Chapter 1: Public Administration: The Basics

In the turbulent landscape of the 1960s, Lyndon B. Johnson stood at a pivotal crossroads, where personal values, political astuteness, and the pressing challenges of the era converged to shape his audacious decision to launch the Great Society initiative.

Johnson's journey had humble beginnings in the rugged heart of rural Texas, where he personally tasted the bitterness of poverty. These formative years etched in him an unwavering commitment to combating economic disparities and extending a helping hand to the less fortunate. His own experiences lit a fire of compassion within, driving his determination to rectify the social and economic injustices he'd witnessed firsthand.

The 1960s were marked by seismic shifts in American society. The civil rights movement raged with demands to dismantle racial segregation and discrimination. Johnson recognized the urgency of addressing these deeply entrenched injustices, firmly believing that America's progress hinged on unity, not division.

Assuming the presidency in the shadow of John F. Kennedy's tragic assassination, Johnson carried the weight of a legacy. He was committed to honor Kennedy's unfulfilled initiatives, particularly in the realms of civil rights and healthcare reform. Johnson was renowned for his legislative acumen and he possessed an uncanny ability to navigate the web of Congress. He firmly believed in the power of government to address society's woes and was prepared to wield his power to drive reforms.

The United States was also enjoying significant economic prosperity. It was a unique moment to take advantage of this windfall and invest in social programs that would enhance the quality of life for all citizens. The stars seemed to align favorably for his vision of a Great Society. And so, as he announced at the University of Michigan, “We are going to assemble the best thought and broadest knowledge from all over the world to find these answers. I intend to establish working groups to prepare a series of conferences and meetings—on the cities, on natural beauty, on the quality of education, and on other emerging challenges. From these studies, we will begin to set our course toward the Great Society.”

President Lyndon B. Johnson meets with Civil Rights leaders Martin Luther King, Jr., Whitney Young, James Farmer. Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum. Image Serial Number: W425-21. In the public domain. https://www.lbjlibrary.org/object/photo/civil-rights-act-1964 

Johnson viewed the Great Society as a moral imperative. It wasn't merely an issue of economic and social policy; it posed a profound question about America's values and its commitment to justice and equality. It was far reaching and included key policy areas such as (this is not inclusive):

• Civil Rights (including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
• The war on poverty (including programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, and Community Action Program
• Education (The Elementary and Secondary Education Act)
• Medicare and Medicaid (These programs for the elderly and low-income Americans hadn’t existed previously)
• Environment (Including, but not limited to, the Water Quality Act and the Clean Air Act)
• The arts (Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts)

This broad and ambitious set of initiatives and programs involved numerous government agencies and a significant expansion of the federal government's role in addressing various societal issues. While it's challenging to come up with an exact count of the number of government offices and employees involved in the Great Society, here are just a handful of the key agencies and departments that played significant roles:

• Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW): HEW was a central agency responsible for implementing many of the Great Society programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, and various education initiatives.
• Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): HUD was created to address urban development and housing issues, aiming to improve living conditions in cities and support affordable housing.
• Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO): OEO was established to coordinate the War on Poverty programs, including Head Start, Job Corps, and Community Action Programs.
• Department of Transportation (DOT): DOT was created to oversee transportation-related initiatives, including highway construction and safety programs.
• Department of Labor: The Department of Labor was involved in various labor-related initiatives, including job training and workplace safety.
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): The EPA was established to address environmental concerns, marking the beginning of significant federal environmental regulation.
• Department of Commerce: The Department of Commerce played a role in economic development and trade-related aspects of the Great Society.
• Civil Rights Commission: While not a department, the Civil Rights Commission was instrumental in monitoring and addressing civil rights issues during this period.

These are just some of the many agencies involved in the Great Society, and there were other federal, state, and local government offices that also played roles in implementing specific programs and policies. Additionally, the expansion of these agencies and the creation of new ones led to an increase in government employment during this era.

In essence, Lyndon B. Johnson's decision to pursue the Great Society was a journey guided by personal experiences, the exigencies of his era, and a steadfast belief in the transformative potential of government. His presidency became a chapter marked by historic legislative achievements, aimed at addressing the pressing issues of his time and improving the lives of all Americans.

