1 Introduction
The term âbureaucracyâ possesses negative connotations usually surrounded by images of incompetence, laziness, sloth, and inefficiency. The concept of responsiveness or the potential for nonresponsiveness deserves equal, if not more, attention. In theory, bureaucracies are neutral organizations, tools to be used for good or ill. In reality, they have the capacity to become independent policymakers that operate beyond the cognition of average citizens. Classical theorists recognize both the need for bureaucracy and the dangers they pose. In the modern era, when the tentacles of the state can reach almost any corner of the world, this danger is perhaps more unrelenting than ever. An ever enlarging government bureaucracy slowly but surely may erode individual liberties and the ethos of democracy, if not checked by outside or internal forces. This chapter describes the growth of the administrative state and the ethos of bureaucracy that can support the state. It provides examples of autonomous actions by government organizations and their potential to act in manners contrary to established law.
2 Growth of Administrative State in the US
2.1 PreâNew Deal Growth
Administration of one type or another is necessary for governing large numbers of people. One person cannot do it all; some delegation is essential. This is both an ancient and modern axiom. For example, the Bible (Exodus 18: 1â27) informs readers that upon leaving Egypt, Mosesâ father-in-law Jethro advised him that he would âsurely wear awayâ if he continued to take it upon himself to sit in judgment of everyone who came to him to instruct them about the statutes and laws of God. Jethro recommended that Moses identify able men who âfear God, men of truth, hating covetousness.â These men would âbe rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.â Moses would have jurisdiction over âevery great matterâ but others would judge âevery small matter.â This burden-sharing arrangement would enable Moses to âendureâ and enable the people to âgo to their place in peace.â
Crafters of the US Constitution took heed of the administrative prescriptions found in the Bible. They recognized the need for both delegation and oversight, ever fearful of the dangers posed by concentrated power. These apprehensions correspond with a framework that prioritizes both limited government and the protection of individual liberty. The US Bill of Rights as well as other amendments to the Constitution explicitly outlines such protection. The first ten amendments (Bill of Rights) prohibit the government from intrusion into personal prerogatives, such as religious worship, right to assembly, or freedom of speech. The Bill of Rights enumerates procedures the government must follow to protect against unreasonable search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment. Among other protections, amendments outline procedure for redress of breaches in constitutional rights. These protections help ensure freedom from an intrusive, oppressive, and expansive public sector.
The US founders intended the size and scope of the public sector to be modest. The first agencies of the federal government were the Departments of War, State, Navy, Treasury, and Office of the Attorney General. At the end of the Federalist period (1800), about 3000 appointed civilian officials labored in the federal government. The original State Department consisted of nine employees in addition to the Secretary of State. The War Department did not reach 80 civilian employees until 1801. Over time, the number of agencies and personnel increased steadily. An expansion of governmental responsibilities led to the creation of the Department of the Interior in 1849, the Department of Justice in 1870, and the Post Office Department in 1872. By 1881, the number of federal personnel grew to about 95,000; by 1925, federal workers increased to nearly half a million (Wilson 1975, p. 77).
Clientele pressure represents one factor that contributed to the growth of the federal bureaucracy. The Department of Agriculture and the Department of Commerce and Labor arose to protect the interests of farmers, industrial workers, and business. In 1862, (a time when approximately three-fourths of Americans lived off the land) the government created the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Originally, the department principally confined its activities to research and education with the goal of developing and disseminating new farming techniques. Over time, however, the USDA expanded its services into activities such as economic forecasting, nutritional programs, food stamps, consumer services, rural development, natural resources, and environmental protection (Stillman 1987, p. 42). In 1888, labor organizations such as the Knights of Labor helped secure creation of a Department of Labor. In 1903, the Department of Labor was renamed the Department of Commerce and Labor. During the nineteenth century, client-oriented pressures also led to the creation of bureaucracies at the state level (Wilson 1975, pp. 88, 90).
Regulatory agencies added to the growth of bureaucracy. The inability of states to regulate powerful private entities such as the railroads facilitated the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887. Political pressures fostered the establishment of other regulatory bodies such as the Federal Reserve Board in 1913, the Federal Trade Commission in 1914, and the Federal Power Commission in 1920. Creation of each of these regulatory bodies occurred in a charged political environment. Proponents of regulating massive organizations (such as railroads, banks, utilities, and corporations) were able to muster sufficient political strength to pass legislation that reined in the power of these entities (Woll 1963, p. 42).
The growth of regulatory agencies represents a source of anxiety for some citizens. Critics of these organizations view regulatory agencies as a âfourthâ or hidden branch of government because they play an unpublicized role in shaping policy (Stillman 1987, p. 42). The ability of the public to influence the behavior of nonelected officials in these regulatory bodies remains a constant source of concern. In the era of Donald Trump and Tea Party populism, fears of a âdeep stateâ have gained traction. This fear is consistent not only with bureaucratic growth but also with the great discretionary power of career bureaucrats. The ability of these bureaucrats to exert their authority over average citizens is profound. Their power is often obscure to the average citizen. Many citizens therefore view bureaucrats as unaccountable threats to their liberty since career officials are not directly subject to the electoral will of the people. This seepage of accountability represents a corruption of the principle of government by consent of the people.
