** REQUIRED READINGS **
From your first big packet, please read:
- “A Government of Strangers” by Hugh Heclo, pp 247-253
- “Bureaucracy” by James Q Wilson, pp 271- 277.
We will commence discussing these in class Tues afternoon, so if you want to get a jump on it, you’ll be better for it. At least skim them during lunch Tues.
Post clarification and thoughtful Qs, and/or evaluation here.
– Bromley
Clarification Questions
What does mundane operations mean?
What does incongruously mean?
Important Questions
Why is information that is available about top people in government limited to the public?
Why do they have no control over subgovernments? Isn’t risky to have a part of the government that the executive officials can’t control?
If the subgovernments’ ultimate purpose is “self-sustaining in control of power in its own sphere” doesn’t that mean they are trying to become independent of the government?
Why would they want to sabotage and spread a negative leak about a political appointee who is supposedly on the same side as them?
Why should an executive political leader have to know how to manage and deal with bureaucratic sabotage?
Is Gilbert saying that the government takes so long to agree and pass new laws because of all the restrictions the Constitution has made so that the government doesn’t overwhelm the people? Isn’t that allowing the people to overwhelm the government?
1. What government positions constitute an officer as a bureaucrat?
2. In order to obtain a high power job granted by public election, the majority of politicians must make general promises that are hard to keep once they’re in office. Doesn’t the current campaign system promote popular distrust of politics even if the candidates have the best interests of the people in mind?
3. Doesn’t the fact the bureaucrats, politicians, and lobby groups use personal relationships with each other to achieve political goals or stop political actions corrupt the system of checks and balances?
4. Won’t distributing contract jobs to the lowest bidder make it so the worst contractor gets the job? How does excluding the best workers provide equity?
5. Wouldn’t privatizing jobs like the building of the skating rink make the process more efficient, cheaper, and take away the political motives of bureaucrats trying to win the approval of interest groups?
Sabotage, secrecy, friends for political reasons, and three way phone calls…..this whole institution sounds like the plot of Mean Girls…
How come we only hear about the President and his life rather than some of the highest officials in the government and the Cabinet? Is the President a figure head of America? Why is the President blamed for a lot of Americas problems?
Why is being the President fine but being a politician or a bureaucrat is not fine? Why do people hate politicians and bureaucrats?
How can Ignorance be security?
If there is so many problems in the bureaucracy, shouldn’t we fix them?
If there are so many rules on cities about building, why don’t private companies build everything and the city doesn’t have to worry about the cost of building everything?
So is a slow government a efficient government?
I’m a bit unclear on who these sub-governments are. Is it congress or people who work under the President but aren’t bureau members?
If these sub-goverments exist under the President, why does he have no control over them?
Do the cases of sabotage within the political sphere, such as the two presidential assistants, show that corruption exists between the president and bureaucrats?
Why is sabotage so necessary for power in the bureaucratic world?
Are red tape procedures de jure or de facto?
How do we measure a government’s efficiency objectively?
Do the negative connotations behind “bureaucrat” and “politician” affect the actual corruption of them?
How can we make sure governments are more efficient?
If inefficiency is not the most important bureaucratic problem, then what is?
If America has so-called “self rule”, why are there so many problems with inequality and arbitrary rule?
What is sub rosa opposition?
Hugh Heclo – From a government of strangers
1.What type of political leadership in the executive branch is Hugh referring to? Who/what fulfills the role of “government of strangers”? What makes them strangers? — “In every new crop of political appointees, some will have had government experience and a few will have worked together, but when it come to group commitment to political leadership in the executive branch they constitute a government of strangers.” Pg. 247
2.In what manner, why and how is the struggle to control a bureaucracy a “leap into the dark”?
3.Is it fair under the political world that these political appointees and several thousands of top bureaucrats take executive actions without the public’s opinion? Is public opinion even considered in this situation? Pg. 248
4.Has there ever existed any society without the existence of a republic or political influence? Did Native Americans have any sort of ruling society?
5Please clarify the following, “Ignorance may not be a bliss, but it cab be security”.
6Would applying more rules in the White house regarding sabotage serve as a catalyst to improve security?
7.If a political executive ignores a bureaucratic sabotage
8.Is it an appropriate approach for a political executive to ignore bureaucratic sabotage?
9.How has bureaucratic sabotage evolved for the past years? What kind of impact has it had in the development of the executive branch?
