chapter assignments 3003

PAD 3003 after reading the chapters and lectures do these assignments

Module 2 3 assignments due July 1

Assignment 1- discussion

Do you believe that government privatization of services has been a good thing or a bad thing? Why or why not? (50 word mini) list citation if applicable

Assignment 2-  Essay Assignment pl ace essay responses in a Word document only,

1. After reading Chapter Three prepare a short 100 word essay that addresses the following:

Discuss the major efforts to reform the administrative machinery of the federal government from the Brownlow Committee to the National Performance Review. Has this been a success or incomplete success?

2. After reading Chapter Four prepare a short 100 word essay that addresses the following:

It is said our system of government in the United States between the Federal government and State governments is a marriage relationship rather than a parent child relationship. Please elaborate. Your essay should include the role of the U.S. Constitution in framing our system of government.

Assigment 3- Research Article

Using the Richard H. Rush Library at FSW State College locate one scholarly article that recognizes and distinguishes ethical behavior in public administration.  This is the library link https://www.fsw.edu/library/

Page One Article Title: List the article publication information using APA style for reference list citations, “e.g. Smith, N (2005).  Information technology in the public sector. Technology and Public Administration Journal, 12(3), 125-136.”

Page Two Summary (must be at least 100 words): Summarize the article’s main theme and summarize its conclusion(s).

Page Three Evaluation (must be at least 100 words): Critique the article giving your opinion and citing other scholarly articles in support of your critique.

The research assignment is designed to introduce the student to peer reviewed academic research. Here the student searches databases, journals, articles that contribute to the field of knowledge based on the subject matter presented in this module, generally found in the reading assignment. The elements of public administration and public safety administration are constantly changing. It is important the student research sources within the last 5 years unless the source has not been updated by more current research and is still appropriate to the module’s subject matter.

 

Students are graded at three levels. 1. Locating a proper peer reviewed article. 2. Paraphrasing in 100 words the article’s main theme and its conclusion(s). 3. The ability to discuss one’s thoughts through critical thinking critiquing the article and using other scholarly sources to support such the critique.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

PAD 3003 Introduction to public administration

This is the book Shafritz, J. M., Russell, E. W., & Borick, C. P. (2013). Introducing Public Administration. (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. ISBN: 978-0-205-85589-6. ISBN: 978-0-205-85589-6

https://books.google.com/books?id=8fIvCgAAQBAJ&q=chaper+3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Module Two Chapters 3 & 4

Overview:

https://youtu.be/zQi07PtqzcM

Chapter Three Lecture Machinery of Government

This chapter will take a look at government in action as it relates to public-private-partnerships or “P3’s”. Across the nation, the public sector is partnering with the private sector to accomplish that which does not have the political support or the stomach. For example, our text explains that citizens could pay an extra $2.50 to utilize an expressway built in the median and avoid traffic congestion. This rise in “pay for use” partnerships with private business enterprises, some may argue, provides for a different kind of modern day feudalism, marked by class differentiation, where those who can pay for these services will benefit, not the general public.

The machinery of government is the bureaucracy, or division of labor and function, that forms to act and accomplish. Bureaucracy is a word that comes to us from the French language and contains in it the idea of a bureau, or “office” or “desk.” It had and has to do with compartmentalizing activities of the “court” a word representative of the executive functions, or actions, of a government. Whereas administration can be considered government in action; the machinery of government is the collective administrative system that moves together. The United States Constitution provides the checks and balances, the railroad tracks as it were, by which this “machine” may run it’s course.

The Chief Executive of the United States is bound by the constitutional powers invested in him. We spoke about the different views on this authority, from strict constitutionalist to stewardship, and now we understand that the government machinery in the executive office becomes tangible in the departments that report to him. Under article II of the US Constitution, the president is responsible for the enforcement of the laws of the nation. In order to accomplish his national charge, he employs individuals in his “cabinet,” which includes the heads of the 15 agencies. The idea that this country was founded upon the principles that power is made to check power. Even in the execution of the duties and responsibilities of the president, he is bound by constraints and opposing ambitions.