2.2 New Deal and PostâNew Deal Growth
The Great Depression shattered confidence in the ability of the private sector to maintain economic growth. The New Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt embraced a more expansive role for government to provide assistance to those in need. The New Deal employed large numbers of people for public works and other endeavors. Two prominent programs of the New Deal period include the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Projects Administration. These programs helped to fill the economic void produced by the massive Depression beginning with the stock market crash of 1929. With the New Deal, a large permanent bureaucracy emerged. In 1932, the federal bureaucracy comprised 572,000 employees; by 1939, 920,000 employees; and by 1950, 2.6 million (p. 49). Philosophically, the Great Depression shifted attitudes away from the view that poverty is the result of individual characteristics such as indolence, drug abuse, or alcoholism. With the Great Depression , people who were previously hardworking and prosperous found themselves unemployed and in desperate economic straits. It became much easier for them to accept the notion of an expansive government. This government could correct for market failure that was evident. The government became the employer of last resort as Keynesian policies of government spending became accepted.
With the declaration of war against Japan on December 8, 1941, and the subsequent declaration against Germany on December 11, 1941, unemployment was no longer an issue. Federal government spending expanded by 132 percent between 1941 and 1942; spending increased by 111 percent from 1942 to 1943. By 1945, expenditures for defense accounted for 37 percent of the nationâs gross domestic product. In 1940, 14.6 percent of the nationâs labor force was unemployed. Unemployment declined to 1.9 percent by 1945. By 1950, defense spending as a percent of gross national product declined to 5 percent. Defense spending as a percent of total federal spending declined from 90 percent in 1945 to 32 percent in 1950 (Tassava 2008).
National security remained a concern even after World War II. The National Security Act of 1947 established the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to collect, coordinate, and disseminate foreign intelligence. In 1946, Congress created the Atomic Energy Commission to foster and control the peacetime development of atomic science and technology. Congress set up the National Science Foundation in 1950 to promote basic and applied research and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1958 in response to the USSRâs launching of the Sputnik satellite in 1957 (p. 51).
The next great wave of government activism occurred during the 1960s with Lyndon Johnsonâs Great Society programs. Johnsonâs Great Society introduced programs such as food stamps, worker training, Medicare, and Medicaid. Numerous regulations were enacted relevant to environmental pollution, worker safety, and consumer protection (Cohen 2000, p. 54). The Johnson administration created agencies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, and Appalachian Regional Commission. In addition, the Great Society expanded grant programs to state and local governments in support of hospitals, schools, and highways (Stillman 1987, p. 50).
More recently, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 established the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The new department consolidated 22 agencies related to homeland security into a single Cabinet-level agency. Organizations such as US Customs, Immigration and Naturalization Services; Immigration and Customs Enforcement ; Transportation and Security Administration; Federal Emergency Management Agency; US Coast Guard; and the US Secret Service were consolidated into the new DHS. The creation of the DHS represents the largest US government reorganization in 50 years. In fiscal year 2017, DHS received a net discretionary budget of $40.6 billion and comprised more than 240,000 employees (United States Department of Homeland Security 2017).
Solely exploring numbers of federal agencies and the size of the federal workforce, however, underestimates the true influence of government. While the official count of US federal employees (not including uniformed military personnel and postal workers) has not changed considerably in recent years a more careful investigation reveals that the US public sector has âstealthilyâ expanded using the proxies of state and local government, for-profit businesses, and nonprofit organizations (Dilulio 2014). Raw personnel data, however, grossly underestimates the true size and scope of the federal government. Government organizations such as the Department of Defense conceal their true size by hiring outside contractors. The government obscures numerous national securityârelated expenditures. In addition, the US government does not openly reveal âblack budgetâ programs that cover expenses related to military research and covert operations. Examples of black budget expenditures include spending for the F-117 stealth attack aircraft and the B-2 stealth bomber. For a long time the government denied the existence of these aircraft.
The public sector also accounts for a large proportion of the revenues to state, local, and nonprofit organizations. Between 1960 and 2017, the number of state- and local-government employees tripled to more than 18 million. Federal money contributes greatly to the growth of lower-level governments. Between the early 1960s and early 2010s, the inflation-adjusted value of federal grants for the states increased more than tenfold (Will 2017).
In an example of federal influence, contributions from the national government help fund many local police departments. In addition, agencies such as the Defense Department supplemented their workforce with an almost equal number of for-profit contract employees. In 2006, there were nearly as many private contractors as US military soldiers in Iraqâ100,000 contract employees versus 140,000 troops. Finally, a large proportion of the revenues to nonprofit organizations flow in one way or another from the public sector. If payments to state and local government, payments to for-profit businesses, and funding of nonprofit organizations are summed, government spending in 2017 was 3.5 times bigger than in 1960 (Will 2017).
2.3 Explanations for Growth of Government
Various theories exist as explanations for government growth. Wagnerâs Law posits that increases in the size and scope of government correspond to changes in society, particular to changes in urbanization and industrialization. According to this view, as society transitions from an agricultural to an industrial economic base, the demands on law enforcement, fire protection, transportation, education, and sanitation systems increase. Urbanization, with its potential for conflict, creates a need for government to take on more responsibility in supplying vital services. Other explanations for government growth focus on revenue created by economic growth, policymakers underestimating the true cost of programs, and politicians wishing to curry favor with constituents (Nice and Fisher 2016, p. 49).
Crises, surges of demand for government activity, clientele pressure , and budget maximization are commonly cited explanation for government growth. The Great Depression and World War II directly led to vast increases in the size and scope of the public sector. Franklin Rooseveltâs New Deal created an array of agencies to a...