The Great Society is also a testament to public administration. Public administration is a field of study concerned with the management of public policies, programs, and services. It is a complex and multidisciplinary field that involves the application of various disciplines, including political science, economics, sociology, law, and management. It is difficult to concisely define public administration and there is no one generally accepted definition because, as the Canadian Encyclopedia puts it, “the scope of the subject is so great and so debatable that it is easier to explain than define.” This is putting it more lightly than Dwight Waldo did in 1967 when he asserted that, “the immediate effect of all on sentence or one paragraph definition of public administration is a mental paralysis rather than enlightenment and stimulation.”

Thus, this chapter provides an overview of public administration rather than any attempt at a succinct definition. We will discuss its significance, and the key components involved in the practice and study but we will stop short of trying to fit it neatly into a box. Scholar David H. Rosenbloom conceptualized public administration as having three definitions-a managerial, a political, and a legal definition. I would agree with this, however I feel that these can be clustered together into a category called “application” and then I would add a category called “academic.”

 Application Definitions of Public Administration

Public administration is the action that the government chooses to take. This can be internal, such as when the governor of Iowa recently restructured some of Iowa’s departments and agencies, or external, like when Maui County in Hawaii set up distribution centers to give out food and water in the wake of the 2023 wildfire emergency. Similarly, the city arborist checking the local trees for Emerald Ash Borers, Police Officers responding to a 911 call, Ag inspectors making sure that meat processing plants are following safety codes, DMV workers processing drivers’ license applications, a manager at the Department of the Treasury firing an employee for violating a security protocol, and the President of the United States meeting with the President of France and 22 million other employees are all practicing the application of public administration. These people also have counterparts in countries around the world. The totality of the working-day activities of all of the world’s bureaucrats is the application of public administration.

The realm of public administration extends to the practical implementation of public interest through the intricate stages of the public policy-making cycle. It is said that Edmund Burke once commented that, “The public interest requires doing today those things that men of intelligence and good will would wish, five or ten years hence, had been done.” This concept finds resonance in the words of Walter Lippmann, who posited “the public interest may be presumed to be what men would choose if they saw clearly, thought rationally, and acted disinterestedly and benevolently.”

This line of thought has roots tracing back to John Stuart Mill, as conveyed in one of his letters. Mill argued that the pursuit of human happiness, including one's own, is more effectively achieved by adhering to general rules rather than scrutinizing the consequences of each individual action. This principle extends even more prominently to the pursuit of the overall happiness of society, as any alternative approach would not only leave people uncertain about the outcomes but also lead to perpetual discord.

In practice, the notion of public interest serves as the universal envelope within which political actors package the policies and programs they advocate. It is a rare occurrence to encounter a lobbying group, public official, legislator, or chief executive proposing a program that is not presented under the banner of being "in the public interest.”

Constitution. In the public domain. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution 

Public administration is the execution of public laws. Any application of a general law inherently constitutes an administrative action. The very existence of administration relies on this legal framework. In the United States, the Constitution of 1787, along with its amendments, serves as the “supreme” governing law. All legislative enactments must align with it, or at the very least, must not blatantly violate it in a manner apparent to the U.S. Supreme Court. The legislation that establishes an agency or program (referred to as enabling legislation) is the law that legally permits a program’s existence. Theoretically, no government administrator can take any action unless it is provided for in the legislation or the rules and regulations that the legislation empowers the agency to establish. Even the President of the United States cannot spend any public funds without legislation to authorize it. In a recent Republican presidential primary debate, former Senator Nikki Haley criticized candidate and former President Donald Trump for having spent too much money during his term, “Donald Trump added $8 trillion to our debt and our kids are never going to forgive us for this.”  Donald Trump, however, could not have spent one penny of that money without congressional approval.

