| Popis: |
Governmental professionalism is declining. There are many more political appointees in the bureaucracy, and the environment has not been supportive or trusting. But public officials can play a role in restoring the environment for professionalism. The new service orientation may help. Alternatives to the formal structure and senior executives service may also help. Richard Harwood of the Washington Post made an observation that does not in any way constitute news. He wrote: "The prestige of an occupation is a factor, too, and in that respect government service has suffered substantially since the 1930s, when New Deal brain trusters set out to change the world and since the 1960s, when many of the `best and the brightest' flocked to the New Frontier that beckoned in Washington. Today the image of the public service is tarnished" (Harwood, 1994). What Harwood describes, of course, is not simply a condition existing in Washington. It pervades the entire nation. I am old enough to remember the way things were before World War II, and I have thought and written about the condition of the public service in the United States for more than 40 years. I have seen the decline first hand. But based on my observations over the years, I believe there are things we can do to improve the environment for public service professionalism. While Ronald Reagan consistently avowed that government, with much public acceptance, was "the problem," government was seen as a real friend and defender before World War II. The image of business was negative, with scandals on Wall Street and in the public utilities particularly on the public mind. At the same time the unions were developing rapidly and aggressively pursuing their special interests. Perhaps as a result, many thought there was a public interest that was superior to those of business and labor. Harold Laski, the eminent British political scientist, is generally given credit for arguing that government is the third, vital piece in this cast of actors. It is government that is charged with representing and defending the public interest in society. To be sure, government had interests, but people clearly trusted it a great deal more than they trusted business or labor. Very few, in those days of Franklin Roosevelt, conceived of government as the problem. The belief in government as good and important died slowly. As society grew in complexity and diversity, new problems and needs were identified. The expansion in the number of tasks and responsibilities assigned to government at all levels in the last 30 years has been astronomical. Yet governments did not perform credibly in a variety of arenas, partly because of deficient policies and partly because of organizational and managerial inadequacies. While John F. Kennedy gave a temporary boost to the image of the public service, the decade of the 1960s contributed further to the rejection of government as a positive force. The Vietnam War led to great distrust of and disregard for governmental edicts, but perhaps more important was the recognition that we had a government that served the white, generally male, majority. Little had been done to reconcile the needs of the minorities and thus to develop a public interest that was reflective of the entire society. Voices of increasing breadth and intensity questioned the integrity and even the legitimacy of the government. Over time, the status of the public service in the United States has declined greatly. It is a condition that raises serious questions about the ability of society to govern itself responsibly. The Florida Situation I have lived in Florida for about 14 years and have had a good opportunity, through my academic assignment at Florida State University, to observe the state government and its operation. My opportunity to know local governments has been more limited, because only two units (a city and a county) are in the immediate vicinity. … |