The United States Constitution established that the United States government derived its just power from the people. The people divested their divine authority to govern to the central government. Just as the people divest their authority in the national government, they likewise establish in the US Constitution sovereign states. James Madison, the fourth president of the United States and author of the US Constitution, wrote in Federalist 45 that “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. Soon after writing this, the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution codified the American invention of federalism in the 10th Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

This is very important because this form of government, via the establishment of two separate and sovereign forms of government simultaneously, that is both the state and the national government, is the critical identifying feature of “federalism.” This federal form of government was built on the idea that people would grow in their authority, next the states, finally, and perhaps not at all, the federal government. It builds upon the inverted pyramid that we talked about previously. Now, if you make the connection between the structure of the US Constitution having at its pinnacle “the people,” you can more clearly understand why there has been such an importance placed on education, in particular, a “liberal” education that was intended to help teach free men and women what is necessary to be free.

State governments are sovereign and have powers divested to them by the United States Constitution. Additionally, each state has its own constitution which has been adopted and which governs the activities and “government in action” in that state. Within each state, there are governments that derive their authority to “rule” or act on behalf of the state, and they consist of the county, municipal, township, school districts, and special independent and dependent taxing districts. The state, although chastised through appeals to home rule from local governments, have virtually unlimited authority in the state. Unlimited in the sense that they are not qualified or quantified in the US Constitution. States have, however, checked this power by establishing what is scope of their authority, which is their independent constitutions.

The argument for preemption, and primarily that it has been against preemption of local government control, does not have a basis in anything other than the local government political system. It most definitely does not have a basis in the United States constitution, except for if you were to make the extremely tenuous argument that states divest their authority to different local governments. Still, one might suggest that it is still perfectly legitimate for the state to pre-empt local government control as it pleases.

Professor Tanis Janes Salant classified county government into the following:

• Commission Form
• Commission Administrator with a Council Manager,
• Chief Administrative Officer, or County Administrative Assistant,
• Council-Executive

 

A System of Constant Reform

The Brownlow Commission, established in 1936 by President Roosevelt, resulted in enhanced control of bureaucracy

 

The first Hoover Commission under President Truman, who took office after President Roosevelt died, strengthened the executive office of the president and enhanced agency management. The Second Hoover Commission recommended that the federal government cabinet had grown too big, but it’s recommendations were shelved.

 

The Ash Council under Nixon led to the transformation of Bureau of the Budget into the Office of Management and Budget. The remaining restructuring recommendations were cut short due to the Watergate scandal.

 

Ronald Reagan’s President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control, or the Grace Commission named after Chairman Peter Grace, led to a lot of written documents, but little actual change or reform.

 

Clinton appointed Al Gore to the National Performance Review. This led to deregulation of federal agencies and a more customer friendly approach to doing business with the people. It eliminated government positions and functions and reported savings in the hundreds of billions of dollars. After the Gore Report, and Al Gore’s unsuccessful run for president, the federal government began a trend toward privatization of government under Bush. Obama’s take on reinvention has been the growth and expansion of government.

 

Government administration has become, and will likely continue to become, decentralized in how it accomplishes its goals. Political analyst E.S. Savas explained four ways the decentralization of services can occur: first, through load shedding or government withdrawing from providing the services; second, alternative delivery systems where government’s role is limited to grants or vouchers; third, by imposing user fees; and fourth by restoring competition and minimizing government monopolies.

 

Privatization has led to the development of the “third sector” or the nonprofit sector. While business and government have their place in the first two spots, the nonprofit community has become the other national actor in accomplishing goals that are community-minded, but not necessarily government mandated. The Reagan and Clinton administration particularly encouraged the civic development, though not in the same ways, and President Bush expanded the nonprofit definition to include faith-based providers who might otherwise not be included in the traditional nonprofit model.

 

The concept is not what is within the realm of public administration, but how does the public administration manage so many different internal and external arms of the machine of government to accomplish its goals? Only the future will tell us.

 

Chapter Four Lecture  Intergovernmental Relations

 

Perhaps there is no better example of federalism in action than in the debate and legislation affecting the sale and use of marijuana. Hemp is the plant from which marijuana is derived and has been utilized from colonial era days in the manufacturing and production of rope and textiles. However, beginning in the early and mid 20th century, the recreational use of marijuana has become the topic of the national conversation. In 1906, the federal government began regulating marijuana under the Pure Food and Drug Act, which required labeling it when sold without a prescription. States, however, took the lead in criminalizing marijuana. Then the United States Congress passed the Uniform Narcotics Act under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a voluntary standards approach for states to follow in developing their own legislation.

 

From 1930 to 1962, Harry Anslinger, head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which is now part of the DEA, crusaded for toughness against the use of marijuana. Then Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937, which didn’t criminalize it, it just heavily regulated its sale. States lined up in support and although it became even more popular to use marijuana during the rise of the “hippie” culture, Nixon didn’t change a hardline federal stance.