Government officials find themselves in an ongoing dilemma—should they act on a certain problem or not? If so, what should they do? How much money should they spend? Every action, or lack thereof, every single cent spent, falls within the realm of public policy. Such determinations, whether they involve reaching a conclusion or opting for inaction, are orchestrated by those who wield political authority and are subsequently executed by administrative officials within the bureaucracy. Thus, public policy and public administration are inextricably linked, representing two parts of the same machine. One formulates decisions while the other enacts them. Separating the parts doesn't make sense because they all depend on each other. When we make policies, it's not just about putting them into action. Policymaking keeps going, and people keep giving ideas on how to make things better. This feedback can come from citizens, news reporters, or official agencies. No matter how it comes, we need to make new choices, even if that choice is to do nothing.

In democratic nations, government agencies play a pivotal role in implementing legislative acts that embody the collective will of the populace. As Alexander Hamilton said in Federalist 72, “The administration of government, in its largest sense, comprehends all the operations of the body politic, whether legislative, executive, or judiciary; but in its most usual, and perhaps its most precise signification. it is limited to executive details, and falls peculiarly within the province of the executive department.” This process, however, is considerably more interactive and dynamic than a simple separation of powers illustration might suggest. Despite the distinct separation of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches in the United States, all factions engage in a continuous process of influencing and being influenced by one another. Presidents propose legislation to Congress, governors to state legislators, mayors to city councils. In modern government, executives across all tiers do not passively adhere to executing the legislature’s will; instead they actively vie to shape that will and to advocate for the implementation of programs they are eager to introduce. And lawmaking bodies do not simply pass laws and sit back while executive agencies implement them and run programs with no control. There are oversight procedures in place so that lawmakers can see exactly how agencies are running their programs and spending their money. If the lawmakers do not like it, they can pass laws or decrease funding moving forward. Such engagements can, and sometimes do, lead to high-profile and intense clashes, however this is surprisingly rare. The actuality is significantly less dramatic and more routine. The majority of the functions are not newsworthy and we simply do not hear about them.

Alexander Hamilton cca 1790. https://founding.com/founders-library/american-political-figures/alexander-hamilton/ Used under Fair Use exemption to U.S. Copyright law.

Public Administrators

Public employees in the United States play a crucial role in maintaining and delivering essential government services at various levels of government, including federal, state, and local. These public servants come from diverse backgrounds and serve in a wide range of positions, from teachers and law enforcement officers to administrators and healthcare workers. Examining the characteristics of these public employees can provide insights into the composition of the public workforce and its educational profile.

One significant aspect of public employees in the U.S. is their level of education. On average, public employees tend to have higher levels of education compared to the overall workforce. Many public sector positions require at least a bachelor's degree or higher, particularly in fields such as education, healthcare, and administration. For instance, teachers typically hold bachelor's degrees, while healthcare professionals like doctors and nurses often have advanced degrees.

Education is particularly emphasized in federal government employment. Federal agencies often require candidates to have specific educational qualifications for various roles. This can include bachelor's degrees for entry-level positions and advanced degrees for specialized roles. As a result, the federal workforce tends to have a higher average level of education compared to state and local governments.

Furthermore, education is not only a requirement for many public sector jobs but also a pathway to career advancement. Public employees often engage in lifelong learning and professional development to enhance their skills and qualifications. They may pursue additional degrees, certifications, or training programs to stay current in their fields and advance their careers.

In terms of diversity, the public workforce in the U.S. has made significant strides over the years in terms of gender and racial diversity. Government agencies have implemented policies to promote diversity and inclusion, resulting in a more representative workforce. However, challenges related to diversity and inclusion persist in some areas, and efforts to address these issues continue.

Public employees in the U.S. also enjoy certain benefits and job security that can be attractive to many job seekers. Government jobs often provide competitive salaries, comprehensive healthcare coverage, retirement plans, and paid leave. Additionally, public sector employment is known for its job stability, as government agencies tend to be less affected by economic downturns compared to some private sector industries.

Salary differences between public and private employees are a complex and multifaceted topic influenced by various factors, including job type, educational requirements, location, and benefits. It's essential to recognize that comparing these two sectors can be challenging due to their differences in roles and objectives.

