executive branch?

2. Would the federal bureaucracy serve the public betterif all departments were independent agencies andthereby less influenced by the president?


a. National Aeronautics and Space Administrationb. Department of Health and Human Servicesc. Peace Corpsd. National Science Foundatione. Social Security Administration

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6


People wait in line to mail income tax forms on thelast day for filing taxes. U.S. post offices alwaysexpect long lines as the midnight deadlineapproaches. —Have you had positive or negativeexperiences in dealing with government agencies?



by the people, and for the people.”When people’s anticipatedSocial Security checks are late or Medicare benefits are denied,citizens often feel frustrated and resentful about their treatmentat the hands of bureaucrats who are paid by taxpayers, yet donot seem responsive and obedient to the public. Frustrationcan be compounded by the fact that many government em-ployees enjoy job protections that make them very difficult tofire, even if they are rude or incompetent and have been thesubject of many complaints by people who come into contactwith a particular office of agency. Perhaps you have felt suchfrustration in dealing with student loan applications, waitingfor a tax refund, or otherwise seeking responsiveness from agovernment agency.

This negative image of bureaucracies obviously includesgeneralizations about large organizations and the frustrationsthat individuals may face in dealing with the officials who workthere. What is your image of a bureaucracy? When we talkabout the bureaucracy in terms of government agencies ratherthan banks, corporations, and universities, does your image ofbureaucracy depend on which government officials come tomind? When a firefighter rushes into a blazing house and savesa child’s life, few of us would associate this hero with thenegative image of a bureaucracy.Yet the firefighter belongs to abureaucracy:The fire department is a government agency, hier-archically organized and with specialized responsibilities foreach rank, from the chief down through the captain and theindividual firefighters.

As this example shows, our perceptions of governmentagencies may depend on actual experiences.When governmentofficials respond quickly and provide expected services directly

The Nature ofBureaucracy

Describe the image people have of the federal bureaucracy, and evaluatethe bureaucracy’s advantages anddisadvantages.

(pages 264–269)

Bureaucracies can be public entities, such as a state treasurydepartment that collects taxes and enforces tax laws, or privateentities, such as a bank with different departments for mort-gages, commercial loans, and checking accounts.As you knowvery well, colleges and universities are also bureaucracies, withmyriad offices responsible for admissions, financial aid, residen-tial life, parking, and security. In a bureaucracy, workers typicallyhave specific tasks and responsibilities, and there are clear linesof authority in the organization’s pyramid of supervision andleadership. One person is responsible for leading and supervis-ing the organization, and beneath the leader lie different levelsof responsibility and supervisory authority. In a private organi-zation, such as a business corporation, the leader might becalled the president or the chief executive officer. In a govern-ment agency, the title of the head person may depend on thenature of the agency and the definition of the positions underrelevant constitutional provisions or statutes. Departments aregenerally headed by a secretary, while independent regulatorycommissions typically have a chairman.

The Image of BureaucracyIn the minds of most Americans, the word bureaucracy does notconjure up idealistic notions of efficient organizations thatcarry out specialized responsibilities for the public’s benefit. In-stead, bureaucracy can convey an image of gargantuan organiza-tions filled with employees who push paper around on theirdesks all day and worry only about collecting their paychecksand earning their pensions. In government service, becausethese employees have secure jobs, they may be perceived to feelno pressure to work industriously or efficiently.

A poll concerning the performance of five federal agen-cies conducted by the Pew Research Center for the Peopleand the Press found that “the agencies get generally poor rat-ings for how well they carry out their administrative tasks.”Thegroups that were polled “criticize the agencies for working tooslowly and making their rules and forms too complicated.”5

The negative image of the bureaucracy may be enhanced byAmericans’ expectations that the government ought to operatefor the benefit of the people in accordance with Abraham Lin-coln’s familiar words describing a “government of the people,

8.3

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


THE NATURE OF BUREAUCRACY CHAPTER 8 265

to us, there’s no reason to associate these officials and theiragency with the negative image of a bureaucracy. On the otherhand, when responses to our requests are slow and we can’t un-derstand why we must fill out complicated forms or meet de-tailed requirements, the negative images come galloping back.

Because of their size and distance from many citizens,federal agencies may be especially susceptible to generatingnegative images.When citizens go to their local Social Secu-rity Administration office to apply for retirement or disabilitybenefits, the office staff may need to seek approval from otherofficials back at Social Security headquarters. Meanwhile,they may have to fill out many forms and provide copies ofvarious documents—and then wait weeks for an answer.“Redtape!” they mutter. Direct services from a local firefighter orpolice officer put a human face on much-appreciated and im-mediate government services. But federal officials are oftendistant, faceless decision makers whose contacts with citizensare based on slow and frequently disappointing correspon-dence in response to questions and requests about importantmatters such as taxes, Social Security benefits, and medicalassistance for veterans.

Unlike the equally faceless customer service representa-tives for online merchants and credit card companies, whonevertheless seem eager to respond to our phone calls andquestions, the government officials with whom we commu-nicate may appear detached and unresponsive—and (it seems)all too often, agents at the IRS, Social Security, or the Veter-ans Administration either insist that we pay more or tell usthat we can’t get some benefit.This does not necessarily meanthat low-level government officials are coldhearted by nature.They may need to fill out many forms and gain approvalsfrom superiors before they can address our claims and ques-tions in a slow-moving process. Whether or not individualgovernment officials are uncaring, it is easy to understandwhy the bureaucracy often has a negative image in the mindsof Americans.

According to Charles Goodsell, we expect too muchfrom bureaucracies, and we have negative images in part be-cause “we expect bureaucracies not merely to expend maxi-mum possible effort in solving societal problems but to disposeof them entirely, whether solvable or not.”6 Do you agree thatgovernment agencies receive blame unfairly for falling short ofperfection?

The Advantages of GovernmentBureaucracyOfficialdom does not exist by accident. Bureaucracies arecreated and evolve as a means to undertake the purposes andresponsibilities of organizations. The German sociologist MaxWeber (1864–1920) is known for describing an ideal bureaucracy

involving competent, trained personnel with clearly definedjob responsibilities under a central authority who keeps de-tailed records and makes consistent decisions in accordancewith established rules. In theory, these are beneficial elementsfor running an organization efficiently.

If you were in charge of distributing retirement benefitsthroughout the United States, how would you organize yoursystem of distribution? Would you simply appoint one individ-ual in each state to be the coordinator in charge of the retireesin that state and then send that individual all of the money eachmonth for that state’s retirees? This approach appears to elimi-nate the current centralized bureaucracy of the Social SecurityAdministration, but it also may create many problems. Howwould you know whether each state coordinator was using thesame criteria and rules for determining eligibility for retire-ment funds? How would you know whether the coordinatorswere sending out the appropriate amounts of money on time?When agencies are organized in a hierarchical fashion withspecialized responsibilities, the federal government can try todiminish the risks from these problems.

Many Americans believe that bureaucracies alwayshinder rather than help when action is needed.

After waiting in long lines, talking to disinterested and unhelpfulofficials on the phone, or experiencing long delays in hearingback from a particular office, many people at some point feel dis-satisfied with government agencies. However, despite their flawsand problems, bureaucracies provide a number of advantages forimplementing laws and public policies.

• Standardization. By having a centralized administrationand a common set of rules, benefits and services can be pro-vided in a standard fashion that avoids treating similarly sit-uated citizens differently.A retiree in Idaho can receive thesame federal benefits and services as a retiree of the sameage and employment history in Maine.

• Expertise and Competence. When people who workin an agency focus on specific areas of law and policythroughout their careers, they can develop expertise onthose issues.This expertise will help them effectively carryout laws and policies and, moreover, permit them to adviseCongress and the president on ways to improve law andpolicy. Presumably, their expertise will make them morecompetent than people who know little about the subject.Thus people who work for the EPA are typically hired be-cause of their education and interest in environmental is-sues, and they develop greater expertise on this subject asthey spend years working in this area.

• Accountability. Congress can authorize a specific budgetfor particular programs and then monitor results for the tar-geted policy area. If $50 million are earmarked to combat airpollution, the existence of an agency dedicated to environ-mental issues—the EPA—permits those funds to be directed

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



to the targeted issues and not mixed together with fundsdestined for education, transportation, and defense, all ofwhich are handled by separate agencies in the bureaucracy.After the money is spent, air pollution can be evaluated, andCongress and the president can assess whether the EPAspent the money effectively and whether their intendedpolicies were carried out correctly.

