The Bureaucracy: The Rise And Fall Of The Bureaucracy

Though the bureaucracy began simply, with George Washington’s creation of the Department of Foreign Affairs, over the last 226 years, its size and power have increased exponentially. From homeland security to the delivery of mail, this “fourth branch of government” possesses a wide scope of responsibilities. However, the necessity for such a structure often comes into question. According to Max Weber, who believed that “the bureaucracy was likely to acquire an ‘overpowering’ power position, the bureaucracy is an “inevitable consequence” of modern day life (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). A specialized bureaucracy provides valuable expertise, an asset which the Founders did not take for granted, as they had suffered a committee

system run by “part-time amateurs”, under the Articles (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, WIlson). Although the bureaucracy is often cumbersome, especially when one is standing in line at the DMV, it seems that it is a “necessary evil” for government to manage and regulate “the complexities of modern life.”
Necessary as it may be, the bureaucracy often proves to be stagnant, corrupt, and mediocre, however the source of these bureaucratic issues remains murky, at best.

In “Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power,” Peter Woll states that our system of government, “. . in many ways supported bureaucratic organization and functions independent of the president,” (311). According to Woll, the Framers intended to establish an independent bureaucracy, as they gave Congress substantial power over the administrative “branch.” However, because of the bureaucracy’s independence, Woll asserts that, though he possesses the authority, the president often lacks the power to control the bureaucracy. Naturally, this can lead to the corruption and inefficiency of the administrative process. Also contributing to this inefficiency and corruption, is the very nature of the bureaucracy itself. By definition, a bureaucracy is a “large, complex organization of appointed officials,” (“American Government: Institutions and Politics”); this inherent complexity causes many of the issues of bureaucracy. In discussing bureaucratic agencies’ budgets, James Wilson claims that “. . since measuring the output of a bureau is often difficult. . .the bureau has a great deal of freedom within which to seek the largest possible budget,” (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). Essentially, the vastness of each bureaucratic agency makes close scrutiny a time consuming and futile effort. Additionally, Woll contends that “. . the three branches do not always use to the fullest extent their authority to regulate the bureaucracy,” (“Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power”, 314). This assertion suggests that perhaps the source of the bureaucracy’s problems lie, not within the institution itself, but within the reluctance of the other branches of government to regulate it. Wilson proffers another explanation for the bureaucracy’s inefficiency in his scrutiny of the USPS, arguing that

“The problem. . was not omnipotence but impotence,” (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). Wilson explains that, because government had a monopoly on the mail delivery service, there was simply no reason for the Postal Service to attempt to be more efficient, as it had no competition. Upon further scrutiny, the source of the bureaucracy’s inefficiency and corruption seem to be both intrinsic and extrinsic.
A final concern regarding the bureaucracy is that the system is undemocratic. Woll indicates that, although the Constitution calls for a separation of powers, “The administrative process. . often combines various functions of government in the same hands,” (“Constitutional Democracy and the Bureaucratic State”, 314). Considering the great lengths to which the government goes to separate power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches, it seems relatively undemocratic that the bureaucracy combines the functions of these branches. Another undemocratic characteristic of the bureaucracy is that is evident when Wilson deems the bureaucracy the “unaccountable administrative realm” (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). Additionally, Woll contends that, although the president is constitutionally responsible for the “administrative branch,” it would be nearly impossible for him to be informed enough about all the bureaucratic agencies to stand as its sole representative. However, if Woll is correct and the president is unfit to represent the bureaucracy, who can the people hold accountable? It is appointed, not elected, officials who run the bureaucratic agencies, making these department heads essentially as isolated from the people as the justices of the Supreme Court. Wilson adds “investing discretionary authority in the hands of a public agency” as a threat to democracy (“The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, Wilson). The ability of agencies to lower regulations puts the general public in jeopardy, as issue networks often develop between a special interest and a bureaucratic agency. However, despite the bureaucracy’s non-democratic aspects, it is, quite certainly a “necessary evil.”