In the United States, public employees often work in government agencies, schools, and healthcare institutions, while private employees work for businesses ranging from small enterprises to large corporations. One key distinction lies in the nature of funding. Public employees are typically paid through taxpayer dollars, grants, or government budgets, whereas private employees' salaries come from a company's revenue.

One common perception is that public employees may earn lower salaries than their private sector counterparts. However, this generalization oversimplifies the reality. Public sector jobs often come with benefits such as retirement plans, healthcare coverage, and job security that can offset lower base salaries. In contrast, private sector employees may receive higher salaries but might need to bear more of their benefits' costs.

The discrepancy in salaries becomes more evident when comparing specific professions. For example, entry-level positions in the private sector, especially in industries like technology and finance, often offer higher starting salaries than equivalent public sector roles. However, public sector jobs, such as teaching or law enforcement, tend to provide more predictable pay scales and opportunities for salary growth over time.

Education and experience play a significant role in determining salary differences. In both sectors, individuals with higher educational qualifications tend to command higher salaries. For instance, public school teachers with master's degrees typically earn higher salaries than those with bachelor's degrees. In contrast, some private sector jobs may require advanced degrees for entry, resulting in higher starting salaries.

Geographic location is another critical factor. Salaries can vary significantly based on the cost of living in a particular area. Public sector employees in high-cost-of-living cities might receive higher salaries to offset housing and living expenses. Conversely, private sector employees in these areas may receive even higher salaries due to increased competition for talent.

It's worth noting that public sector employment often comes with greater job security, as government jobs tend to be less affected by economic fluctuations and downsizing. Additionally, public sector employees may enjoy better pension plans, which can be a crucial factor when considering overall compensation.

Public employees in the United States often tend to have higher education levels compared to their private sector counterparts. This phenomenon can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, many public sector positions, such as those in government agencies, education, healthcare, and research institutions, require specialized knowledge and skills that often necessitate advanced degrees or extensive training. Additionally, public sector jobs frequently prioritize educational qualifications and professional certifications, leading to a workforce that values and encourages continuous learning. Furthermore, public sector employment often offers attractive benefits, including support for further education, which can incentivize employees to pursue advanced degrees or professional development opportunities. While higher education levels are prevalent in the public sector, it's essential to acknowledge that there is diversity within the workforce, with a wide range of educational backgrounds and qualifications across various job roles and government agencies.

Academic Definition of Public Administration

Public administration is the study of how governments work, but there's a debate about where it fits in academics. Is it a part of political science, or is political science a part of public administration? According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), public administration is “A program that prepares individuals to serve as managers in the executive arm of local, state, and federal government and that focuses on the systematic study of executive organization and management. Includes instruction in the roles, development, and principles of public administration; the management of public policy; executive-executive relations; public budgetary processes and financial management; administrative law; public personnel management; professional ethics; and research methods'' (NCES).

The field of public administration is a science—a methodical body of knowledge rooted in empirical observations. It is not an exact science though, like the natural or physical sciences, it is instead a social science, operating in the realm of human behavior and the roles of organizations and society. As an academic discipline, it maintains a non-normative stance, devoid of personal bias and characterized by objectivity and generalizability. Scholars in public administration employ the scientific method, using observation, analysis, and experimentation to examine administrative functions. The bedrock of public administration principles and theories lies in observed occurrences, systematic data classification, and analysis, with certain fundamental principles possessing universal applicability. Ultimately the field of public administration can be researched, learned, and taught using these methods, embodying the principles of a scientific discipline.

The roots of public administration as an academic field are often traced to an article by Woodrow Wilson in 1887 which was published in Political Science Quarterly. Title, “The Study of Administration''. He wanted to change how people thought about political science. Instead of just thinking about politics, he wanted to focus on how governments are run. This change was needed because running a government was getting more complicated, and Wilson thought political science needed to catch up.

Certainly, Woodrow Wilson had a broad vision for the field of public administration that extended beyond the immediate concerns of his time. While many of his contemporaries were primarily focused on reforming government hiring practices and moving towards a merit-based system, Wilson saw this as just the starting point. His goal was more ambitious; he aimed to thoroughly examine and improve the functioning of government as a whole.

