As the scope of government activity has grown during the
twentieth century, so has the bureaucracy. The way that
bureaucracy is organized affects its ability to carry out
its tasks.
Americans are constant critics of the federal
bureaucracy. We tend to believe that it has grown too big
and too intrusive. In looking at the historical
development of the bureaucracy, we can identify important
reasons for its growth. When we ask if the bureaucracy
can be cut down, we once again confront the tension
between majoritarianism and pluralism. Although most
Americans want a smaller federal government, different
segments of the population work hard to protect the
programs and agencies that are of value to them.
Bureaucracies are conventional because they make policy
decisions. Under the administrative discretion given them
by Congress, they have the authority to make policy,
usually through rule making or adjudication. These
decisions are not carried out in a scientific or purely
rational way. Rather, they are subject to the pulls and
pushes of the political system.
It seems easier to catalogue the failings of bureaucracy
than it is to find cures for them. In recent years,
deregulation has been seen as a means to reduce the size
of government while reforming the bureaucracy by
diminishing its role over the marketplace. However, As
the savings and loan scandal and other problems
illustrate, risks as well as benefits are associated with
deregulation.
- Return
to Top ©1998 by Houghton
Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
|
Summary |
|
-
|
|
|
IDEAlog