324 CHAPTER 11|THE BUREAUCRACY
CHAPTER goals
Defi ne bureaucracy and
explain its major functions.
¾ PAGES 325–31
Trace the expansion of
the federal bureaucracy
over time.
¾ PAGES 331–34
Describe the size and
structure of the executive
branch today.
¾ PAGES 334–39
Describe who bureaucrats
are and the regulations that
govern their employment.
¾ PAGES 339–42
Explain how Congress and
the president oversee the
executive branch.
¾ PAGES 343–49
These programs could be implemented only if DeMarco certifi ed that they
would be “loss minimizing” for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—that the two
corporations would be better off because reduced mortgages were more likely
to be repaid. Based on his assessment of the programs, DeMarco refused. His
decision did not appear to refl ect political considerations or opposition to the
Obama administration’s initiatives. Rather, DeMarco was following the legal
mandate of the FHFA as he interpreted it and trying to do what was best for the
agency. This is not to say that the Obama administration didn’t want what was best
for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; rather, the situation was one in which reasonable
people could disagree about the consequences of the proposed policy.
The Obama administration attempted to sidestep DeMarco by fi nding a new
permanent head of the FHFA or by removing DeMarco in favor of a different acting
director who presumably would be more sympathetic to their initiatives. However,
these efforts were blocked by congressional disapproval and by regulations that
make it hard to remove bureaucrats from their positions. Ultimately, the Obama
plan was rewritten to eliminate the aspects that DeMarco objected to, and as of
summer 2012, DeMarco remained in his position at the FHFA.
This case highlights just one instance of confl ict and compromise within the
federal bureaucracy. It also illustrates the impact of bureaucratic agencies on
life in America. The bureaucracy, it seems, is everywhere. Americans encounter
the work of government employees every day: when they sort through mail
delivered by the Postal Service, drive on highways funded by the Department of
Transportation, or purchase food inspected by the Food and Drug Administration.
The prices Americans pay to surf the Web, watch television, or use a cell
phone are infl uenced by regulations issued by the Federal Communications
Commission. When Americans go on vacation, their bags are inspected by the
Transportation Security Administration; the aircraft and pilots are scrutinized by
the Federal Aviation Administration, and the beaches may be maintained by the
Army Corps of Engineers.
While many federal bureaucrats work diligently to serve the American public,
examination of what they do and how they do it reveals a paradox: the same
organization that accomplishes so many huge tasks also does things that are
ineffi cient, wasteful, and downright dumb. Do these shortcomings result from
inevitable accidents, or are they the consequences of deliberate actions? And if
so, why are agencies designed to fail or to do things that look a lot like failure?
In this chapter, we show that it’s possible to explain many bureaucratic
failures in terms of the bureaucracy’s complex decision-making procedures
and the political confl icts that ensue when elected offi cials and interest groups
attempt to control bureaucrats’ actions. These confl icts underlie many seemingly
inexplicable bureaucratic actions and outcomes. For example, the need to
monitor bureaucrats to ensure that they carry out congressional mandates often
leads to rigid procedures that make it impossible for bureaucrats to shift policies
in light of changing circumstances. In many cases, these structures refl ect
compromises among lawmakers holding different ideas of what bureaucrats
should do. In this sense, the bureaucracy is just like Congress, multinational
corporations, or other large enterprises that have many employees and
undertake complex tasks.
This chapter also shows that the public’s disdain for bureaucrats is not
uniform. Most Americans award higher ratings to government agencies and
offi ces with which they have personal experience. Similarly, most bureaucrats
believe deeply in their agency’s mission and work hard to achieve its goals.