- More recent civil service reform is examined as a discussion on modern ethics and the continued effort to create a better and more ethical system of governance.
- In conclusion, recent threats to the ability of the public administration to serve the needs of the people are examined.
Although Fukuyama points out that this occurrence varies between agencies, today’s government mostly favors experience and connections over quality. Someone that has worked in government for many years is automatically more qualified than a recent Harvard graduate who is smarter.
The resistance for merit-based hiring in the civil service is still in tact, and the government has managed to cleverly go around the Pendleton act, by placing term rules, and other disincentives that discourage potentially talented civil service workers to want to get hired in the first place.
As Fukuyama puts it, the country needs to work on promoting innovation in the Public administration sector, and that starts with qualified workers.
By the time Jimmy Carter took office in 1977, the Lloyd-La Follette Act was considered to be altogether obsolete, as its legislation had failed to empower the employees which it intended to protect. The act was amended unsuccessfully under two executive orders of the Kennedy and Nixon administrations respectively. An entirely new piece of legislation was needed (Coleman, 1980).
In the wake of the Watergate scandal, OPEC embargo, and the devastating failure of the Vietnam War, the country was very wary of the United States Government and eager for change. During his campaign, Carter promised to “strengthen presidential control over federal services.” (Schultz, 1998)
One of the first tasks he undertook in office was to propose what would become the first comprehensive act of civil service reform since the Pendleton Act in 1883. President Carter submitted his proposal in March of 1978, and congress spent 7 months drafting the legislation (Woolley & Peters, 1978).
The Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) went into effect on October 13, 1978. It was considered by many to be the greatest domestic accomplishment of the Carter administration, though its lasting effects have been widely disputed (Clymer, 1982).
- Public administration has seen much reform to better serve the American people.
- The Pendleton Act resolved the issues of the spoils systems to introduce merit based bureaucracy and depoliticize public administration.
- The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 continued the effort to better regulate the American bureaucracy to live up to ideals of fairness and equality.
Ethics in Public Administration:
The Pendleton Act
- Far-right political dissidents claim that President Barack Obama in particular has utilized a spoils-system like system to assist underprivileged individuals and unionized workers which made substantial contributions to his campaigns (Disvalo, 2015).
- These claims generally lack substance, mostly referring to an over exaggerated instantiation of representative democracy.
- The most convincing of these implications of corruption via a modern day spoils system is that of the system established in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in which unlimited campaign contributions without disclosure of amounts (Oyez, Citizens United v. FEC).
- Through this system individuals can advertise as much as they like to support a candidate for office.
- Thus, through this system of individuals working to elect a candidate, they would assume that their actions would be rewarded.
- While this relationship is difficult to prove explicitly, constitutional precedent established in McCutcheon v. FEC results in an extraordinarily difficult process to prove explicit corruption in a spoils-system similar way.
CSRA 1978
Ethics in Public Administration
Carter’s presidency was a time of serious “reexamination” of bureaucratic organization, following a decade of government administration that had “widely over-promised and woefully underperformed.” Bureaucracy was beginning to be viewed in a negative light as the US government grew in size, complexity, and cost without a corresponding growth in productivity or efficiency(Sundquist, 1979).
Efficacy of Reforms
- Ethics continues to be a substantial concern in public administration despite the efforts of civil service reform to eradicate these concerns.
- The spoils system famously utilized by Andrew Jackson, which supposedly brought about the demise of President James Garfield was replaced by the merit system.
Despite this, challenges to the ability of the public administration to serve the people unhindered remain for future generations to resolve.
The ethics of this system of “rotating government” as Jackson so aptly put it is highly questionable. Jackson’s urgent need for reform was real, but the way he went about it had pretty bad repercussions.
CSRA 1978
This new injection of oversight and excellence based administration attempted to resolve the issues in public administration to better return to the virtue of serving the constituent. The Pendleton Act was a revolutionary first step in promoting ethics, with the long term goal of developing a stable results oriented bureaucracy to serve the polity.
- However, concerns in the public administration remained, and concerns with the ethics in management persisted.
- These concerns were resolved through the promulgation of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
- Continual ethical progress in public administration is essential to the ends of the government to provide services to ensure equal access to success for each citizen.
Despite the substantial progress that civil service reform acts have contributed to public administration in the United States, concerns still exist about equitable treatment and the role of the government in the lives of its constituency. Many of these claims indicate that a modern day spoils system of some sort exists.
Government jobs became less about the people who knew how to do them and more about the connections that those individuals had. This resulted in inefficiency throughout the government and a precedent for this removal and insertion of specific people that proved to repeat itself throughout different presidencies.