• Coordination. Efforts of different agencies can be moreeffectively coordinated when each has clearly defined re-sponsibilities and a hierarchical structure. Hierarchy enablesthe leaders in each agency to direct subordinates to work incooperation with other agencies. For example, if officials inthe Department of Education and the Department ofHealth and Human Services are instructed to cooperate inimplementing an antidrug program or an education pro-gram aimed at preventing teen pregnancy, the leaders of therespective agencies can work together to delegate shared re-sponsibilities. When individual officials throughout thecountry act independently on issues, it is much more diffi-cult to coordinate efforts effectively.

In general, these advantages may be helpful in both govern-ment and business organizations.

One additional advantage, a merit-based system for hiring,has special importance for government bureaucracy. Until alittle over a century ago, government employees were hired and fired on the basis of their support for particular politicalparties and candidates for elective office. This was called thepatronage system, or spoils systemn. Political parties re-warded their supporters by giving them government jobs. Atthe same time, supporters of the opposing party were fired assoon as an election placed new leaders in office.“To the victorbelongs the spoils,” said a prominent Jacksonian Era politicianearly in the nineteenth century, giving political patronage its al-ternative name, the spoils system. (By “spoils,” he was referringto the practice of an army sacking a conquered city and soldierscarrying off whatever they could grab.)

Of course, the spoils system had many problems. Therewas an abrupt turnover in many government positions afterelections in which a different political party gained power.Unqualified people got government jobs despite lacking theknowledge and interest to carry out their tasks properly.Government workers steered benefits and services to fellowpartisans and sought to deprive their political opponents ofgovernment services. Officials spent too much time doingthings that would help keep their party in power and them-selves in their jobs. New roads, government contracts, and otherbenefits went to citizens who supported the elected officialswho had hired the government workers. With self-interestunchecked, there were grave risks of corruption, as governmentworkers and political leaders alike traded bribes for favoritismin distributing government services and benefits.

All these problems came to a head in the early 1880s.During the summer of 1881, a man claiming to be a disap-pointed office seeker (he was probably insane) shot PresidentJames Garfield. Garfield’s assassination made him a martyr for the cause of “good government.”This event helped pushforward previous proposals to reform the employment systemwithin the federal government. Congress and President ChesterA. Arthur found themselves under irresistible public pressure to enact legislation establishing a civil service systemn basedon merit.

In 1883, Congress passed and President Arthur signedthe Pendleton Act, creating the first federal civil service sys-tem. Under this act, applicants for specified federal govern-ment jobs were supposed to be tested, demonstrate theirqualifications, and keep their jobs based on competent per-formance rather than political affiliation. The new systemreduced, but did not entirely eliminate, such problems as un-qualified employees and bribery. Over time, more federal jobs were brought under civil service rules, and civil servicesystems eventually developed as well in state and local gov-ernments, especially during the Progressive Era in the firstdecades of the twentieth century.

The civil service system is still the framework for thefederal bureaucracy.Today, the president can appoint the topofficials who oversee most federal government agencies. Indoing so, the president seeks to steer the bureaucracy in pol-icy directions that reflect the voters’ presidential choice inthe most recent election. However, except for these high of-ficials and the staff in the Executive Office of the President,the vast majority of other federal workers are civil serviceemployees who remain at their jobs as presidential adminis-trations come and go. Standardization, expertise, and com-petence would all be endangered—indeed, under today’sconditions, they would collapse—if federal agencies experi-enced the kind of massive turnovers in personnel after eachelection that were typical of America in the mid-nineteenthcentury.

Civil service rules protect federal employees from beingfired for failing to support a specific political party. Federal em-ployees are further protected by the Hatch Act of 1939, a lawthat limits the participation of federal employees in politicalcampaigns (see Table 8.4).They can vote and attend politicalrallies, but they cannot work on campaigns or endorse candi-dates.Although this law limits federal workers’ political partici-pation, it is intended to prevent them from being pressured byelected officials to donate their money and time to politicalcampaigns. Prior to the implementation of civil service systems,it was very common for government employees to be requiredto work on political campaigns in order to keep their jobs.Thecurrent system spares them from fearing that they will lose pro-motions, raises, and other benefits for failing to support theparty in power.

n Patronage System (Spoils System):A system that rewards the supporters of successfulpolitical candidates and parties with governmentjobs while firing supporters of the opposing party.

EXAMPLE: An aspect of the patronage system continues to exist, as new presidents appoint supportersfrom their political party to top leadership positions in executive branch agencies. In earlier decades, suchpolitical appointments extended to even lower-level government jobs and created risks that governmentemployees would be pressured to support a particular political candidate in order to keep their jobs.

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



TABLE 8.4 The Hatch Act of 1939

PERMITTED/PROHIBITED POLITICAL ACTIVITIES FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

Federal employees may• register and vote as they choose.

• assist in voter registration drives.

• express opinions about candidates and issues.

• participate in campaigns where none of the candidatesrepresent a political party.

• contribute money to political organizations or attend political fund raising functions.

• attend political rallies and meetings.

• join political clubs or parties.

• sign nominating petitions.

• campaign for or against referendum questions, constitutionalamendments, municipal ordinances.

Federal employees may not• be candidates for public office in partisan elections.

• campaign for or against a candidate or slate of candidates in partisan elections.

• make campaign speeches.

• collect contributions or sell tickets to political fund-raisingfunctions.

• distribute campaign material in partisan elections.

• organize or manage political rallies or meetings.

• hold office in political clubs or parties.

• circulate nominating petitions.

• work to register voters for one party only.

• wear political buttons at work.

SOURCE: U.S. Office of Special Counsel http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm#regulations. Accessed on April 11, 2010.

The Problems of GovernmentBureaucracyThe advantages of a merit system do not mean, however, thatgovernment agencies necessarily fulfill their responsibilities effi-ciently and satisfy the expectations of citizens, the president, andCongress. Many practical problems tarnish the idealistic visionof civil service bureaucracies as effective, efficient organizations.For example, as organizations grow in size, decision-making lay-ers increase between the employee whom the average citizenencounters and the upper-level managers with final authority.Higher-level decision makers may be far removed from thepractical policy problems affecting citizens.When decisions mustmove through a chain of command, there are obvious risks ofdelay, including the chance that documents will be misplaced orlost so that new forms must be completed to start a decision-making process all over again.

Civil service protections can make it difficult for top offi-cials to motivate government employees and spur them to take

actions, especially when those actions require changing anagency’s priorities or operating methods. Almost by nature,large organizations are resistant to change. People who have be-come accustomed to doing their jobs in a specific way may bereluctant to adopt new priorities and directives. Bureaucraciesare not typically associated with innovation and bold ideas.They change slowly, and usually in incremental fashion.Whenthe president or Congress wants law and policy to move in anew direction, getting the bureaucracy to reorder its prioritiesand operate in different ways can be akin to the familiar imageof “turning a battleship at sea”—a slow, gradual, laboriousprocess. If executive agencies are slow to implement new laws,they can hinder or even undermine the achievement of a presi-dent’s policy goals.

For policy change to be effective, laws and programs mustbe designed by taking account of the resources, characteristics,experience, and organizational structure of the agencies thatmust implement those laws and programs. President George W.Bush, for example, touted his No Child Left Behind (NCLB)law, passed in 2002, as the key to improving education through-out the country.The NCLB law required the testing of all stu-dents and provided for punishing schools in which studentsperform poorly.Two years later, however, the federal govern-ment found that the law had been poorly implemented, be-cause data about schools and students were not collectedconsistently and systematically throughout the nation. Imple-mentation problems can be even more significant when, ratherthan just providing guidance and supervision for state and localgovernments, an agency bears responsibility for hiring staff,training personnel, and carrying out new tasks.When agenciesare large bureaucracies, it can be exceptionally difficult to or-ganize, implement, and monitor programs effectively.