Wilson made a crucial distinction between administration (the practical operation of government) and politics (the actions and decisions of elected officials). He believed that the two should be kept separate, with administration relying on expertise and efficiency rather than political patronage. In essence, he advocated for a more professional and non-partisan civil service.

Interestingly, when Wilson initially wrote his essay on this topic in 1887, it didn't gain much attention. It was a lengthy piece, and the subject matter wasn't widely popular at the time. However, its significance was later recognized. In 1941, the essay was republished with great fanfare, complete with a reproduction of Wilson's original submission letter. This reissue catapulted Wilson's ideas to prominence, making his work essential reading for generations of students and scholars interested in public administration.

History

The study of how public administration has evolved in the United States since the adoption of the Constitution in 1789 involves numerous perspectives and complexities. This evolution is not straightforward due to the various cycles of government expansion and reduction experienced at all levels of governance.

In his work "Democracy and the Public Service" from 1968, a seminal resource on the early stages of public administration, Frederick C. Mosher identifies five distinct periods spanning from 1789 to the late 1950s (Fig. 1.1). Mosher refers to this era as the "pre-modern" period and examines the individuals who held key roles in public administration during each of these historical phases.

During the early days of the United States, shortly after George Washington's inauguration, federal government positions were primarily occupied by individuals from the upper class, often referred to as "gentlemen." Selection for these roles was based more on an individual's character than their political affiliations. However, these government positions did not offer significant monetary compensation, leading to an emphasis on personal wealth as a qualifying factor. This resulted in elevated standards for eligible candidates, typically from affluent backgrounds. During transitions in administrations, there was some "rotation in office," affecting around 20 percent of positions.

Andrew Jackson coin. U.S. Mint. https://www.usmint.gov/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2008-presidential-dollar-coin-andrew-jackson-uncirculated-obverse.jpg In the public domain.

The start of Andrew Jackson's presidency in 1829 marked the beginning of the "Government by Common Man" era. Jackson's election was centered on the idea of creating a more accessible government that was truly "by the people." While his time in office was marked by significant turmoil, it did not entail a complete turnover of federal positions to party affiliates. However, the concept of distributing government roles to party loyalists after a new leader's victory, known as the spoils system, gained prominence in subsequent administrations. The successes and eventual misuses of this system led to the emergence of the Progressive or Good Government movement, which advocated for reforms.

The era of "Government by the Good" commenced with the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act in 1883, also known as the Pendleton Act. This legislation mandated that government employment be linked to merit and required rigorous competitive examinations to determine the most qualified candidates. This shift prompted the need for training individuals to become more competent government employees. Additionally, the civil service reform movement emphasized the importance of political neutrality among government personnel.

The fourth era, known as "Government by the Efficient," gained prominence and ran parallel to the principles of scientific management associated with figures like Frederick Taylor. Efficiency became the central theme, and government positions underwent scrutiny through new personnel and compensation systems, including position classification. This marked the period when public administration began recognizing itself as a science, establishing principles and theories aimed at enhancing government efficiency and rationalization.

By the late 1930s, public administration had firmly established itself as a distinct area of academic study. Mosher's concept of "government by administrators" indicated a significant shift in scale. By the mid-1950s, the government workforce had grown significantly, with nearly 10 million individuals employed across federal, state, and local governments. Government spending had also increased, reaching 25 percent of the gross national product (GNP). It was evident that government was operating on a much larger scale.

The Administrative Procedures Act

The federal government had grown so large, in fact, that Congress was growing uncomfortable with its scope and power. Because of this, they spent years crafting and passing the Administrative Procedures Act.

The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) is a fundamental piece of legislation in the United States that governs the way federal administrative agencies operate and make decisions. Enacted in 1946, the APA was created to establish a controlled and transparent process for federal agencies to operate. It provides a set of procedural guidelines aimed at ensuring due process, accountability, and public participation in the administrative rulemaking process.