The goals outlined in Carter’s proposal were diverse:
- to create more officials responsible for making policies rather than administering them (Schultz, 1998),
- to eliminate the merit system without detriment to the structure of the Fed,
- to give authority to federal management while giving employees protection from that very authority,
- to limit excessive government spending, and
- to create a federal workforce representative of the American people (Cambell, 1978).
The Modern Spoils System
There were two parts to the Civil Service Reform Act, including reorganization and civil service reform. The reorganization plan abolished the US Civil Service Commission (CSC) and divided its responsibilities among three main agencies.
Reorganization
- The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) would now oversee management of executive branch agencies and be in charge of human relations regulation within the federal domain.
- The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) was awarded the power to conduct investigations of the federal civil service and to hear appeals of federal employees under consideration for administrative discipline or dismissal.
- The Federal Labor Regulations Authority (FLRA) was established to oversee unions, protecting the right to unionize and imposing standards enforced by the Office of Labor-Management Standards in the US Labor Department (Knudsen, 1979).
Civil Service Reform
- Additionally, the hierarchy of the federal managerial class was modified to include the Senior Executive Service, upper division managers rewarded via merit-based bonuses.
- Finally, the CSRA provided protection for whistleblowers (Knudsen, 1979).
The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978
This has two key implications on public administration.
- First, by ensuring that a certain individual will be elected, these individuals will receive in return regulatory procedures carried out by the bureaucracy that will be economically beneficial to the donor.
- This affects the ability of the public administration to serve the public in its ideal state because of the unethical corruption introduced by the influx of money in politics.
Prior to 1912 there was no legal language to inhibit the US government from dismissing a federal employee for any behavior not expressly protected by the First Amendment.
- The second way that society can be effected by a sense of modern day spoils systems is through cabinet appointments.
- These positions have substantial influence over the public administration and thusly allow for the corruption.
- In exchange for the political contributions of an individual, the cabinet seat will be filled by a secretary sympathetic to their corporate desires.
- This ability of the bureaucracy to decide policy and substantially affect the course of public administration is codified in King v. Burwell.
- In this influential case regarding the Affordable Care Act, Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the court that in cases of congressional ambiguity on federal programs, the bureau responsible for the administration of the provision has the authority to interpret the law as they see fit (Oyez, King v. Burwell).
In effect, political donors, in the modern system, can substantially effect public policy through political candidates who will ensure that bureaucratic policies amenable to their interests will be implemented: essentially, buying influence through a modern day spoils exchange.
In this year Congress passed, under the Republican leadership of Senator Robert M. La Follete for whom the legislation was named, an act codifying “just cause” for dismissal and providing federal employees with job protection rights.
While the Pendleton Act aimed to end unjust hiring practices on the basis of nepotism, the Lloyd-La Follette Act intended to end similar injustices in firing practices. Entering the 20th century it became clear that while the Lloyd-La Follette Act had established the right of federal employees to unionize to protect their individual and collective job rights, it failed to give them any real power to leverage for their needs.
Changes Post Pendleton Act
The Civil Service Commission
Andrew Jackson & the Spoils System
Effects of the Pendleton Act Today
- According to the US department of state, when the Pendleton act was passed in 1883, “only 10 percent of the government's 132,000 civilian employees were placed under civil service.
- The rest remained at the disposal of the party power, which could distribute for patronage, payoffs, or purchase.
- Today, more than 90 percent of the 2.7 million federal civilian employees are covered by merit systems” (state, 2006).
- A movement to reform the system of dispensing jobs began in the years following the Civil War.
- The 1881 assassination of President James Garfield by a man looking for a political position put the entire system into the spotlight and reinforced calls for reform.
Critics like Fukuyama(2013), argue that with specific policies like the ObamaCare act that recently passed, a new Pendleton act should be drafted.
Amanda Tejuca
Arlette Gomez
Matt Fasul
Peter Kreutzer
Sarah Bardolph
When Andrew Jackson won the 1820 presidential election it was on the basis of the promise of government reform. He, as most presidents often do, emphasized the big changes that he would make when in office.
“What the contemporary civil service fails to do is to attract smart, highly qualified young people out of elite universities in the manner of the classic French, German, or British services. In fact, the government is very good at putting a large number of obstacles in front of any ambitious young person who might want to sign up, like voluminous disclosure rules in the current employment regulations” (Fukuyama, 2013).
- The first big change he instituted while in office changed the country forever; he kicked out most government employees, and appointed others who were loyal to him prior to his election, or just loyal to his political party.
- The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act was named after its primary sponsor, Senator George Pendleton, a Democrat from Ohio.
- However, it was primarily written by an attorney and a renowned activist for civil service reform, Dorman Bridgman Eaton.
- The act made it illegal for a federal worker to be fired because of their political views or moral standings.