The federal bureaucracy bears responsibility for organizinginitiatives nationwide, relying on thousands of individuals spreadthroughout the country at hundreds of locations. Let’s take anexample: the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),which was created in November 2001 in the aftermath of the9/11 terrorist attacks.The TSA is now part of the Departmentof Homeland Security. Among other responsibilities, the TSAscreens passengers and their baggage for weapons and explosivesbefore they board commercial airliners. An airline passenger’sunsuccessful attempt to ignite a bomb as his plane approachedthe Detroit airport from the Netherlands on Christmas Day in 2009, provided a stark reminder of the need for effective,professional security officials conducting screening and searchesat all airports.

In its first few years, the TSA was plagued with problems.Eighteen-thousand screeners were hired and initially put towork without required background checks.Among the 1,200screeners eventually fired after background checks revealedthat they had lied on their applications or had criminalrecords, several with criminal pasts were permitted to remain

n Civil Service System: A government employment system in whichemployees are hired on the basis of their qualifications and cannot be fired merely forbelonging to the wrong political party; originated with the federal Pendleton Act in1883 and expanded at other levels of government in the half-century that followed.

EXAMPLE: Federal employees in the Internal Revenue Service, National Park Service,Department of Transportation, and other agencies are hired based on their qualifications—education and experience—for a specific job, and they retain their positions over the years asnew presidents win election, serve their terms, and are then replaced by new presidents.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



on the job for weeks or even months before termination.7

The federal government paid hundreds of thousands of dol-lars in claims after screeners were caught stealing from passen-gers’ luggage while searching for weapons and explosives.Morale problems also developed as screeners complained ofbeing required to work overtime without adequate compen-sation and of being assigned to use baggage-scanning equip-ment without receiving any training.8 If the TSA had beengiven more time for planning, more opportunities to screenand train workers, and more resources to ensure adequate per-sonnel and equipment at each airport, the implementation ofthe policy might have gone more smoothly.The bureaucracy,however, must work in a constrained environment in whichlimits on time, resources, and expertise often result in imple-mentation problems.

Reform of the BureaucracyThe gigantic size and nationwide responsibilities of modernfederal agencies make it extremely difficult for the bureaucracyto live up to the ideals of efficient performance based on man-agement principles in an organizational hierarchy. Some criticsargue that alternative approaches to implementation could re-duce the problems of government bureaucracy. One suggestionis to try decentralization—a reform in which the federalgovernment could give greater independence to regional officesthat would be more closely connected to local issues and clientpopulations.Alternatively, states could be given greater authorityto handle their own affairs. For example, state inspection agen-cies could receive federal funds to enforce national air pollutionor workplace safety laws.The argument for decentralization rests

on a belief that smaller agencies, presumably more closely con-nected to local problems, can be more efficient and effective.There are risks, however, that decentralization would lead toinconsistent standards and treatment for people in different partsof the country. Officials in one state might vigorously enforcepollution laws, while those in another state might turn a blindeye to such problems because of the economic and politicalpower of polluting industries.

Privatizationn has also been suggested as a cure for theproblems of government bureaucracy. Critics argue that privatebusinesses working under government contracts could deliverservices and benefits to citizens with greater efficiency and lessexpense than when the bureaucracy handles such matters.Alllevels of government use private contracts in an effort to savemoney. Indeed, states have sent convicted offenders to prisonsbuilt and operated by private corporations, governments payprivate contractors to repair highways and build bridges, andthe federal government has hired private contractors to serve asbodyguards for American officials in the war zones of Iraq andAfghanistan.

In theory, businesses and nonprofit agencies are betterthan the government bureaucracy at finding ways to savemoney, developing innovations, and responding to feedbackfrom client populations. One way that they save money isthrough compensation for low-level workers that is less gen-erous than government pay and through flexible personnelpolicies that allow them to lay off or fire employees whosecounterparts in government would have civil service jobsecurity protection. Privatization is controversial. In somecircumstances, private contractors do not save money and donot deliver services more effectively than government agencies.

n Privatization: The process of turning someresponsibilities of government bureaucracy over to privateorganizations on the assumption that they can administerand deliver services more effectively and inexpensively.

EXAMPLE: During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. government hired private companies to handle foodservices, transportation of supplies, construction of facilities, and even personal protection (i.e., bodyguards) for Americanofficials in Iraq. Problems arose, however, when some companies were accused of overcharging for services, bribing militaryofficials for additional contracts, and violating the standards for behavior that are expected of American personnel.

Transportation SecurityAdministration (TSA) officersprovide an essential service inattempting to protect publicsafety at airports. —How can wemake sure that we have selectedthe best candidates to becomeTSA officers and have providedthem with necessary training,equipment, and supervision?

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



8.3

In addition, it can be difficult to hold private companiesaccountable for their actions, because they are not necessarilysubject to the same oversight laws that govern public agen-cies. Moreover, there are risks of favoritism and corruption asprivate companies use campaign contributions, personal con-tacts with government officials, and lobbying to encourageexpenditures of government funds that add to their profits butdo not necessarily address the public’s needs.

For example, during the Bush administration, critics ques-tioned the basis for lucrative, no-bid contracts awarded toHalliburton Corporation, an oil-services and constructioncompany.The company had been run by Dick Cheney (priorto his becoming the vice president of President Bush), and itmade millions of dollars on projects in Iraq despite prior scan-dals about poor performance and overbilling on governmentcontracts.

Periodically, efforts are made to reform the bureaucracyin order to improve its effectiveness. For example, in 1978Congress established the Senior Executive Service (SES),a program within the federal executive branch that enablessenior administrators with outstanding leadership and manage-ment skills to be moved between jobs in different agencies in order to enhance the performance of the bureaucracy.The development of the SES was intended to add flexibility inshifting personnel resources within the federal bureaucracy.Then, during President Clinton’s administration (1993–2001),Vice President Al Gore led a task force of senior governmentofficials in an effort known as the National Partnership forReinventing Government.This effort resulted in several laws tobetter measure the performance of government agencies,increase cooperation between government and business, andotherwise improve the effectiveness of the bureaucracy.


1. Which of the following is not assumed to be abeneficial aspect of bureaucracy?a. employees’ expertise on policy issuesb. citizens’ direct access to high-level decision makersc. vertical lines of authority for supervision and

controld. standardization of procedures and equal

treatment of citizens

2. Civil service systems were developed in response toa. the Great Depression.b. Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs.c. the spoils system.d. the creation of independent regulatory

commissions.

3. Decentralization of the federal bureaucracy woulda. give more authority to decision makers in regional

and local offices.b. eliminate the need for any government officials

to work in Washington, D.C.c. make the judiciary the most powerful branch of

government.d. permit the president to issue direct orders to the

nation’s governors.

4. Proposals for reform of the bureaucracy throughprivatization assume thata. investors want to purchase the U.S. Capitol

building.b. government agencies should grow larger than

they are today.c. cabinet officers will be more highly motivated

if they receive bonuses.d. private businesses operate more efficiently

than government agencies.

ANALYZE

1. How can the bureaucracy improve its image?

2. Should the civil service system be changed to make iteasier to fire government workers? What would bethe risks and benefits?


a. Decentralizationb. Standardizationc. Accountabilityd. Expertisee. Coordination

The Nature of Bureaucracy

Describe the image people have of the federal bureaucracy, and evaluate the bureaucracy’sadvantages and disadvantages.

8.3

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6




The Lobbying Pathwayand Policymaking

Assess the mechanisms and processes that influence and oversee the federalbureaucracy.

(pages 270–275)

From what you’ve read so far, you can see the bureaucracy’s in-fluence over policy through its responsibilities for implementa-tion of laws enacted by Congress.The effectiveness of agencies’implementation efforts can depend on their resources, informa-tion, and expertise. However, the bureaucracy can affect policy-making in other ways.

The bureaucracy also influences the formulation of publicpolicy through the decisions and actions of elites—people withpolitical connections, status, or expertise—and through the day-to-day implementation of laws and regulations by lower-levelpersonnel such as FBI agents, forest rangers, postal workers,water-quality inspectors, and others who have direct contactwith the public. If an FBI agent does not follow mandated pro-cedures when investigating a case or arresting a suspect, the lawsof Congress and the regulations of the Department of Justicehave not been implemented properly. Full and proper imple-mentation of many laws and policies can rest in the hands of rel-atively low-level officials who make discretionary decisionsabout how they will treat individuals and businesses when con-ducting investigations or administering the distribution of gov-ernment services and benefits.

