"politicians
and public administrators fulfill different and potential overlapping roles
within the U.S system governance. What advantages and disadvantages are there
to the lack of “ administration” in the U.S Constitution? What specific
Constitution amendments would you suggest to correct this situation? [If none,
how would you suggest overcoming the disadvantages?]"
The
United States of America is well known around the world as the father of
democracy because of the good principles, especially the separation of powers
that have been outlined in the Constitution. The genius of the American
system of government is that its powers and authority are deliberately divided.
This division means that the President (Executive), the Congress (Legislative),
and the courts (Judicial) each mathematically can serve as one-third of the
American governmental body. This doctrine of separation of powers is a
fundamental rule of law deeply embedded in American culture and governmental
commitment to equal distribution of power, and makes the U.S. Constitution as a
living document. Beckett and Koening
(2005) argues:
The discussions of legal foundations of
government commonly begin with the U.S. Constitution because it is the founding
document and the supreme law of the land. The constitution establishes the
foundation and authority of government and provides the structure and functions
of the three primary branches: legislative, executive and judicial. (p. 1)
The clear goal of the Constitution is to have a
perfectly balanced scale because, if powers were not shared and checked, a
dictator or power monger would control the destiny of the rights and the
liberties of citizens.
In
modern times, every society has a government and the role of government is to
fulfill the need of society. Government is the composition of politicians on
one hand and administrators on the other hand. Politicians are elected
officials who are selected for a specific time while administrators are
appointed by governing boards. The role of administrators is the execution of
the law, policy, and chinks. In fulfilling their duties, politicians and administrators
fulfill different and potentially overlapping roles, because administrators are
committed to politicians’ goals and at the same time engage in
interactions with politicians. Box
(2004) argue:
Public
service practitioners are often involved in providing information and giving
recommendations to policy makers as they formulate a policy, before policy
decision is made. However, it was also recognized that the relationship between
practitioners and elected officials is an ongoing part of governance in
public organizations. (p. 39)
Wilson (1887),
in other words, argued that public administration is a detailed systematic
execution of public law. Every particular application of general law is an act
of administration.
Public administration has not been given
a separate article or description in the Federal Constitution. When one reads
the constitution Article 1 gives power to the Legislative branch (Congress),
Article 2 Gives power to Executive branch (President) and Article 3 gives power
to judicial branch (Court). There is no
place where administration has been mentioned in these three major foundation
Articles in the U.S. Constitution.
The advantage of a lack of
administration in the Constitution is that, in essence, all three government
functions have been collapsed to the administration; thus, public
administrators make rules, (legislature) implement these rules (Executive) and
adjudicate questions concerning their application and execution (Judicial).
According to Beckett and Koening (2005),” Public administrators rule every
branch of government. The source and structure for public administrators is an
essential concern in bureaucratic theory.” (p. 3). Other theories have also
argued that public administration should base more on management side rather
than the foundation of law.
The disadvantage of the lack of
constitutional language about administration affects the importance and
legitimacy of public administration practice. Public administration is
organized around the professional responsiveness. The basic concept behind
responsiveness is that, since the administrative branch is a policy execution
center of government, it must be structured to enable function to counteract
factions by providing efficiency and effectiveness. This is well illustrated in
Max Weber’s ideal type of bureaucracy, which, instead of allowing overlapping
in duties Max Weber’s ideal stresses the importance of functional
specialization for efficiency by adopting the concept of hierarchy for
effective coordination. In this ideal overlapping should be minimized, and not
overdone. The same ideas have well explained in Pendleton Act that public
administrator should be based on merit rather than political connections.
A second disadvantage is that the source
of legal authority for government is hard to identify. Some powers are
enumerated, but there is silence as to others. Take the example of the will of
the majority generally prevails, but is limited when the exercise of that would
also violate individual rights. This often limits what can be done by
administration in implementing public policy as the Constitutional rights of
states and individuals, must be observed and protected.
The
specific Constitutional amendment I would propose to ensure that public
administration is efficient, effective, responsive, and accountable is through
the repeal of the 17th amendment, which talks about how to elect
senators. Senators compose one branch of the Constitution (legislative), which
makes laws. The changes of the method of electing senators from one whereby
they are elected by legislatures of the various states to one in which they are
elected by direct popular vote of the people within the state. The logic behind
is to transfer more power to popular control away from the state legislature, thereby
weakening the power of the state to advance its interest as defined by a
majority of its people through the state legislature. The 17th
Amendment removes both a built-in negation of popular sovereignty and a means
of advancing state policy that was an inherent part of the original checks and
balances under the Constitution. Also, by restoring the election of senators to
the methods directed by the founding fathers, the rule of corruption can be
weakened and the influence of the states in affecting national policy can be
restored to its original stature.
As a conclusion the lack of
administration in the Constitution should not be an excuse for causing
mismanagement or inefficiency in enhancing the role of administrators in
performing their duties. The Constitution is central to the public
administration; despite administration having no chance of being in the
Constitution, one cannot talk about good public practitioners outside the
Constitution. Good public administration means good constitutionalism. Despite
being left out, every public administrator who understands not only the
importance of the constitution but also, what it means about the
politics/administration dichotomy will improve his or her effectiveness. I
personally believe that without Public administration the national and its
constitutional system might fail to operate effectively. Nalbandian (1994) pointes that:
Despite the desire
of these managers simply to do their job, they cannot escape the fact their
role places them on a very prominent stage and ensures continued examination of
their roles, responsibilities and values as they continue to serve the needs of
elected officials who are operating in an even more challenging environment.
Also as we have seen in the above
context the lack of administration in the Constitution has devolved to the
public administrators more responsibility along with the three branches of
government. Because of this responsibility, selection of public administrators
should be done strictly on the basis of merit to avoid litigation. Despite the
lack of administration in the Constitution, the separation of politics and
administration holds out the hope that public administrators can be held
accountable for providing efficiency in government with the same vigor and
discipline in policy execution. And if it happens that there is tension between
politics and administration during the overlapping process, such a situation
can be reconciled where politicians and administrators share an understanding
of their roles and their limitations.
Reference:
Box R.C. (2004). Public administration and
society: Critical issues in american governance. M.E Sharpe, Inc.
Beckett J., Koenig H.O. (2005). Public
administration and law. M.E Sharpe, Inc.
Nalbandian J. (1994). Reflection of a pracademic on
the logic of politics and administration.
Public Administration Review 54 (6) 531-536.
Wilson W. (1887) The study of administration. Political
Quarterly II (2) 197-222.