- Also, it became illegal to make a federal employee involuntarily participate in presidential or small scale political campaigns, and to ask them for donations towards campaigns that they don’t believe in.
This practice became known as the spoils system, a system in which a president hires civil servants on the basis of their political loyalties and affiliations(Feller, 1995).
During Jackson’s campaign, he accused the Adams’ bureaucracy of fraud because he believed they were working against his election. When he became president, Jackson removed highly important government officials such as bureau chiefs, federal marshals and attorneys, under the guise of restoring the government through a “rotation in office.”
It became apparent that the people receiving these jobs were Jackson’s minions, ranging from newspaper editors who supported his cause to an individual who later proved to be a huge con. Samuel Swartwout was appointed collector of the New York City customhouse and he fled with more than $1 million dollars!
Time and time again Jackson denied that the deciding factor in appointing these individuals was their political affiliations, but his actions proved otherwise. Jackson would only take recommendations from his partisans, which was not illegal. A senator from New York, William L. Marcy, defended the entire ordeal, famously proclaiming, “To the victor belong the spoils of the enemy” (Feller, 1995).
- Eaton had been the head of the first civil service commission under the administration of Ulysses S. Grant.
- The first civil service commission was intended to curb abuses and regulate the civil service within the United States.
- However, the commission was not very effective. Eventually, congress cut off its funds in 1875 and after only a few years of operation, its purpose was impeded.
- The civil service commission that was created for the act, came up with different tests and evaluations that measured merit before hiring a worker (state, 2006).
- Over time, the act has expanded to cover more workers.
- The progressive ethics of the act, i.e. hiring workers based on merit instead of connections, which can lead to discrimination, has inspired other reforms in a state and local government level.
- Nonetheless, the new Pendleton Act passed in Congress and was signed by President Chester Alan Arthur on January 16, 1883.
- Thereafter, President Arthur appointed Eaton as the first chairman of the three-man Civil Service Commission until he resigned in 1886.
- The purpose of this three-man Civil Service Commission was to oversee the process for the Pendleton Act.
- This act counteracted the beliefs of the Spoils system, which was in place before it.
- The Spoils system appointed people to government positions based on their connections rather than their hard work and dedication.
- The Pendleton Act, however, awarded people with jobs based on merit instead of political affiliation.
- This act affects public administration because it played and continues to play such a huge role in our government.
- The biggest advantage of the Pendleton Act is that it creates an equal playing field for everyone trying to receive a job and it also motivates people to work more diligently.
Abstract
The purpose of this essay is to examine some key ethical issues in public administration. Civil service reform is remarkable as an attempt to administer policy in a more ethical way.
Implications
Conclusion
- The Pendleton Act was the first major piece of legislation to resolve the ailments of the existing system.
- The impetus of the Pendleton Act sheds insight on the need to continually reform public administration and how rampant corruption can undermine its efficacy.
The problems of the spoils system were the reason why the merit system came about. It is not perfect, and to this day we can see how it is not entirely based on merit, but connections. The way we can improve on the merit system is to perhaps have a second organization that is in charge of investigating the reason why federal workers are hired. This way, they can make sure that it was based on merit and not “spoils.”
- The purpose of Public Administration in the governmental role of the United States is to find problems and offer viable solutions.
- This was exemplified by the creation of the Pendleton Act in response to the unjust spoils system set forth by Andrew Jackson during his presidency.
- The Pendleton Act has elevated our government in a way that makes job opportunities fair for everyone.
The most important part of this is making sure that they are tested and evaluated prior to being hired. These tests have to be administered more strictly, and then cracked down on if someone is hired for connections instead of merit.
- Demonstrating the effectiveness of Public Administration to administer situations in the government and tackle them head on with the creation of laws and acts that prevent any ethical complications among government officials.
- The point of the act is to prevent corruption and keep the integrity of the United States government in tact.
For example, if one person is a Harvard Law graduate who does better on a test than a community college graduate that just so happens to be a family member of someone in congress, then this should be looked into by the second committee that is in charge of upholding the merit system. If the latter person is hired instead of the first, then there should be consequences.
Works Cited
Thus, the problems of the merit system would be fixed if the government can create a group of chaperones that essentially overlooked the entire process of hiring federal workers. However, it is important to note that hiring federal workers based on experience alone is not ethical either, when there are some workers that may be more qualified and intelligent that just recently graduated from a University. The hiring of these workers should be based on these said evaluations only.
Implications
- The Spoils System that was in place before the Pendleton Act created unfair advantages to people trying to receive a job in a sense that it made it about connections rather than merit.
- Job placement should not be based on party affiliations, which is why everyone yearned for civil service reform that ensured that people who were in government positions had the proper prerequisites.