The Bureaucracy andLegislationThe ideal of the bureaucracy envisions employees with compe-tence and expertise who work in a pyramid-shaped organiza-tional structure with clear lines of authority and supervision.Thelines of authority in a bureaucracy’s organizational chart aremeant to indicate that the downward flow of instructions guidesthe actions of personnel at each level of the agency. In reality, thedecisions and actions of personnel within the bureaucracy aremore complicated because of the influence of informal networksand relationships with organizations and actors outside thebureaucracy. In prior decades, political scientists often describedthe influence of these networks and relationships by focusing onthe concept of the iron triangle, a concept describing the tightrelationship and power over policy issues possessed by three enti-ties sharing joint interests concerning specific policy goals:(1) interest groups concerned with a particular policy issue,(2) the key committee members in Congress and their staff withauthority over that issue, and (3) the bureaucracy’s leaders and

8.4

CONNECT THE LINK(Chapter 6, pages 186–189) Congressional committees each have responsibility for

specific policy issues, and they interact frequently with officials in their counterpart

agencies responsible for the same policy issues in the bureaucracy.

the experts on that particular issue within a given department orsubagency.Within their sphere of expertise and interest, theseiron triangles could, through discussion, communication, andconsensus among members, control the writing of laws and thedevelopment of policies.

The linkages and power of the iron triangle were enhancedas interest groups provided campaign contributions to legislatorson relevant congressional committees and rallied their own mem-bers to support or oppose legislative proposals emanating from theiron triangle.As we saw in Chapter 6 (pages 186–189), the com-mittees in Congress are especially influential in shaping policy.The key committee members could draft legislation, block un-wanted bills, and facilitate the passage of desired statutes throughthe legislative process.The bureaucracy’s interested experts couldprovide needed information, help plan and facilitate implementa-tion, and provide strategic opposition to counterproposals gener-ated by those outside of the iron triangle.The concept of the irontriangle helped encourage recognition of the bureaucracy’s role inshaping legislation through informal networks.

Contemporary scholars view the iron triangle concept as limited and outdated. The governing system has changed.Growing numbers of interest groups are active in lobbying, andindividual members of Congress today have less absolute powerover committee processes.With respect to some policy issues,interest groups use strategies that include advertising campaignsto arouse the public and calling the attention of the news me-dia to issues that previously may have been decided largely be-hind the closed doors of a congressional committee room.

Realizing the inadequacies of the iron triangle frameworkfor all policy issues, scholars now focus on concepts character-ized as either issue networks or policy communitiesn. GuyPeters describes these as “involving large numbers of interestedparties, each with substantial expertise in the policy area. . . .They may contain competing ideas and types of interests to beserved through public policy.”9 Both terms describe ongoingrelationships and contacts between individuals interested inspecific policy issues and areas.These individuals have expertiseand remain in contact over time as their particular public pol-icy concerns rise and fall on the nation’s policy agenda.At gov-ernment conferences presenting research on environmentalissues, conference attendees who interact with each other arelikely to include a variety of individuals representing differentperspectives: scholars who study the environment, officials fromthe EPA, staff members from relevant congressional commit-tees, representatives from interest groups concerned with suchissues, and officials from businesses involved in waste disposal,manufacturing processes, and the cleanup of industrial sites.

Some of these individuals may change jobs over the yearsand move from universities and businesses into appointedpositions in government or from congressional committees tointerest groups. In 2004, it was reported that more than 90 formermembers of Congress were employed as lobbyists by businesses

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


THE LOBBYING PATHWAY AND POLICYMAKING CHAPTER 8 271

publicize the president’s actions, and oppose efforts to shape lawand policy.They may also leak information to the news media inorder to bring public attention to issues of concern to them.

An additional role played by officials in the bureaucracy isto provide information for Congress to use in crafting and ap-proving statutes.They provide this information both formallyand informally. Formally, some federal agencies, such as the U.S.Census Bureau, regularly send out a steady stream of informationto all kinds of congressional committees that are interested intrends in the nation’s population as well as in such demographicissues as home ownership, poverty, and education. Other agen-cies gather, analyze, and provide information about very specificpolicy issues, usually working only with those congressionalcommittees that are specifically concerned with these issues. In-formal communication between the bureaucracy and Congressoccurs when legislative staffers or individual members of Con-gress contact agency officials with questions about policy issuesand government programs. These informal contacts can helpbuild relationships within issue networks that lead to cooperativeworking relationships as members of Congress rely on agencyofficials for advice when crafting new legislative proposals.

Congressional reliance on officials in the bureaucracy forinformation can create problems if presidential appointees usetheir authority to direct subordinates to withhold or distortinformation as a means of advancing the president’s policyagenda. For example, in 2004, several conservative Republicansthreatened to oppose President Bush’s Medicare bill if it would

Gale Norton, the first Secretary of the Interior inthe Bush administration, shown here with PresidentBush, was a lawyer with experience as a policyadvocate for businesses interested in economicdevelopment and energy exploration on federallands. —Would the American public have beenbetter served by a Secretary of the Interior whowas a scientist specializing in the forestry, wildlife,and water issues that are under the Department’sauthority?

and interest groups, often with an emphasis on issue areas forwhich they were previously responsible on congressional com-mittees.10 High officials in the bureaucracy also move in andout of government. As these actors move between jobs, theirinterests and expertise keep them in contact with each otherthrough conferences and individual communications as theydevelop working relationships. When bills are formally pro-posed, individuals from throughout the network are likely touse their contacts in seeking to amend the bill’s wording,lobbying for its passage, or attempting to block its progressthrough the legislative process. The “revolving door” ofemployees moving between federal government service and in-terest groups or lobbying firms raises concerns that an agencymay be “captured” or controlled by officials who have longalliances with and commitments to specific interest groups.

For example, Gale Norton, the Secretary of the Interior un-der George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006, had previously worked asan attorney for the Mountain States Legal Foundation, an interestgroup that challenged environmentalist groups in court by argu-ing against government restrictions on land use and by advocatingfor the use of federal lands by ranchers, recreational vehicles, andoil exploration companies.When she left her post in 2006, she be-came a legal advisor for Royal Dutch Shell, an oil company thatobtained lucrative federal land leases for obtaining oil from the In-terior Department that Norton had been heading.11 Such “re-volving door” job movements between government agencies andthe interest groups and businesses with which they deal createrisks of the appearance of impropriety or even corruption. Dothese individuals improperly use their government authority tosteer agency decisions in favor of specific interests in order to ob-tain a lucrative job or other benefits for themselves? In Gale Nor-ton’s case, the U.S. Department of Justice launched a criminalinvestigation in late 2009 that sought to determine whether shehad violated laws against steering government business to favoredcompanies and discussing employment with a company that hasdealings with the government within the area of the governmentofficial’s authority.12 News reports stated in 2010 that no chargeswould be filed against her.

The Bureaucracy and InformationOfficials appointed by the president to head executive agenciesinvariably advocate laws—at least in public—that reflect the pres-ident’s policy agenda. Occasionally, long-time officials within thebureaucracy with experience and expertise may disagree withlaws and policies sought by the president and presidential ap-pointees.They may also disagree with new interpretations of ex-isting laws or with presidential efforts to change current policies.These officials may get in touch with their contacts among per-sonnel who work for congressional committees, thereby alertingsympathetic members of Congress to initiate investigations,

n Issue Networks (Policy Communities): Interest groups,scholars, and other experts that communicate about, debate, andinteract regarding issues of interest and thus influence public policywhen the legislature acts on those issues.

EXAMPLE: The Obama administration’s effort to reform the nation’s health care systemwas shaped by input from pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, health-related interestgroups, labor unions, economists, lobbyists for corporate interest groups and senior citizens, doctors,hospitals, and officials in the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services.

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



cost more than $400 billion, but they had been reassured by theWhite House that it would not.The chief actuary for the Cen-ters for Medicare and Medicaid Services conducted an analysisthat indicated the legislation would cost at least $100 billionmore, but his superior, the director of the Medicare office,threatened to fire him if he revealed this to members of Con-gress.Two months after Congress approved the legislation, theWhite House budget director revealed that the new law wouldactually cost more than $530 billion (see Figure 8.3).13

This risk of distorted information is one reason thatCongress also seeks to gather its own information throughlegislative committees and through the Congressional BudgetOffice and Government Accountability Office, an investigativeagency that reports to Congress.The range of policy issues is sovast, however, that Congress must inevitably rely on officials inthe bureaucracy for important information about many publicpolicies. Even though most employees in the federal bureau-cracy are civil servants who are not formally affiliated witha political party, they may face pressure from presidentialappointees to take actions that violate their own ideals of

performing their jobs with neutrality and competence. If theydisobey superiors, they may be passed over for promotion,transferred to undesirable positions or offices, or threatenedwith dismissal based on phony charges of incompetence.