10. Does the government system need to have a leading community of bureaucrats? What other alternative exists to this issue? Sometimes it’s good to face change.
James Q. Wilson – From Bureaucracy
1.How is business greedy? Is it greedy? Isn’t America an essential product of businesses?
2. Is it okay and a sanitary idea for Americans to rely all their daily life duties on technology?
3. Does the efficiency of the government have a true impact on all the people and their faith the government?
4. If a citizen invest money to “help” the government’s efficiency. Does this action give more power to the citizen or is it a neutral influence?
5. Under the ruling of the government what is it that people want first, equality or protection? Which one is more important to Americans?
Additional Questions
1. What countries are currently allies of the United States? What countries aren’t?
2. Seeing that America’s modern system is not “enough” and is does not provide satisfaction to most Americans. Then, what does satisfy Americans?
3. How can the government and the people work together to understand each other and the clear needs that each “faction” honesty desires?
1. Where do you draw the line between bureaucratic and political forces? Are they truly separate entities, or are they merely two sides of the same coin?
2. Does the iron triangle exist in all bureaucracies, or only in “corrupt” ones?
3. Are leaks really corrupt, or are they just a form of piracy used to manipulate the system in their favor?
4. Does the government have too many hoops to jump through to achieve their goals? What would be the result if some of these hoops were removed?
5. At what point do protections from government become restraints?
It sounds to me like bureaucracy is very corrupt. At he beginning of the reading, Heclo says that “Bureaucrats have a legitimate interest in maintaining the integrity of government programs and organizations.”, which confuses me, because then he goes on to explain the iron triangle, and all of the corruption that goes on in a bureaucracy. Bureaucracy sounds like bickering to me, with politicians not liking each other and doing passive aggressive to not so passive aggressive things to each other. Like Heclo said, “Executive politics involves people, and certain individuals simply dislike each other and resort to personal vendettas.”, which is something that I don’t think there is a feasible fix to. Heclo brings up whistleblowers, who I think are very important, because they bring light to a little bit of the corruption that is going on in the bureaucratic system. I also find it interesting that parents would want their children to be presidents, but not politicians, even though a president is a politician.
I think that it is very obvious that a private job can be done better than a public job. If people were legally allowed to fill up potholes on my island, there would be much fewer potholes. The people could do it for less money, and they would probably be able to get things done in convenient times, instead of doing roadwork in front of a school at 7 in the morning, when everyone is trying to get to school. Wilson seems to be very supportive of bureaucrats, which I don’t agree with. I think there will always be too much arguing and to many people having to make decisions, and almost nothing will ever be done better than it is by a private group. Governments are inefficient, and will continue to be as long as there is a need for a majority or 2/3rds vote. The government worries too much, and focuses on making sure everything goes there way, so they are not able to take ambitious risks that will advance our country even farther. The government tries so hard to be fair and responsive, that they stop being fair and responsive and start being restrictive. Wilson glorifies the bureaucratic system a bit too much, and that bothers me.
Why are governments making ice skating rinks?
Is Bob DWB / DWD?
1) bureaucrats seem to be selected through a meritocratic process to ensure that competent people get the job. Why cant congress move towards this model in electing its members?
2) what does sub rosa opposition mean?
3) can politicians control what the government does by controlling those in charge of doing it?
4) I agree with Wilson that bureaucracies are sometimes inefficient due to bureaucratic rules and procedures.
5) I like how Wilson attributes bureaucratic behavior to certain constraints.
6) government agencies are government bureaucracies, not independent corporations, therefore, they have a completely different
set of incentives.
1. Is sabotage caused by humans’ selfish needs and wants?
2. So who is ethically better, the bureaucrat or the politician?
3. Does either the bureaucrat or the politician have more power over the other?
1. Do bureaucrats act against the executive branch in ways to gain, or protect powers?
2. Do people who sink to fighting petty disagreements because they don’t like someone really deserve a seat in public office? Are they mature enough to handle it?
3. Should bureaucratic “favors” towards someone who is trying to be reelected be seen as sorts of bribes, and if so should they be made illegal?
4. Should we reform a system of public works if they cannot even build an ice-skating rink? Is a system that requires 20 people to say yes too consuming?
5. If inefficiency is a small price to pay for protections in government, why do we then complain when we see the effect of it? Should we be forced to accept one? Either efficiency and less safeguards or more safeguards and less efficiency?