The key components and provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act are:

• Rulemaking Procedures: The APA outlines a structured process for federal agencies to create and modify regulations. Agencies must publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register, allowing the public to comment on the proposed rule. After considering public input, the agency issues a final rule, which is also published in the Federal Register.

• Adjudication Procedures: The APA establishes procedures for administrative hearings, ensuring that parties involved have an opportunity to present evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and receive a fair and impartial decision from an administrative law judge.

• Publication and Transparency: Federal agencies are required to publish various documents, including rules, notices, and decisions, in the Federal Register to inform the public of agency actions. This transparency is a cornerstone of the APA, promoting openness and accountability in government.

• Informal Rulemaking: While formal rulemaking involves hearings and is less common, informal rulemaking is the standard process. It allows agencies to gather public input through the notice-and-comment process without formal hearings.
• Exemptions: The APA provides exemptions for certain agency actions, including military and foreign affairs, as well as specific cases where notice and comment might be impractical or unnecessary.

• Judicial Review: One of the most significant aspects of the APA is its provision for judicial review. Parties affected by agency decisions can challenge them in federal court. Courts can set aside agency actions that are arbitrary, capricious, not in accordance with the law, or without substantial evidence.

• Public Participation: The APA encourages public participation in the administrative process by allowing interested parties to submit comments on proposed rules. This enables agencies to consider a broad range of viewpoints before making decisions.

• Ex Parte Communications: The APA establishes restrictions on ex parte communications, limiting discussions between agency decision-makers and interested parties outside the formal rulemaking process. This helps maintain the integrity of the decision-making process.

• Guidance Documents: The APA governs the issuance of guidance documents, ensuring that they do not carry the force of law and do not impose binding obligations on the public.

• Informal Complaints: Individuals and organizations can file informal complaints with federal agencies if they believe an agency is not following the APA's procedural requirements.

The Administrative Procedures Act plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance between the legislative and executive branches of government, as well as the balance between government authority and individual rights.

Modern Public Administration

The subsequent five decades, spanning from the 1960s to the early 2000s, are often referred to as the modern phase of public administration. During this period, while the dimensions and extent of the federal government remained relatively unchanged, state and local governments experienced notable expansions in both scope and capabilities. Federal budgets essentially doubled, from $46.3 billion in 1960 to $92.5 billion in 1979. However, when assessed as a percentage of the GNP, these figures presented a less remarkable ratio, progressing from 18.5 to 20.8 percent of the GNP. Federal employment also increased by 20 percent, from 2.4 million to 2.9 million. However, when considering the relationship to the population, the level of federal employment in 1979 was essentially consistent with that of the 1950s.

During this timeframe, employment within state and local governments followed a substantially steeper trajectory, escalating from 4.2 million to 13.1 million employees by 1979 and surging to nearly 20 million before stabilizing after 2000. A significant portion of this expansion was within the education sector, a field that stood out as a remarkable value proposition for the government. According to a 2010 census report, education accounted for a significant portion of state and local government employment, but its share of the total payroll was slightly less.

Irving School. Kathyng7210. Used under Pixabay license. https://pixabay.com/photos/school-high-school-education-710056/ 

In a 1980 article, Frederick C. Mosher suggested that these trends were the outcome of profound shifts in the fundamental purposes, phases, and methodologies of federal operations. Mosher contended that the federal government's involvement pattern was transitioning from overt to covert. On one hand, the federal government was diminishing the quantity and extent of its direct engagements, while on the other hand, it was instigating significant endeavors by state and local governments, non-profit organizations, and even private businesses through mechanisms like income support, contracts and grants, regulations, as well as loans and loan guarantees.

According to Mosher, this culminated in a federal administrative stance that increasingly relied on indirect administrative coordination and the transfer of funds. From the perspective of academic study, public administration's concentration remained firmly fixed on the federal government, even as significant developments were progressively gravitating towards other levels of governance.