Some employees within the bureaucracy stand up againstactions by executive branch superiors by providing informa-tion about misconduct by government officials. Individuals who are willing to provide such information are known aswhistleblowers, and they often risk workplace retaliation inthe form of dismissal, demotions, and other sanctions intendedto punish them for their actions and to deter others from re-vealing politically damaging information. In 2004, for example,an issue emerged in the presidential campaign when a seniorcivilian contracting official in the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-neers claimed that Halliburton Corporation, the business pre-viously chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney, had receivedpreferential treatment in the awarding of lucrative contracts forreconstruction projects in Iraq.14 Because the disclosure trig-gered investigative actions in Congress, the official’s supportersfeared that she would suffer retaliation. Her lawyer asserted thatshe should be shielded by the Whistleblower Protection Actof 1989, a federal law intended to prevent officials in thebureaucracy from being punished for their efforts to protect thecountry from governmental misconduct.

In theory, this statute should protect whistleblowers, but inindividual cases, it may be difficult for affected individuals torefute their superiors’ claims that they are being punished forpoor performance rather than for providing well-intentioned,revealing information. For example, just as her attorney feared,the civilian whistleblower from the Army Corps of Engineerswas removed from her position and demoted, with a reductionin salary, after she testified before a congressional committee.15

RegulationsDepending on their responsibilities, federal agencies may receiverule-making authority from the statutes that Congress enacts.Therule-making process gives officials in the bureaucracy power overthe development of public policy. In some cases, the legislationcreating an agency will use general language to describe its mission.For example, as the political scientist Robert Katzmann concludedfrom his study of the FTC,“In the absence of clearly defined statu-tory objectives, the Federal Trade Commission apparently has widediscretion in determining the goal (or goals) that it should pursue.”16

General statutory language can become the basis for the bu-reaucracy’s development of its own precise rules—agency-createdlaws called regulationsn, which govern the topics under a partic-ular agency’s jurisdiction. Commentators often describe regula-tions as filling in the precise details of rules for society based onthe broader directives set forth in statutes. In other cases, Congressmay enact statutes that specifically delegate to agencies the author-ity to formulate the precise rules to govern a particular subject.

SOURCE: February 10, 2005, New York Times Graphics. Copyright © 2005 bythe New York Times Co. Reprinted with permission.

New estimates for the cost of the Medicare prescription drug benefit, approved by Congress in 2003, cover a 10-year period different from the one in the original estimates.

Gauging Medicare Drug Benefit’s Cost

$400billion

$534billion

$724billion*

NOVEMBER 2003 JANUARY 2004 FEBRUARY 2005

10-year estimates for the2004–2013 fiscal years

10-year estimate for the2006–2015 fiscal years

From the Congressional Budget Office, cited by the

Bush administration

From the White House

From the White House

*Reflects the net cost to the government: total payments of $1.2 trillion, minus $468 billion in premiums paid by Medicare beneficiaries, compulsory contributions by states and federal savings in Medicaid.

FIGURE 8.3 n The Cost of Medicare Drug BenefitsIn seeking to gain congressional approval for its Medicareprescription drug plan, the Bush administration reportedlypressured an expert in the bureaucracy to keep quietabout cost projections that it knew would make the planunacceptable to many Republican members of Congress.The figures showing significantly higher expected costswere only revealed after the program had been enactedinto law. —Does the president have too much influenceover the bureaucracy?

n Regulations: Legal rulescreated by government agenciesbased on authority delegated bythe legislature.

EXAMPLE: In order to protect public safety, regulationsissued by the U.S. Department of Transportation define howmany hours each week truck drivers can be on the road andhow many hours of rest they must have between driving shifts.

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



Statutes written by Congress also specify the proceduresthat agencies must use in developing regulations. Normally,these procedures include publication of proposed regulations, aperiod during which the public may comment on the propos-als, and a process for hearings about the desirability and poten-tial effects of the proposed regulations.These procedures giveinterest groups the opportunity to encourage agencies to adoptnew proposals, to work for change in proposals that originatedwith the government or other groups, or to block (if they can)proposed regulations adverse to their interests. For example, in2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used its au-thority under the Clean Air Act by moving forward with pro-posed regulations to set standards for greenhouse gas emissionsfrom automobile tailpipes and power plants. Energy companiesobjected to the regulations and also devoted considerable en-ergy to lobbying Congress for legislation that would block theEPA’s action. Environmental groups countered by lobbyingmembers of Congress to withhold support from any new legis-lation that would stop the EPA regulations.17

The rule-making process creates opportunities for influ-encing the results. Interested individuals’ relationships with of-ficials in the bureaucracy come into play through issuenetworks. Interest groups that give campaign contributions andendorsements to the president’s political party can also lobbyovertly. Because some regulations are controversial, agencies areoften instructed during election campaigns to slow down theprocesses by which rules are changed and created so that thepolitical party opposing the president cannot use pending reg-ulations as a campaign issue.18 Clearly, this rule-making processgives officials in the bureaucracy significant influence over thedevelopment of regulations affecting a wide range of policyissues, ranging from air pollution rules to workplace safety reg-ulations to the approval of new drugs and medical treatments.

Although judgments about the desirability of specific reg-ulatory changes always depend on the values of a particularobserver, it is generally agreed that presidents have opportuni-ties to exploit the rule-making process to advance their ownpolicy agendas. For example, critics accused the Bush adminis-tration of using these tactics to lengthen the hours that long-haul truckers could drive in one shift, despite evidence aboutthe risk of car–truck collisions when drivers are tired; approvelogging in federal forests without the usual environmentalreviews; dilute rules intended to protect coal miners from blacklung disease; and relax air pollution regulations for factories andpower plants.19 The Bush administration and its supportersresponded to criticisms by claiming that the government ham-pers business productivity with too many needless regulations.In 2009, the Obama administration used the regulatory processto pursue its own goals, including improved gas mileage stan-dards for motor vehicles, government funding for stem cellresearch, and federal control over the safety standards for sub-ways and light rail systems.20

Quasi-Judicial ProcessesThe bureaucracy affects policy in some agencies through hear-ings that look similar to the duties of courts in examining evi-dence and issuing decisions. In the course of making thesedecisions, officials in the bureaucracy interpret statutes and reg-ulations and thereby shape policy through their application ofthe law. Depending on the agency and the purpose of the adju-dicative procedures, these processes can be formal or informal.There are also differences in the extent to which these processesare adversarial and thereby permit two sides to argue againsteach other in front of decision makers within the bureaucracy.

Officials in government agencies may use these processeswhen investigating whether individuals and corporations areobeying laws and regulations. In 2009, for example, the FCC re-sponded to complaints from members of the public by launch-ing an investigation about swearing and an allegedly obscenegesture by award recipients on NBC’s broadcast of the GoldenGlobe awards.21 Much like judges in a court, the commissionersmake their decisions based on an examination of evidence andan interpretation of the law related to broadcast standards. More-over, their interpretation of the law and their imposition ofstrong sanctions help shape policy and provide guidance forother broadcasters about permissible program content.

Judicial processes also exist when citizens are denied re-quested benefits from the government. For example, if peoplebelieve that their physical or mental disabilities prevent themfrom working and that they qualify for disability payments fromthe Social Security Administration, they must file an applica-tion with their local Social Security office and provide medicalevidence about their disability. If their local office deems themineligible, they can appeal to an administrative law judge(ALJ) within the Social Security Administration.The ALJ holdsa formal hearing, in which the claimant may be represented byan attorney, and medical evidence is presented to document theclaimed disability22 (see Table 8.5). Similar ALJ hearings andquasi-judicial decisions are made in other agencies concerningmatters such as immigration and labor union disputes.