 

In 1973, Oregon became the first state to decriminalize marijuana and other states followed suite. In the 90’s California legalized the use of medicinal marijuana, even while the federal government didn’t move in step. Citing the interstate commerce clause in the US Constitution, that the federal government had the authority to regulate interstate commerce, the US Supreme Course supported the federal involvement over states in the 2005 case of Gonzales v. Raich.

 

In 2009, the US Attorney General Eric Holder stayed any further raids on medical manufacturing productions. And in Colorado you can now purchase up to an ounce of marijuana legally for recreational use despite federal government laws that do not allow this to happen. In Florida, where you need a supermajority of voters, which is 60 plus one, to make a change in the state constitution, voters turned down an initiative largely led by John Morgan of Morgan and Morgan, a legal firm Florida, to legalize the use of medical marijuana in 2014.

 

The United States Constitution, adopted in 1789, provided something more than a confederation, or a federal government that derived its authority from the states. The United States under the Articles of Confederation in 1781 had a confederate form of government. Additionally, there are unitary forms of government, which have a clear delineation in the responsibilities and roles of levels of government and an example is Great Britain. Federalism is a form of government that provides for sovereign authority of the states and different sovereign authority of the federal, central government. The problem with this is that the US Constitution is interpreted differently by different people. It is the purview of the judiciary to interpret the US Constitution; at one point this job was considered to be menial, as Justice John Jay resigned from his office to run for governor. However, Justice John Marshall cemented the authority of the court in the national power discussion.

 

Each state gets two senators to represent them, and there are 435 representatives who are proportionately divided among the states based on population every ten years after the US census. Senators are elected statewide, but US House members represent districts within the states. Every ten years, states have the responsibility to redraw the maps to reflect voting districts from which a house member will be elected based on population trends, density, and community cultures. Not only does the state legislature have the responsibility to draw districts for United States House members, but also for the state legislatures – both house and senate.

 

Just like we had different theories on the power of the presidency, from restricted to prerogative, to stewardship, we see different views on federalism from a systems perspective. Dual federalism, the first approach to dual sovereignty between states and the federal government, carved out respective authorities and each left the other alone. Cooperative federalism, became popular with FDR and the New Deal, reflected a federal government’s “pump priming” spending to create demand that stimulated economic activity, and rested in the economic theory of John Maynard Keynes who suggested that government can and should be involved with the “free market”. Creative federalism was Lyndon Johnson’s approach and it included the “War on Poverty”, “Head Start”, and the “Great Society” where the poor would become mainstream. His approach to federalism brought together levels of government in the discussion about governing, but also gave direct support to local governments, even bypassing states to do so. New federalism was brought about by Nixon and sought to return federal investment to the state level and be done by formula. The “New New Federalism” approach was adopted by Reagan and sought to strengthen the relationships between the federal government and the state governments. This gave rise to “block grants” that were blanketed to states and no longer categorically attached to policy priorities. This idea was centered on the idea that the federal government should be doing less and the states more.

 

Each of these views on federalism reflect the underlying question of what should we do with the money? The current view on federalism is Keynesian in that the federal government has become the primary actor in the economic development.

Money has been gathered by the federal government since Abraham Lincoln began taxing for the war effort in 1861; however the federal income tax was not firmly established until the passage of the 16th Amendment ratified on 1913. This provides a way for the federal government to directly tax citizens (which some have claimed is unconstitutional as it is not taxing states) to provide for the operation of the federal government. By virtue, therefore, of the federal government’s ability to raise far more than any individual state, it gave rise to the federal “mandate” where the federal government would attach policy implementation in order for a state to receive federal funding. Sometimes, when money isn’t released, it is called an “unfunded mandate”.

 

Power and money have always been tied together. Fiscal federalism says that the federal government, due to its centrality and size, has the best opportunity to deal with real problems, but that states have the best chance at being “on the ground” to implement them. This form of government management has given rise to category grants, which are “funded mandates” from the federal government to states and local government. This is perceived by some as a form of manipulation, putting states on a steady drip of federal government funding reduces the risk of states becoming “obstinate” as it were and opposing the federal government. Medicaid and healthcare are the largest federal category grants that are divested to the state to administer. But with a stifling national debt closing in on $20 trillion dollars, what happens when the federal “drip” of funding runs out? Having recently passed and implemented the Affordable Healthcare Act, this may be an even more fitting analogy.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW