House ethics committee [background and events in its establishment]
In: Congressional quarterly weekly report, Band 25, S. 626-628
ISSN: 0010-5910, 1521-5997
55 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Congressional quarterly weekly report, Band 25, S. 626-628
ISSN: 0010-5910, 1521-5997
In: Congressional quarterly weekly report, Band 25, S. 708-709
ISSN: 0010-5910, 1521-5997
In: PS: political science & politics, Band 2, Heft 4, S. 676-677
ISSN: 1537-5935
In: PS, Band 2, Heft 4, S. 676-677
ISSN: 2325-7172
In: Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, Band 47, Heft 10, S. 307-307
ISSN: 1559-1476
In: Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 22-22
ISSN: 1559-1476
In: PS: political science & politics, Band 3, Heft 4, S. 653
ISSN: 1537-5935
In: PS, Band 3, Heft 4, S. 653-653
ISSN: 2325-7172
In: PS: political science & politics, Band 2, Heft S1, S. 564-564
ISSN: 1537-5935
In: National civic review: promoting civic engagement and effective local governance for more than 100 years, Band 55, Heft 1, S. 59-59
ISSN: 1542-7811
Catherine May speaks to her constituents about a resolution she supported which would establish a committee on ethics in the House. She outlines the tenets of the proposal, the likes of which was likely in reaction to several investigations of grafting and corruption by both Senate and House members. Harold D. Cooley, Chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture was one prominent figure under suspicion for illegal activities at the time.
BASE
In: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/umn.31951t00222170e
Record is based on bibliographic data in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index. Reuse except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Indexed in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index Part V ; Mode of access: Internet.
BASE
In: American political science review, Band 43, Heft 6, S. 1119-1144
ISSN: 1537-5943
"Anybody we like is efficient. Anybody we do not like is a bureaucrat." This good-natured comment on legislative attitudes toward the executive branch was made recently in Congress by an experienced lawmaker, speaking as chairman of a subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations. The epigram may be relished for its knowing humor, but its greater significance lies in the light it sheds on one of the most important problems of modern government—the problem of insuring responsible administration in the framework of democratic society.For, of course, one way of getting nowhere in attempting a solution of this problem is to reduce it to a matter of personal preference. In the broader context, it is plainly irrelevant whether or not "we," as citizens or as lawmakers, happen to "like" the individual administrative official we confront, or the particular public agency, or the functions that have to be performed under the laws, or the general direction in which things are moving in response to the policies of those elected to exercise political control. Nor do our likes and dislikes furnish a trustworthy criterion to mark the border line between "efficient" public service and "bureaucracy."And yet, for the administrative official it is a familiar experience to encounter sharp animosity on the part of some legislators, as well as some elements of the public, precisely for doing his statutory duty. In a party system like ours, which puts only a small premium on political solidarity, the frequency of such experience is increased because lawmakers exercise great freedom of dissent from legislative measures passed with the support of their own party.
In: Congressional quarterly weekly report, Band 25, S. 382-385
ISSN: 0010-5910, 1521-5997