Search results

The question discussed in this paper is, How can the state, in the collective facilities which it supplies to the community, best ensure the maximum service in efficiency. Involved in the issue is the question of the functions of the state itself.Upon this question there is a controversy of steadily-deepening vigour covering a very wide range. At the one extreme are those who hold that the state has no duties towards the citizens except to "keep the ring". There must be such people in the world, for I hear them constantly denounced; but I have never met any of them. So far as I know, no one now questions the necessity of the state playing a great and ever-increasing part in the functioning of the community. Or, as Lord Salisbury said. "We are all socialists now". At the other extreme is the hundred per cent. socialist who regards the state not as a functioning agency of the community but as embodying in itself the total activities of the state. In the words of G. D. H. Cole:
The essence of Socialism is to be found, not in a particular way of organizing the conduct of industry, but in a particular relationship among men. Socialists hold that this relationship, which they desire to see established throughout the world, cannot exist where industries and services and the ownership of capital are left in private hands; and for this reason as well as in the interests of productive efficiency they wish to socialize the business of production and exchange.

AbstractThis work was conducted as part of a project with the Urban Research Interest Group, an initiative sponsored by the Urban Affairs Programs, Center for Global Change and Earth Observations, the Institute of Public Policy and Social Research, and the Office of the Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies at Michigan State University. Related work was completed in partnership with Jodi Summers Holtrop and Sissi Burch.

As a field, we know exceedingly little about how presidents' public relations affect administrative politics. For instance, when will presidents create new agencies to satisfy public concern about an issue? When does public opinion provoke presidents to fire officials? The dearth of scholarship on these sorts of questions is striking, particularly given the literature's emphasis on the importance of public relations to the presidency. I argue that we cannot fully understand bureaucratic politics without considering the impact of this development, which scholars call the 'public presidency.' Furthermore, research on the public presidency has concentrated on legislative politics, which differ considerably from administrative politics. After delineating general claims, the author outlines theoretical and empirical considerations for two specific avenues of research. Adapted from the source document.

From its birth, administrative law has claimed a close connection to governmental practice. Yet as administrative law has grown and matured it has moved further away from how agencies actually function. The causes of administrative law's disconnect from actual administration are complex and the divide is now longstanding, but it is also a source of concern given the increasing importance of internal administration for ensuring accountable government. This Article analyzes the contemporary manifestations and historical origins of administrative law's divide from public administration, as well as the growing costs of this disconnect. It also describes the Administrative Conference of the United States ("ACUS")'s exceptional status as the rare forum spanning the worlds of both administrative law and public administration, and the critical role ACUS can play in reasserting linkages between these two critical dimensions of government.

The public interest is a much neglected concept that has powerful symbolic and instrumental value. Building on the work of Goodsell, this article provides a framework to examine the degree to which a policy or program is in the public interest. This research presents four cases that illustrate how serving the public interest in a democracy requires ongoing concern with not only what is done but also with how it is done. Furthermore, the cases demonstrate that public administrators can heavily influence the degree to which a policy or program is in the public interest.