Hugh Heclo – From a government of strangers
1. What is the process in which someone gets elected to be a bureaucrat? Are there any requirements for these positions?
2. Should public election matter when it comes to appointing people for the bureaucracy?
3. Should the president regulate these sub-governments to limit their interest?
4. Are the the bureaucracy being efficient? How do we know that the bureaucracy are doing their job right?
5. Can bureaucrats not be politicians? Does the current system work?
James Q. Wilson – From Bureaucracy
1. Is the process of using the fewest dollars or the least time to produce satisfactory rink the most efficient process?
2. If inefficiency is not the only problem according to p.275 on the third paragraph, what are other problems in a bureaucracy?
3. Is Wilson implying that the people should not put any constraints on bureaucracies if not they can not be efficient? Is this true or false?
4. Should the people put more demand on bureaucracies or should the government do it?
Clarification Questions:
1. What exactly is the iron triangle?
Thoughtful Questions:
1. Why is it difficult to have effective leadership in a bureaucracy in Washington?
2. Why is it that we know more about what the President does on a daily basis, but at the same time, he barely has any say in decision making?
3. Couldn’t there be a way to either prevent or predict sabotage in political executives so that our government won’t be considered as corrupt?
4. How can one truly commit sabotage? In what ways within the government can the saboteur cause corruption?
5. Could there be a way to defend against the iron triangle?
^^^^^these are for Hugh Heclo
1. Why is such a high level of responsibilty givng to political appointees, who have not proving their effectiveness.
2. What were the views of the founding fathers on bureacracy?
3. Are bureacracts able to have arbitary rule?
4. Does bureacracy actually help the citizens, if it can take years to get things that are in the public interest done or never at all?
5. If bureacrats say they do not know what they should know, then why are they not fired from their jobs?
6. Why has the government not eliminated or at least cut down on bureacracy?
7. Does making small breaks in bureacracy only hurt the government’s infrastructue by making that department unstable for a length of time, and would the same kind of sabotage occur again when the department is stablized?
8. Do the constrants on bureacracy really come from the people?
9. Has the United States of America gotten to the point, where more laws need to be removed than made?
10. Will things like sending a card in the mail eventually turn into a long bureacratic process?
Clarification Question:
Why are some phrases in a different font?
Thoughtful Questions:
1. Is private enterprise more efficient than public bureaucratizes or the other way around?
2. Are there any other roles that would go into the refurbishing of the ice skating rink besides Accountability, Equity, Fiscal Integrity, and Efficiency?
3. Why is inefficiency a small price to pay for freedom and responsiveness?
4. Why would the government spend time and money on a skating rink anyway?
5. Why is it that the more rules we impose, the harder it is for our government to be fair and responsive?
^^^^^these are for James Wilson
I really liked these readings, Hugo Heclo’s piece was really helpful for my essay as he discusses governmental corruption and the disconnect between the partys. The way the uses the “iron triangle” was a really good explanation of the relationship between the different branches and the role lobbys play in politics. I found Wilson’s document rather simple, it goes to show how inefficient our government is at handling infrastructure problems. Of coarse the private sector will be faster because they can pay up front without being scrutinized by the public. But aspects of this article will end up in my term paper.
1. Can politicians guide what government does by controlling the people who do it?
2. To what extent does appointment power make political control of the bureaucracy possible?
3. What are the implications of the politicization of the bureaucracy for political control and bureaucratic autonomy within the executive branch?
4. How do political executives (interested in political control) and bureaucrats interact with each other?
5. Why do high-ranking career bureaucrats try to ensure the administration continually?
Heclo refers to political leadership as a “government of strangers”. Does this put the system at a disadvantage for being people of different backgrounds? Does it make it harder for the system to agree on certain policies?
Would Heclo agree with the saying “the devil is wise because he is old”?
What is a bureaucratic system?
What is a civil servant’s role within government?
What are some similarities and differences between private enterprise and public bureaucracies?
Hecol’s document shows how the government bureaucratic system works through the iron triangle. In my opinions the bureaucrats act like a bunch of middle school girls who just go around and around in circles and never get anything done. This is also what Wilson’s document shows. The government in inefficient at solving problems because of the majority voting system and the want to go to one side or the other rather than reach a compromise. In this case the private sector will always rule over the public sector.