What was John Gaus’s response to Woodrow Wilson’s ideas about ensuring bureaucratic accountability? What solution did Gaus offer?
What will be an ideal response?
John Gaus thought that Woodrow Wilson’s reliance on the rule of law to keep administrators in line (in essence elected officials make laws and administrators carry them out) was an insufficient accountability measure as laws are not always clear and, further, not always translatable into clear and predictable policy that can be carried out. Gaus’s solution was to rely on the administrators’ professional norms. This led to a famous debate in 1940 between Carl Friedrich (who was aligned with Gaus) and Herman Finer about whether it was possible to rely on these professional norms or if external controls were necessary to keep administrators accountable.
You might also like to view...
The particular population from which a sample is actually drawn is called a _____________.
a. Sampling frame b. Sampling unit c. Element d. Sample bias
Generational effect refers to the
A) way in which political socialization produces opinions. B) increased tension between those of different ages within the same political faction. C) tendency for people to adopt conservative political opinions as they age. D) long-lasting impact of significant events on the political opinions of the generation that came of age at that time. E) way in which the family members of different ages influence political opinions.
The governor of Texas faces a difficult situation because the governor __________.
A. has to appoint so many top officials in the executive, like the attorney general and lieutenant governor B. is unable to get any media coverage and the public expects leadership to come from the legislature C. cannot influence bills considered by the legislature D. has relatively weak formal powers, but the public has high expectations of the office
Political action committees were created as a result of ______.
a. weaknesses among local Republican parties in the Deep South b. interest group restrictions in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974 c. candidates’ need for more money to pay for television advertising d. fundraising scandals such as Teapot Dome