Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T11:32:10.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constitutionalism and Bureaucracy in the 1980's Some Bicentennial Reflections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2020

Herman Belz
Herman Belz*
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although plans are well underway for celebrating the bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution in 1987, it is doubtful that many of the public will be aware — or if aware would care to celebrate — a centennial milestone in the history of American government that teachers of political science will recognize as having great importance for American constitutionalism. I refer to what may be described, with some historical license, as the birth of the administrative state. This event was announced by the publication in 1887 of Woodrow Wilson's famous essay, “The Study of Administration,” and by the creation in the same year of the Interstate Commerce Commission, the prototype of the independent regulatory agencies that were to affect so profoundly the nature of American government in the twentieth century.

Type
Research Article
Information
News for Teachers of Political Science , Volume 41 , Spring 1984 , pp. 16 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Belz, Herman, “New Left Reverberations in the Academy: The Antipluralist Critique of Constitionalism,“ Review of Politics, Vol. 36 (April 1974), 265-83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Rabkin, Jeremy, “The Judiciary in the Administrative State,” The Public Interest, No. 71 (Spring 1983), 62–84Google Scholar.

3 Sartori, Giovanni, “Constitutionalism: A Preliminary Discussion,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 56 (December 1962), 853-64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Maddox, Graham, “A Note on the Meaning of ‘Constitution,’ “ APSR, Vol. 76 (Dec. 1982), 805-09Google Scholar.

5 See, for example, Thompson, Kirk, “Constitutional Theory and Political Action,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 31 (Aug. 1969), 655-81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wolin, Sheldon S., “Political Theory as a Vocation,” APSR, Vol. 63 (Dec. 1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kariel, Henry S., Open Systems: Arenas for Political Action (Itasca, III., 1969)Google Scholar. Modified recent expressions of this outlook appear in Dahl, Robert, “On Removing Certain Impediments to Democracy in the United States,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 92 (Spring 1977), 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Joseph, Lawrence B., “Democratic Revisionism Revisited,” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 25 (Feb. 1981), 160–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Manley, John, “Neopluralism: A class analysis of Pluralism I and Pluralism II,“ APSR, Vol. 77 (June 1983), 368-83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Wheeler, Harvey, “Constitutionalism,” in Greenstein, Fred I. and Polsby, Nelson W., eds., Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 5:Governmental Institutions and Processes (Reading, Mass., 1975), 76–87Google Scholar.

7 Pennock, J . Roland and Chapman, John W., eds.. Constitutionalism: Nomos Vol. 20 (New York, 1979)Google Scholar.

8 Schochet, Gordon J., “Introduction: Constitutionalism, Liberalism, and the Study of Politics,” Constitutionalism, 1–11Google Scholar.

9 Kateb, George, “Remarks on the Procedures of Constitutional Democracy,” Constitutionalism, 215-37Google Scholar.

10 Pennock, J. Roland, “Epilogue: Constitutionalism,” Constitutionalism, 378-83Google Scholar.

11 Harris, William F., II, “Bonding Word and Polity: The Logic of American Constitutionalism,” APSR, Vol. 76 (March 1982), 34–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Llewellyn, Karl N., “The Constitution as an Institution,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 34 (January 1934), 1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 The styles are immanent positivism, transcendent positivism, immanent structuralism, and transcendent structuralism. These are similar to the categories developed in Ely, John Hart, Democracy and Distrust (Cambridge, 1980)Google Scholar, and Bobbitt, Philip, Constitutional Fate (New York, 1982)Google Scholar.

14 Harris, , “Bonding Word and Polity,” loc. cit, 43–45Google Scholar.

15 Cf. Spencer, Martin, “Rhetorics and Politics,” Social Research, Vol. 37 (Winter 1970), 597–623Google Scholar; Sartori, , “Constitutionalism,” loc. cit., 864; Scheingold, Stuart A., The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change (New Haven, 1974)Google Scholar.

16 Dahl, “On Removing Certain Impediments to Democracy in the United States,” loc. cit.

17 Sundquist, James L., “The Crisis of Competence in Our National Government,” Pol. Sci.Q., Vol. 95 (Summer 1980), 183–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Pennock, “Epilogue,” loc. cit.

19 This is of course the ideal presented in Wilson, Woodrow, “The Study of Administration,” PSQ. Vol. 2 (June 1887), 197–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Yates, Douglas, Bureaucratic Democracy: The Search for Democracy and Efficiency in American Government (Cambridge, 1982), 46–47Google Scholar.

21 Shapiro, Martin, “On Predicting the Future of Administrative Law,” Regulation, Vol. 6 (May/June 1982), 18–25Google Scholar.

22 Lowi, Theodore J., The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States, second ed. (New York, 1979)Google Scholar; Skowronek, Stephen J., Building a New Administrative State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877-1920 (New York, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Keller, Morton, Affairs of State: Public Life in Late Nineteenth Century America (Cambridge, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stewart, Richard B., “The Reformation of American Administrative Law,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 88 (June 1975), 1669-1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilson, James Q., “The Rise of the Bureaucratic State,” The Public Interest, No. 41 (Fall 1975), 77–103Google Scholar; Hayes, Michael T., “The Semi-Sovereign Pressure Groups: A Critique of Current Theory and an Alternative Typology,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 40 (Feb. 1978), 134-61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Freedman, James O., Crisis and Legitimacy: The Administrative Process and American Government (New York, 1978)Google Scholar.

23 Nelson, Michael, “A Short, Ironic History of American National Bureaucracy,” JP, Vol. 44 (Aug. 1982), 747-78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Huntington, Samuel P., American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony (Cambridge, 1981)Google Scholar.

25 A good expression of the legitimacy view is West, William F., “Institutionalizing Rationality in Regulatory Administration,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 43 (July-Aug. 1983), 326-34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Heclo, Hugh, “Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment,” in King, Anthony, ed., The New American Political System (Washington, 1978)Google Scholar.

27 Cf. March, James G. and Olson, Johan P., “Organizing Political Life: What Administrative Reorganization Tells Us About Government,” APSR, Vol. 77 (June 1983), 281-96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Rohr, John A., “Public Administration and the Constitutional Bicentennial: An Essay on Research,” International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 4 (1982), 349-80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rosenbloom, David H., “Constitutionalism and Public Bureaucratics,” The Bureaucrat, Vol. 11 (Fall 1982), 54–56Google Scholar.

29 Fischer, Frank, “Ethical Discourse in Public Administration,” Administration and Society, Vol. 15 (May 1983), 5–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Lilla, Mark T., “Ethos, ‘Ethics,’ and Public Service,” The Public Interest, No. 63 (Spring 1981), 3–17Google Scholar.

31 Kaufman, Herbert, “Fear of Bureaucracy: A Raging Pandemic,” Public Admin. Rev., Vol. 41 (Jan.-Feb. 1981), 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Yates, Bureaucratic Democracy, 152-55.

33 Kaufman, , “Fear of Bureaucracy,” loc. cit., 7; O'Neill, Timothy J., “Does the Separation of Powers Violate the Rule of Law?” unpublished manuscript, p.4Google Scholar.

34 Long, Norton E., “Bureaucracy and Constitutionalism,” APSR, Vol. 46 (Sept. 1952), 808-18CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Long's thesis has an historical analogue in the argument that the bureaucratic state originated in attempts to preserve individual and group minority rights against majoritarian encroachment. See Nelson, William E., The Roots of American Bureaucracy 1830-1900 (Cambridge, 1982)Google Scholar.

35 Schochet, , “Constitutionalism, Liberalism, and the Study of Politics,” loc. cit., 11Google Scholar.

36 Cf. Letwin, Shirley, “Law without Law,” Policy Review, No. 26 (Fall 1983), 7–16Google Scholar.

37 Vile, M.J.C., Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers (New York, 1967), 308Google Scholar.