STUDENT profileIn July 2007, two law students at Cornell University, KristenEchemendia and Heidi Craig, succeeded in persuading theBoard of Immigration Appeals that an immigration judge hadmade mistakes in ordering the deportation of a Guatemalanman. The man had been tortured by military officials inGuatemala and had escaped to the United States, where he livedand worked quietly for 13 years. When he was arrested byAmerican officials for entering the country illegally, he soughtto gain asylum—in effect, special permission to stay in theUnited States—because of the risk that he would be torturedand killed if he was sent back to Guatemala. He had no lawyer

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6



to represent him at his original immigration hearing, however,and he spoke little English.The Cornell students reviewed therecords of the hearing and argued that he had been denied hisconstitutional right to a fair trial, because he had not been givenadequate opportunity to present evidence about his physicalscars and psychiatrists’ reports on his depression and other prob-lems resulting from the detention and torture in Guatemala.

As with other judicial-type processes within the bureau-cracy, immigration hearings do not receive public attention, andlarge numbers of cases are processed with relatively little timespent on many of those individual cases.Thus the risks of errormay be greater than in a regular criminal or civil court, in whicheach side is represented by a lawyer in public proceedings.

The Cornell students were able to help the man becausethey had specialized knowledge and advanced education in law.However, simply by being aware of the nature and importanceof Social Security disability processes, immigration hearings,and other matters within the bureaucracy, college students maybe able to direct people to helpful resources.

Oversight and AccountabilityAs you’ve seen in the various ways by which agency officialsshape policy, bureaucrats can have significant influence.Yet theiractions typically are not noticed by the public or the news me-dia.Without public attention focused on the decisions of agency

officials, it is difficult to know what they are doing and to makesure they do not exceed their authority or otherwise make im-proper decisions. However, oversight mechanisms do exist.

All three branches of government have the power to sub-ject the bureaucracy to oversight and accountability.The presi-dent attempts to oversee, guide, and control the bureaucracythrough the supervisory authority of political appointees at thetop levels of each agency. These appointees are supposed tomonitor the work of subordinates and ensure that officials ineach agency, as they produce regulations and implement statutes,are working to advance the president’s preferred interpretationsof laws.The threat of sanctions exists, because even though itmay be difficult to dismiss civil service employees for most oftheir actions, the superiors in each agency can affect promo-tions, bonuses, and job assignments through the performanceevaluations that they conduct annually on each employee.

There is also legislative oversight. Christopher Foremandescribes this as “two interlocking congressional processes: theefforts to gather information about what agencies are doing andto dictate or signal to agencies regarding the preferred behavioror policy.”23 Oversight by the legislative branch arises whencongressional committees summon officials to testify. By press-ing these bureaucrats with questions in a public hearing, mem-bers of Congress can attempt to discover whether laws arebeing implemented effectively and justly. If members are un-happy with the performance of officials in specific agencies,

TABLE 8.5 Applying for Social Security Disability Benefits

APPLICANT DECISION MAKERS

• Step 1. Submit application forms. Records needed to demonstratethat applicant meets the criteria for (1) enough total years workedcontributing money to the social security system to become eligible for consideration; (2) worked at least half the time in yearspreceding claimed disability; (3) contact information for doctors.

If disability claim is denied, then:

Decision makers: After officials in Social Security Administrationdetermine if applicant’s work history makes the individual qualified for benefits, medical personnel in state agency receive referral fromSocial Security Administration to obtain medical records and evaluateapplicant’s capacity to work.

• Step 2. Request reconsideration. If disability claim is denied, then: Decision makers: Entire file reviewed by officials in Social SecurityAdministration who did not take part in the original decision.

• Step 3. Appeal decision to quasi-judicial process in Social SecurityAdministration. If disability claim is denied, then:

Decision makers: An administrative law judge (ALJ) within SocialSecurity Administration will conduct a hearing at which the applicantand the applicant’s attorney (if represented by counsel) can presentevidence and witnesses before ALJ decides whether the originaldenial of benefits was improper.

• Step 4. Appeal decision to the Appeals Council within the SocialSecurity Administration. If disability claim is denied, then:

Decision makers: Members of the Appeals Council within the SocialSecurity Administration will review records and either deny the claimor refer the case back to the ALJ for further review.

• Step 5. File lawsuit in U.S. District Court. Decision makers: U.S. District Court judge considers evidence anddetermines whether the denial of benefits by the Social SecurityAdministration was improper.

SOURCE: U.S. Social Security Administration. http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/ssa.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php?p_page=1&p_cv=1.50&p_pv=&p_prods=&p_cats=50 Accessed on April 11, 2010.

ISB

N1-256-75663-6



1. The “iron triangle” can be influential over agencydecisions becausea. Congress often requires an ironclad, three-step

process for the creation of regulations.b. the president, the cabinet secretary, and the

Supreme Court must agree on the wording ofevery regulation.

c. of relationships and communications betweenindividuals in interest groups, congressionalcommittees, and agencies.

d. the Constitution divides power between threebranches of government.

2. Someone inside the bureaucracy who reveals toCongress that an agency has violated its own rules ormisused funds is generally called aa. provocateur. c. administrative law judge.b. whistleblower. d. patron.

3. What term have contemporary scholars used to betterillustrate the complexity of the original iron triangleconcept?a. regulatory process c. issue networkb. Federal Register d. Senior Executive Service

4. How many branches of the government possess thepower to provide oversight and impose accountabilityon the bureaucracy?a. three (Congress, president, judiciary)b. two (Congress, president)c. one (Congress)d. none (the bureaucracy is independent)

ANALYZE

1. Briefly explain what a regulation is and how one iscreated in the federal bureaucracy.

2. What are quasi-judicial processes of the federalbureaucracy?

IDENTIFY THE CONCEPT THAT DOES NOTBELONG

a. Iron triangleb. Regulationsc. Federalismd. Whistleblowere. Issue networks

The Lobbying Pathway and Policymaking

Assess the mechanisms and processes that influence and oversee the federal bureaucracy.8.4


they can publicize these problems and thereby cast politicalblame on the president.This tactic puts pressure on the presi-dent and top appointees to ensure that agencies perform prop-erly. Moreover, Congress controls each agency’s budget. Ifagencies disappoint or clash with Congress, they risk losingneeded resources. Congressional control over funding thereforecreates incentives for cooperation and compliance by officialsin the bureaucracy.24

Judicial oversight comes into play when individuals and in-terest groups file lawsuits claiming that agencies are not imple-menting laws properly or are not following proper proceduresin creating regulations.The many quasi-judicial processes withinthe bureaucracy are also subject to oversight through appeals tothe federal courts from adverse judgments by ALJs, agency com-missions and boards, and other bureaucratic decision makers.

Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner faced toughquestioning from members of Congress when summonedto testify about the Obama administration’s programs forkeeping banks from collapsing and reviving the nationaleconomy. —How does Congress influence the actions offederal agencies?

8.4

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6


276

Conclusion

The size of the federal bureaucracy reflects the policyambitions of the national government. If the govern-ment of the United States focused only on national de-

fense, foreign relations, and taxation, as it did in the foundingera and for most of the nineteenth century, the federal bureau-cracy would be both smaller and narrowly focused on thoselimited areas.Today, however, Congress writes laws establishingrules and programs covering a host of policy issues, from agri-culture to energy to health care.To implement these complexprograms, create relevant regulations, and enforce the laws en-acted by Congress, the bureaucracy needs sufficient resourcesand trained personnel.

Despite the negative images the word bureaucracy calls tomind, the federal government needs large agencies to gather in-formation, maintain records, educate the public, provide services,and enforce laws.As the national government enters new policyarenas or emphasizes new policy goals, such as homeland secu-rity in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11,2001, the bureaucracy changes through reorganization and real-locations of money and personnel.

The bureaucracy plays a major role in public policythrough a form of the lobbying decision makers pathway. Gov-ernment agencies influence policy in several ways, none ofwhich are clearly visible to the public or well covered by themedia. Personnel in government agencies must implement thelaws enacted by Congress and the policy initiatives developed

by the president. If officials in the bureaucracy lack resources,knowledge, motivation, or supervision, the impact (or lackthereof ) of policies on citizens’ lives may differ from the out-comes intended by legislative policymakers and the executivebranch.This occurred when MMS officials failed to fulfill theirresponsibilities for inspecting and supervising offshore oildrilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico, as discussed at thebeginning of this chapter. By becoming too closely tied to theoil companies that they were supposed to oversee, these MMSofficials did not enforce laws on safety standards.