- Ever since President Chester Alan Arthur signed the Pendleton Act into effect on January 16, 1883, our nation has become one in which equal opportunity is still at the forefront.
- The act greatly diminished the corruption that was plaguing the United States government at a time that government officials were poorly selected.
- People from all over the world came to America in search of the lives they wanted to live.
- We credit the renowned civil service activist Dorman Bridgman Eaton as the primary writer for the act that has helped mend the United States' unethical government employment.
- This helped mend the United States into the super power that it is today.
- Public Administration officials are now given their positions based on their established credentials and skill sets.
- This ensures that there is no abuse of power or conspiracy in the government, through the merit system.
Introduction
- Aside from having a chaperone group overlooking the merit system, a test much like the BAR exam could be created for the different types of government sects, in order to be hired or elected for office.
- For example, in order to run for congress and get elected, they would have to pass a test first to make sure they are completely qualified to do everything the job entails.
- If they pass, then they can proceed to office.
Limitations
- Cambell, Alan (1978). "Civil service reform: A new commitment". Public Administration Review 39 (2): 99–103.
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2008/08-205
- Clymer, Adam. Special To The New York Times (1982-05-03). "POLITICAL SCIENTISTS SEE LITTLE IMPACT OF 1978 CIVIL SERVICE LAW". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2015-04-28.
- Coleman, Charles (1980). "The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978: Its Meaning and Its Roots". Labor Law Journal 31 (4): 200–207.
- Feller, D. (1995). The Jacksonian Promise: America 1815-1840. Johns Hopkins University Press
- Fukuyama, F. (2013, November 3). Why We Need a New Pendleton Act. Retrieved from http://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/11/03/why-we-need-a-new-pendleton-act/
- King v. Burwell. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-114
- Knudsen, Steven; Jakus, Larry; Metz,Maida (1979)."The civil service reform act of 1978". Public Personnel Management.
- "Pendleton Act (1883)." Pendleton Act (1883). Www.ourdocuments.gov, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2015.
- Schultz, David (1998). Politics of Civil Service Reform. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing. p. 159. ISBN 0820433799.
- State, U. D. (2006, August). Pendleton Act (Civil Service Reform Act), 1883. Retrieved from Class Brain: http://www.classbrain.com/artteenst/publish/article_130.shtml
- Sundquist, James L. (1979). "Jimmy carter as public administrator: An appraisal at mid-term.". Public Administration Review 39 (1): 3–11.
- Woolley, J., & Peters, G. (n.d.). Jimmy Carter: Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 Statement on Signing S. 2640 Into Law. Retrieved November 25, 2015, from http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29975
- There are a few limits that we faced in this study as there is no clear way in which we can really see or know the mental process that occurs with those who select government officials.
- For all we know their political affiliations could still be an underlying factor that is considered in the process.
- Public administration is intended to serve the needs of the American people in accordance with the legislation promulgated by the United States Congress.
- However, at times the work of this bureaucracy is impeded internal threats to efficacy.
- Most importantly, this can apply to other areas like secretary of defense or jobs having to do with the security of the country.
- This is because having an unqualified person performing the tasks that these positions entail can not only be unbeneficial but entirely risky to the country.
- It is crucial that they are qualified for the job, instead of just there because of connections and experience like the “spoils” system suggests.
- But what we do know for sure is that the selection of these individuals is no longer as blatantly obvious and unethical as it was before these regulations were placed.
- Future studies can be made on public administration’s development and investigations on the effectiveness of the Pendleton Act today can still be further delved in.
- The entire reason why the merit system was created was to eradicate the spoils system so combining them would not be ideal.
- It would be messy and confusing to try to combine these two into one logical and working system. If the merit system is going to be in place, then the spoils system cannot be active simultaneously.
- The spoils system can lead to conspiracy between members of the government and that is exactly what can lead to dictatorships and abuses of power.
- This would create chaos in the government and be unethical and unfair to the citizens of the country.
The merit system is important because a successful government has to be based on at least a small amount of disagreement between the workers in order to ultimately uphold democracy. Otherwise, it would be the government against the people.
- In the course of American history these issues have been the products of the ethical dilemma of public administration.
- This dilemma centers on the role of the public administration as a product of political factors, as epitomized by the spoils system which characterized the public administration for more than a century, or a product of societal factors, to serve the will of the people.
This paper investigates some ethical issues which threatened the ability for the American bureaucracy to serve the needs of the people in an efficient way, reforms intended to resolve them, and the effect that these reforms had on the continuing effort to improve American society.
The paper concludes with the examination of some modern obstructions to the ethical administration of the bureaucracy and how the institutional code interacts with the public administration.