Figure 1.1

Despite the relatively static dimensions of government in terms of size and scale, the realm of public administration, both as a practice within governmental structures and as a field of study, underwent a sequence of significant transformations and adjustments. The first transformation, as previously mentioned, pertained to what was appropriately termed "Intergovernmental Relations," reflecting the federal government's strategic reorientation concerning its roles and operational methods with regard to its state and local counterparts. Within this landscape emerged a tendency for the federal government to directly allocate entitlement payments to individuals—an inclination that would intensify with the aging of the American population. A prime example of this trend is Social Security, which by 1993 had surpassed defense spending to become the largest category of federal programs.

During the Modern Period, public administration also acknowledged fresh dimensions of public policy and more comprehensive management practices. After the succession of racial disturbances in 1964 and the acknowledgment of profound inequalities within American society, public administration began to scrutinize its commitment to social fairness and its role in advancing race relations, alleviating poverty, and fostering social justice. This gave rise to novel emphases in public policy analysis that evaluated the equity, distribution, and recurrent bias in the allocation of public benefits and social safety net initiatives.         

Watergate Complex. Used under Creative Commons 2.0 license. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WatergateComplex.jpg 

In the aftermath of the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, the field of public administration experienced a significant shift in its focus and priorities, particularly in relation to ethical considerations. The Watergate scandal, which involved illegal activities and abuses of power within the Nixon administration, had a profound impact on public perception of government and those who served in public office.

• Increased Scrutiny: The Watergate scandal was a watershed moment in American politics. It revealed a range of unethical and illegal activities, including the burglary of the Democratic National Committee headquarters and attempts to cover up the involvement of high-ranking government officials. This scandal led to increased scrutiny of government actions and raised questions about the ethical conduct of public administrators.
• Loss of Public Trust: The scandal eroded public trust in government institutions and public officials. The perception that those in power could engage in unethical behavior or abuse their authority for personal or political gain shook the foundation of democratic governance.
• Reevaluation of Ethical Standards: In response to the crisis of trust, the field of public administration began to reevaluate its ethical standards and practices. There was a growing recognition that ethical behavior and accountability were crucial for maintaining the integrity of government institutions.
• Dialogue on Ethics: Public administration scholars, practitioners, and policymakers initiated an ongoing dialogue about ethics in the public sector. This dialogue encompassed discussions about the ethical responsibilities of public administrators, the importance of transparency and accountability, and ways to prevent future ethical lapses.
• Reforms and Legislation: The discussions on ethics led to reforms and changes in legislation aimed at promoting ethical conduct in government. Agencies and departments implemented codes of ethics, and laws were enacted to ensure greater transparency, protect whistleblowers, and hold public officials accountable for ethical violations.
• Training and Education: Public administration programs in universities and training institutions began to place a stronger emphasis on ethics education. Future public administrators were trained not only in the technical aspects of government but also in the ethical dimensions of their roles.
• Ongoing Focus: The renewed focus on ethics in public administration did not fade after the immediate aftermath of Watergate. It became an enduring aspect of the field, with ongoing discussions, research, and efforts to maintain high ethical standards in government.

A third transformation within the Modern Period pertained to the government's approach and application of regulations. In the pre-modern era, federal and state governments reacted to the ascent of monopolies and various other entities that dominated, or in many instances controlled, particular industries or sectors of commerce. Government agencies were bestowed with oversight authority over an array of business practices in fields like banking, transportation, telecommunications, energy, and agriculture, among others.

However, commencing from the 1960s and gaining momentum through the 1970s and 1980s, the government ventured into a phase of deregulation, reducing or even eliminating the regulatory framework governing industry practices. This shift aimed to enhance competitiveness and stimulate economic performance in these industrial domains.

Nevertheless, deregulation was only a single facet of the equation during the Modern Period. Governments simultaneously introduced fresh legislation and established agencies to regulate labor and Consumer practices and equal employment rights, as well as enhancing workplace safety and fostering collective bargaining practices, represented additional focal points. Another consequential shift, prompted by the establishment of environmental protection agencies at both federal and state levels, revolved around regulating pollution and championing environmental safeguards. Over time, these concerns have evolved to encompass addressing climate change and promoting sustainability.

