Summary of the book The Founders, the Constitution and Public Administration by Michael Spicer
Uploaded by sandpiper1 on Oct 26, 2011
This essay summarizes the book by Michael Spicer.
In his book, Michael Spicer seeks to resolve was he sees as a conflict between the “optimism of public administrators and the view of most economists. His thesis, which he expands later in the book, is that
“[M]any, if not most, public administration writers exhibit a rationalist worldview that places great faith in the powers of human reason, the Founders held … a more anti-rationalist worldview that stresses the limits of reason. This conflict in worldviews … makes it difficult for us as public administration writers to argue for the legitimacy of public administration on constitutional grounds. (P. xi).
This observation immediately begs the question, “Why should we care about legitimacy in this context?” This is not a trivial question; Americans in general dislike and distrust bureaucracy and to submit to its authority they must believe that public administrators have a right to make a certain number of decisions for them.
Spicer points out that as partisan politics have gotten progressively uglier, Americans increasingly tend to view public administration through the prism of their own ideology. Conservatives see public administrators as “obstacles” to their “attempts to increase liberty”; liberals see public administrators is “preserving and reinforcing existing social and economic inequities…” (P. 4). In a climate marred by such hostility it’s no surprise that public administration is no longer regarded as legitimate.
Spicer says that this lack of legitimacy can have “real costs.” (P. 4). First, if talented people do not believe government service is legitimate and worthwhile, good candidates will not come forward for possible employment and the overall quality of public administration will suffer.
Second, public perception that public administrators are incompetent undermines their morale. Third, if political leaders perceive a lack of legitimacy in public administration, they may “impose overly restrictive controls on public administrators that that damper their flexibility and raise the costs of providing services to taxpayers. (P. 5). Spicer acknowledges that rules are necessary to a functioning bureaucracy; what he objects to is a sort of “micro-management” technique that stifles effective administrative action and is counterproductive. (P. 5).
Finally, lack of legitimacy can “contribute to erosion of public regard for the law.” (P. 5). Given that most people’s only point of contact with government is at the local level, this is an important point.
Having established...