Congress and the president rely on the bureaucracy for in-formation and expertise about many policy issues. Officials in thebureaucracy may influence legislation through formal testimonyto congressional committees as well as through informal contactsin the issue networks with committee staffers and interest groups.Officials in the bureaucracy also create law and policy throughrule-making processes for developing, changing, and eliminatingregulations. Modern presidents see the rule-making process as ameans to advance their policy agendas without seeking the ap-proval of Congress—and often without announcing to the publicthe precise implications of the changes that have been made. Inlight of the bureaucracy’s daily involvement in the complete rangeof policy issues affecting the United States, this component of na-tional government will remain extremely important and influen-tial, despite the fact that the American public does not recognizeor understand its actions and impact.

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


CONCLUSION CHAPTER 8 277

How do elements of the bureaucracy both strengthen and weaken its effectiveness?KEY CONCEPT MAP

The creation of new departments contributes to the size and expense of the bureaucracy; it also enables the federal government to affect policy areas that may be handled better by states and cities.

Critical Thinking Questions

If you had to eliminate an existing federal government department, which department would you eliminate and why? Are there additional federal government departments that should be added to address specific policy issues?

As the country faces new policy challenges, new departments can be created to increase the federal government’s expertise, resources, and capacity to take action.

TTtoto

An

Political leaders may not have enough issue-specific expertise or be effective at managing complex organizations; they may also have compromising ties to interest groups and political parties.

Critical Thinking Questions

What if all cabinet secretaries had to meet specific educational and experience qualifications to be appointed to their positions? Would departments be run more effectively? Why or why not?

Experienced political leaders, such as former governors and members of Congress, are accustomed to dealing with a variety of policy issues and are skilled at dealing with legislators, the news media, and other government officials.

Civil service employees often resist the president’s efforts to initiate new policy priorities. They may not be easily fired if they do their jobs poorly or disobey the president.

Critical Thinking QuestionsWhat if all civil service employees could be fired when the president or politically appointed department heads were dissatisfied with their performance? How would that affect government operations?

Civil service employees are hired based on educational qualifications, experience, and expertise. They are protected from being fired for political reasons, which encourages them to make decisions based on expertise, not politics.

Private contracts are often steered to friends and political supporters, and the government cannot easily supervise or control how well private contractors do their jobs.

Critical Thinking QuestionsAre there specific government functions and services that should never be placed under the control of private contractors? Which functions? Why?

The government can give contracts to private businesses that may be able to perform a variety of services and functions in a more efficient and cost-effective manner.

ororitie

aisist

pdd

efofo

caprpr

ve

Strengths Weaknesses




Creation of New Departments

Civil Service Selection Process

Privatization

Appointed Political Leaders as Agency Heads

Privatization

Many Americans have a negative image of the bureaucracy. Itcan be easy to overlook the role of government agencies inproviding the facilities and services that make modern societypossible. Without roads, schools, airports, drinking water,sewage systems, and other government services, we wouldhave a very different society. —If you were running for

Congress, would you tell voters that the federalgovernment is “too big,” “not big enough,” or merely“underappreciated” at its current size? What would youdo to either change the size of government or to changevoters' perceptions about the bureaucracy?IS

BN

1-25

6-75

663-

6


278

Review of Key Objectives

The Federal BureaucracyTrace the development of specificfederal departments and agencies.

(pages 252–257)

The bureaucracy in the executive branch of the federalgovernment is composed of departments, independentagencies, independent regulatory commissions, and gov-ernment corporations that have authority over specifictopics across the vast array of policy issues facing theUnited States.The specific departments were created overthe course of history as the country encountered policy is-sues that required the attention of the federal government.The original departments created at the formation of theConstitution, including Treasury and State, reflected recog-nition of the flaws in the previous Articles of Confedera-tion. Other departments were created later in history as thenation faced new issues such as urbanization, educationalreform, and large numbers of aging veterans from WorldWar II and other wars in need of medical care.

KEY TERMSBureaucracy 252Departments 255Independent Agencies 255Independent Regulatory Commissions 255Government Corporations 255

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS1. Are there any federal departments that are unnecessary

because their missions could be handled better by stategovernment or private organizations? How wouldpublic policy be different without these agencies?

2. Are there any new departments that should be created inthe federal government (e.g., Department of EconomicDevelopment) or any agencies that should becomecabinet-level departments?

INTERNET RESOURCESRead about the organization and responsibilities of a fed-eral department, such as the U.S. Department of Trans-portation at http://www.dot.gov or the U.S. Departmentof Homeland Security at http://www.dhs.gov

ADDITIONAL READINGGoodsell, Charles T. The Case for the Bureaucracy, 4th ed.Washington,

DC: CQ Press, 2003.

8.1

Departments andIndependent Agencies

Analyze the debate over whether theheads of federal agencies should bepolicy experts or loyal politicalappointees.

(pages 258–263)

The executive branch is organized into departments.Thepresident appoints a secretary to head each department, aswell as the attorney general to lead the Department of Jus-tice.These appointees (plus the heads of a few other desig-nated agencies) constitute the president’s cabinet. Politicalappointees may be politicians or individuals with policyexpertise who share the president’s policy goals. However,most personnel in the bureaucracy are civil service em-ployees who remain on the job as presidents come and go.Although political appointees are typically committed tothe president’s agenda, the central role of political ap-pointees at the top of government agencies raises questionsabout whether these individuals have enough knowledgeabout the issue areas for which they bear responsibility.

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS1. Should there be minimum qualifications related to

education and expertise in order to gain a presidentialappointment to lead a department or other agencymanaged by a political appointee?

2. Is it important for Americans to see diversity in thepresident’s cabinet? Why or why not?

INTERNET RESOURCESRead about the individual appointees in the president’s cabi-net and find links to the departments of the executive branchat http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/cabinet. html

Independent agencies have their own Web sites, suchas the Federal Communications Commission at http://www. fcc.gov, the Federal Trade Commission at http://www.ftc.gov, and the National Labor Relations Board athttp://www. nlrb.gov

ADDITIONAL READINGKatzmann, Robert A. Regulatory Bureaucracy. Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press, 1979.

Kettl, Donald F., and James W. Fesler. The Politics of the Administra-tive Process, 4th ed.Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2008.

8.2

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


279

The Nature ofBureaucracy

Describe the image people have of thefederal bureaucracy, and evaluate thebureaucracy’s advantages anddisadvantages.

(pages 264–269)

The popular image of the bureaucracy is of large, imper-sonal organizations that are inefficient and unresponsive.The advantages of a bureaucracy stem from providingorganizations with clear lines of authority in which eachemployee has specific responsibilities and expertise. Ideally,bureaucracies are useful for standardization and consistencyin providing government services. However, bureaucraciesoften fall short of their intended performance goals.As aresult, critics have suggested that private businesses shouldassume responsibility for some of the tasks currently han-dled by government.

KEY TERMSPatronage System (Spoils Systems) 266Civil Service System 266Hatch Act 266Decentralization 268Privatization 268Senior Executive Service (SES) 269

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS1. Do the advantages of bureaucracy outweigh the dis-

advantages?2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of privati-

zation? Can you think of examples of the privatizationof government functions that have worked well orworked poorly?

INTERNET RESOURCESLearn about job opportunities and employment policies inthe federal civil service at http://www.usajobs.gov and atthe Web site for the U.S. Office of Personnel Managementat http://www.opm.gov

Read a report by the Urban Institute on the privati-zation of government social services at http://www.urban.org/publications/407023.html

ADDITIONAL READINGMeier, Kenneth J., and Laurence J. O’Toole. Bureaucracy in a

Democratic State: A Governance Perspective. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press, 2006.

Wilson, James Q. Bureaucracy:What Government Agencies Do andWhy They Do It. New York: Basic Books, 1991.

8.3

The Lobbying Pathwayand Policymaking

Assess the mechanisms and processesthat influence and oversee the federalbureaucracy.

(pages 270–275)

The bureaucracy implements statutes and creates regula-tions, but its effectiveness is limited by its resources, infor-mation, and expertise.

