Bureaucrats put government policy into practice, and therefore the federal
bureaucracy has a large impact on policymaking. In order to get their policies
passed, the president and Congress must work with the bureaucracy. Controlling the
bureaucracy can be difficult for the following reasons:
-
Size: The president cannot monitor everyone or even every
group within the bureaucracy, so much of what bureaucrats do goes unmonitored.
-
Expertise of bureaucrats: The people who administer policy
often know much more about those issues than the president or members of
Congress. This expertise gives the bureaucrats power.
-
Civil service laws: Firing bureaucrats, even for
incompetence, is very difficult.
-
Clientele groups: Many federal agencies provide services to
thousands of people, and those people sometimes rally to defend the agency.
-
Policy implementation: When Congress creates a new program,
it does not establish all the details on how the policy will be implemented.
Instead, Congress passes enabling legislation, which grants power
to an agency to work out the specifics. Although the agency must stay within
some bounds, it has a great deal of latitude in determining how to carry out the
wishes of Congress.
Rule-making
The federal bureaucracy makes rules that affect how programs operate, and
these rules must be obeyed, just as if they were laws. The
rule-making process for government agencies occurs in stages.
After Congress passes new regulatory laws, the agency charged with implementing
the law proposes a series of rules, which are published in the Federal
Register. Interested parties can comment on the rules, either at
public hearings or by submitting documents to the agency. After the agency
publishes the final regulations, it must wait sixty days before enforcing those
rules. During that time, Congress can review and change the rules if it desires.
If Congress makes no changes, the rules go into effect at the end of sixty
days.
Federal regulations affect many groups of people, who have often
challenged those regulations in court. Because litigation is a slow and
expensive way to change regulations, Congress passed the Negotiated Rulemaking
Act of 1990 to limit the need for litigation by opening the rulemaking process
to those affected by it. The act encouraged federal agencies to engage in
negotiated rule-making. If an agency agrees to the proposed
regulations, for example, it publishes the proposals in the Federal
Register and then participates in a negotiating committee overseen
by a third party. Agreements reached by the committee are then open to the
normal public review process. Parties to negotiated rule-making agree not to sue
over the rules.
Deregulation and Reregulation
Since the Carter Administration in the late 1970s, the federal
government has frequently sought to remove regulations established by
earlier administrations, a practice called deregulation. The
federal bureaucracy usually carries out deregulation, often with
encouragement from the president. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, for
example, the government deregulated the airline industry, significantly
increasing competition and lowering prices. Sometimes the federal government
changes its regulations significantly, a process known as
reregulation.
Bureaucrats as Policymakers
In theory, federal bureaucracies merely carry out the policies enacted by
Congress and the president. In practice, however, many scholars argue that the
bureaucracy plays a significant role in federal policymaking via iron triangles
and issue networks.
Iron Triangles
An iron triangle is an alliance of people from three
groups: a congressional subcommittee that deals with an issue, the executive
agency that enforces laws on that issue, and private interest groups. Often,
the members of the triangle know each other well, and people frequently move
from one corner of the triangle to another. The members of the iron triangle
work together to create policy that serves their interests.
Example: An iron triangle might
form around a particular weapons system. The Defense Department may want
a new weapons system, members of congressional Armed Services Committees
may want to look tough on defense by voting for a new system, and
military suppliers want to make money by selling weapons systems.
Therefore, it is in the interests of all three parties to push Congress
to authorize the new weapons system.
Issue Networks
An issue network is a group of individuals who support a
specific policy, not a broader issue. The three parts of the iron triangle
are often parts of a single issue network, but other people may also be a
part of the network, including experts, scholars, and the media. The
influence of issue networks is similar to that of iron triangles: By working
together, members of an issue network can shape and determine policy.