Predictably, as each wave of reform fell short of expectations, the very concept of reform started to symbolize a predicament. Amid criticism of the outcomes achieved by concrete reform endeavors in U.S. public administration, novel perspectives began to scrutinize the essence and aspirations of reform itself. Jocelyne Bourgon, in her 2011 work titled "A New Synthesis of Public Administration," remarked that the incomplete nature of administrative reforms can largely be attributed to the complexities of devising and implementing a comprehensive, cohesive program for overhauling bureaucracies. She contended that such undertakings might be misguided, advocating for a recalibration of reform. In her view, in order to effectively confront governance challenges, public administrations should reassess the interplay among their organizational, institutional, adaptive, and innovative capacities.

Summary

Public administration can be defined through various lenses, including applied and academic perspectives. Regardless of the approach taken, its broad scope encompasses all activities undertaken by governments and the study of those activities. Public administration cannot be separated from its political context, as this very context defines its public nature, setting it apart from private or business administration. Essentially, public administration represents the actions a government takes, and it operates within the bounds of the law, serving as a tool of legal execution. Virtually every application of a general law involves an act of administration. The legal foundation allows public administration to exist, but its managerial component is crucial for effectively carrying out the public's business.

In the realm of academia, public administration involves the examination of the principles and practices of management when applied to government and the public sector. However, it extends beyond managerial concerns to encompass the entire political, social, cultural, and legal milieu influencing the functioning of public institutions. It is inherently interdisciplinary, drawing from diverse fields such as political science, sociology, business administration, and law. The roots of American public administration as an academic discipline trace back to Woodrow Wilson's influential 1887 article, "The Study of Administration." While it initially developed within the realm of political science, it eventually emerged as an independent field during the latter half of the twentieth century.

Another perspective on the evolution of public administration, articulated by scholars like Frederick Mosher, considers it in the context of transforming the public administration profession. The notion that public service should embody ideals beyond bureaucracy is crucial to understanding the new roles and responsibilities that government is assuming in the era of globalization. As a profession, public administration offers substantial opportunities for idealism in the pursuit of public service. Concerns about the effectiveness and scope of public service often fluctuate with changing political philosophies in different administrations. Nonetheless, the core essence of public administration remains the provision of public services, whether delivered by career public servants or through contracts with private sector or non-profit organization employees. In addition to ensuring accountability and efficiency in delivering public services, modern public administration faces the challenge of realigning public enterprises and services to meet evolving needs such as renewable energy sources, resource conservation, green technologies, and sustainable designs.

Bibliography

Burke, E. (1774). Speech to the Electors of Bristol. In Library of Economics and Liberty, Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund Inc, 1990, section 4.1.6.

Hamilton, A. (1788). The Federalist Number 72. New York: E. P. Dutton.

Herring, E. P. (1936). Public Administration and the Public Interest. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lippmann, W. (1955). The Public Philosophy. Boston: Little, Brown.

Mill, John (1849) “The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume XIV - The Later Letters 1849-1873 Part “I. University of Toronto Press.

Mosher, F. C. (1968, 1984). Democracy and the Public Service. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mosher, F. C. (1980). The Changing Responsibilities and Tactics of the Federal Government. Public Administration Review, (Nov/Dec 1980).

National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/cipdetail.aspx?y=55&cipid=88560

Rosenbloom, D. H. (1990). Public Administration (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.

Shafritz, J., & Hyde, A. C. (2012). Classics of Public Administration. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.

Tocqueville, A. de. (1835; translation 1899). Democracy in America. New York: Appleton.

Waldo, D. (1955). The Study of Administration. New York: Random House.

Waldo, D. (1975). Education for Public Administration in the Seventies. In American Public Administration: Past, Present, Future, ed. F. C. Mosher. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Wilson, W. (1887). The Study of Administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2(June); reprinted 50(December, 1941).

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). State and local government jobs more likely than private sector to require postsecondary education. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2022/state-and-local-government-jobs-more-likely-than-private-sector-to-require-postsecondary-education.htm