Whistleblowers in the bureaucracy provide informationabout misconduct within agencies.They are supposed to beprotected from retaliation because they are helping to en-hance accountability by calling attention to agencies’ failings.

Presidents use the rule-making process to advancepolicy agendas through regulations and thereby steer thebureaucracy’s actions.The rule-making process also pro-vides opportunities for interest groups to influence regula-tions. Congress uses oversight mechanisms, such as holdinghearings that require testimony from agency officials orenacting new legislation to limit actions by governmentagencies.

KEY TERMSIron Triangle 270Issue Networks (Policy Communities) 270Whistleblowers 272Whistleblower Protection Act 272Regulations 272Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) 273

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS1. Do the unelected officials in government agencies

possess too much power in the process for creatingregulations?

2. Do adequate mechanisms exist to hold bureaucratsaccountable for their decisions and actions?

INTERNET RESOURCESRead published proposed regulations awaiting public com-ments at http://www.regulations.gov

ADDITIONAL READINGForeman, Christopher H., Jr. Signals from the Hill: Congressional

Oversight and the Challenge of Social Regulation. New Haven,CT:Yale University Press, 1988.

Gormley,William T., and Steven J. Balla. Bureaucracy and Democ-racy:Accountability and Performance, 2nd ed.Washington, DC:CQ Press, 2007.

8.4

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6


1. Why do bureaucracies exist?a. Individuals naturally seek to pass their authority

and power into the hands of groups.b. Bureaucracies are intended to prevent politicians

from having power over public policy.c. Bureaucracies carry out the work of the

organizations in an efficient and effective way.d. Bureaucracies don’t exist; the term refers to a

misconception about how government operates.

2. Why is the federal bureaucracy as big as it is?a. The size of the federal bureaucracy reflects the policy

objectives and commitments of the nationalgovernment.

b. Its size is mandated by Article II of the Constitution.c. The federal budget deficit has caused 35 cabinet-

level departments to be abolished since 2002.d. The U.S. Supreme Court instructed Congress to create

a specific number of agencies.

3. How does the bureaucracy share public policymaking withother governmental entities?a. The president shapes laws that help define public

policy; Congress directs bureaucratic agencies to carryout those laws.

b. Congress and the president create laws to definepublic policy; officials working in federal agenciescarry out those laws and policies.

c. Experts in bureaucratic agencies enact statutes thatare implemented by the president unless Congressvetoes the statutes.

d. Working upward through a vertical hierarchy ofauthority, bureaucratic experts inform the presidentof laws that are necessary to conform to his politicalviews; the president urges Congress to write and passthe appropriate legislation, which the judiciary thensigns into law.

4. Which federal agency has the primary responsibility forresponding to oil spills in the ocean?a. None. It is the responsibility of state and local

agencies.b. Department of Energyc. U.S. Department of Emergency Preparednessd. U.S. Coast Guard

5. A successful political candidate or party rewardingsupporters with government jobs and firing supporters ofthe opposing party is known asa. gerrymandering.b. logrolling.c. the merit system.d. the spoils system.

6. How many different organizational entities are in thefederal bureaucracy?a. one (departments)b. two (departments and independent agencies)c. three (departments, independent agencies, and

independent regulatory commissions)d. four (departments, independent agencies,

independent regulatory commissions, andgovernment corporations)

7. The creation of the Department of Health, Education, andWelfare (HEW) in the 1950sa. marked the expansion of the bureaucracy into policy

areas that the Constitution did not anticipate.b. was a natural extension of the Constitution’s original

emphasis on federal responsibilities for publiceducation.

c. required a constitutional amendment, because itradically departed from the policy focus prescribed inthe Constitution.

d. shifted federal authority in policy matters from thelegislative to the executive branch.

8. New departments of the federal government have generallybeen createda. because of new amendments added to the

Constitution.b. because events and changes in American society

presented the government with new challenges.c. because presidents issued executive orders that

created new departments that were of interest tothat particular president.

d. because members of the president’s cabinet decidedto eliminate existing departments without consultingwith Congress.

9. What do the heads of federal executive departments do?a. They work within their departments to make sure the

officials and employees beneath them are contentand well-compensated.

b. They act as a liaison between the department andthe economy.

c. They work directly for the president in trying tomake their department respond in accordance withthe president’s policy preferences.

d. They act as a buffer between their own departmentand foreign governments.

10. Regulatory entities are usually calleda. councils.b. advisory boards.c. agencies.d. caucuses.

11. The FCC isa. a governmental corporation.b. an independent agency.c. a department.d. an independent regulatory commission.

12. “Iron triangles” are required by the Constitution as ameans to hold the bureaucracy accountable.a. trueb. false

13. People’s negative perceptions of the federal bureaucracyare often unfaira. because all federal employees are always working

hard and in the best interests of the public at large.b. because federal employees do not receive good

wages or benefits.c. because people often do not realize the difficult

challenges of administering government programs.d. because “red tape” is an urban myth.


Chapter Review Test Your Knowledge

ISB

N1-256-75663-6


CHAPTER REVIEW CHAPTER 8 281

14. Why was the civil service merit system enacted?a. so that federal employees would become more

courteous on the jobb. so that federal employees would get and retain their

jobs based on their competence, not their politicalaffiliation or personal connections

c. so that federal employees could be legally bound tocarry out their responsibilities effectively

d. so that federal employees could be held to consistentperformance standards and could be fired if theirsuperiors disliked them

15. What is a significant practical problem with the federalbureaucracy?a. Standards of competence are so high that it becomes

difficult to find and retain suitable employees.b. There are few people who want to work for the

federal government.c. Its size makes it slow to change or respond to policy

shifts signaled from the president or Congress.d. Workers are fired so frequently at the whim of

cabinet members that agencies cannot developenough expertise to understand the laws that mustbe carried out.

16. What risks are faced by whistleblowers?a. They may be demoted or lose their jobs if protective

laws are not applied to them.b. They may be arrested for revealing confidential

information to members of Congress.c. They may be sued by newspaper reporters for

defamation.d. They face no risks and are most likely to be given

awards for service.

17. Why are critics worried about the pattern of officialsleaving the federal bureaucracy to join interest groups or lobbying firms in the same field of interest—and evenreturning to government service in that same field?a. because they can often get cynical and burned outb. because this pattern prevents a particular issue

network from including a diverse group of participants

c. because such individuals might lack sufficientexpertise

d. because the agencies might in effect become too heavily influenced by alliances in the privatesector

18. Why do the Congressional Budget Office and theGovernment Accountability Office exist?a. to gather and communicate to Congress information

available only to Washington insidersb. to communicate the results of congressional hearings

to the publicc. to gather and provide to Congress information

undistorted by the political agendas of the presidentor bureaucratic agencies

d. to monitor, in a nonpartisan way, the budgetary and policy actions of the federal courts—especiallyexcise courts

19. When a new president enters the White House, the newadministration is likely toa. permit Congress to control government agencies

until the Supreme Court has confirmed the cabinet’smembership.

b. fire most employees in the federal bureaucracy in order to replace them with political appointees.

c. seek to issue new regulations that advance thepresident’s policy preferences.

d. ignore the bureaucracy and let it keep doing its job as it has always done in prior administrations.

20. When government agencies unduly influence thedevelopment of new statutes and policy through the“iron triangle” or issue networks, the publica. usually finds out about it from the news media.b. usually finds out about it from governmental

publications.c. almost never finds out about it.d. really does not need to know about it.

Exercises Apply what you learned in this chapter on MyPoliSciLab.

Read on mypoliscilab.com

Study and Review on mypoliscilab.com Explore on mypoliscilab.com

Watch on mypoliscilab.com

eText: Chapter 8

Pre-TestPost-TestChapter ExamFlashcards

Video: The CDC and the Swine Flu

Video: Internal Problems at the FDA

Simulation: You Are a Deputy Director of the Census Bureau

Simulation: You Are the Head of FEMA

Simulation: You Are the President of MEDICORP

Simulation: You Are a Federal Administrator

Comparative: Comparing Bureaucracies

Timeline: The Evolution of the Federal Bureaucracy

Visual Literacy: The Changing Face of Federal Bu-reaucracy

ISB

N1-

256-

7566

3-6


living democracy, national edition, 3/emyresource.phoenix.edu/.../livingdemocracy_3e_ch08.pdfthe...

Documents