Is the politicization of the public service bureaucracy inevitable given its structure of incentives for career advancement?

Question

I just need a brief explanation of the reasoning behind why this may be the case.

Answer 1

Hi!

So to start, the politicization of bureaucracy is anything but inevitable in countries that have a strong tradition with the rule of law and a history of embattled cities facing political machines. For example, in the United States in the mid-1800's to early 1900's, you had these big political machines using a spoils system to give jobs and positions in government to those who helped the machine's campaigns.

However, with the rise of populism in the late 1800's and the Progressive Movement in the first two decades of the 20th century, policymakers began to put safeguards in place to break these machine's hold on power. In fact, for many politicians, battling patronage became a key part of their platform. Examples of these reforms include the passage of the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act (1883), the Passage of the Hatch Act(s) (1939 and 1940), and a clean-up of the Postal Service.

These reforms focused on making the Civil Service synonymous with a merit system, where positions were chosen based of skill and achievement, which it remains to this day. However, there is a connection between federal bureaucracy, congressional committees, and interest groups, where each work together to coalesce and conserve power. I have linked an explanation of this "iron triangle" below.

Hope this was helpful!

Link for Iron Triangle- https://www.albert.io/blog/iron-triangle-ap-us-government-crash-course/

Answer 2

Governments make important determinations about how social resources and career progress are to be distributed and how public justice is to be dispensed. While many key governmental decisions are made by traditional political actors , such as presidents, legislatures, and courts implementation of many policies is carried out by bureaucracies.