There are many uneven things about this book, starting with the amazing price differential for Amazon's price at $129, compared with a small-print new offering at $19! I have never figured out how such differences come about - but I'm grateful for my $19.00 copy (plus shipping)!
As a researcher working on a project concerning federal agency history and performance I was elated to come upon this volume - even if it was published in 1998.
I have of course not read all 741 pages, and even if I did I could not properly evaluate the treatment of most agencies. But I have 30+ years with Interior and done intensive research on its history. More recently I have been studying federal government appointment history and Jimmy Carter's Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, initially triggered by the highly negative reports of CSRA operations by colleagues.
I'm well impressed by the treatment of a chaotic, multifaceted agency constantly grappling with controversy and politics: Interior. A sample of good writing with accurate description follows:
"The first two eras of natural resource management - acquisition (1792-1867) and disposal (1812-1933) - fostered a crazy-quolt pattern f land ownership and competing interests that still plagues the Department of Interior today". I would trust this author with my i-phone. Every aspect I am familiar with is at least competently treated, often with outstandingly candid accuracy, with one exception. The author of the chapter totally left out Carl Schurz, Interior Secretary under President Rutherford B. Hayes, and one of the nation's foremost reformers and excellent administrators through its history. He withstood pressure to transfer the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the War Department (which advocated "pacification programs", cleaned up a corruption-ravaged agency, and instituted the first system of examinations for new employees in the U.S. Government (10 years before passage of the Pendleton Civil Service Act in 1882). He also refused to serve with the corruption-stained President Garfield when the latter refused to follow Schurz's urging to continue the practice of Hayes in appointing high officials on the basis of competence rather than patronage.
Unfortunately, treatment of the Civil Service system follows what I have discovered is an all too prevalent pattern sometimes called "presentism". Presentism is demonstrated when writers use the standards of the present to judge the past. It usually means elevating arbitrary or short-range policies or ideas to a new norm - under which earlier more ethical and effective policies might be erroneously seen as "rigid" or "old fashioned", etc. This is what has apparently happened to the author of the CS article. He finds obscure difficulties with the one of the signal reform measures in U.S. history, the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1882. It played a significant role in bringing the nation out of the rampant public corruption of the Gilded Age. Unlike the present Office of Personnel Management, whose chief is a patronage appointment replaced at presidential elections or more frequently, the Civil Service Commission was bipartisan, and led by outstanding individuals - including Theodore Roosevelt.
From the time of the Reform/Progressive era in federal government around the turn of the 20th Century to around 1960, most federal agencies operated with professional leaders as well as employees, largely independent of arbitrary political interference. This was a time of peak innovation, achievement and public confidence in agencies - notwithstanding whipsawing or other occasional erratic intrusion by Congress. Since World War II various stresses and turbulent events caused the nation to gradually slide back into the earlier patronage system. The primary qualification for high office became political loyalty and policymakers went musical chairs at each election; Worse, Carter's Civil Service Reform Act created a Senior Executive Service, 10% of which could be nonpermanent appointments by the President - to serve under the chief policymaker and push the President's policies - often counter to the mission or judgment of professional administrators. Utlimately demoralization spreads and unstable policies erode public confidence as well. Virtually all experts recognize that the CSRA was not only a failure but counterproductive. The author vaguely alludes to "problems" but seem at sea with respect to the whole subject.
Here are two contrary examples, and if agency staff should happen to see this review site I think everyone would be well served if they shared experience with their own agencies
However, after World War II various stresses brought about variable deterioration in the effectiveness of the federal government agencies. Political polarization brought with it a partial return to the patronage system of the Gilded Age ntroduced turbulent partisan political polarization and
Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
