Why does the president struggle to control the Federal Bureaucracy?
Most modern day presidents have said that they found it nearly impossible to
control the federal bureaucracy. The president presides over fifteen cabinet
departments and fifty five to sixty independent agencies staffed by two and a
half million federal civilian employees. The president must struggle to control
the federal bureaucracy, he can’t be in more than one place at one time.
The constitution endows the president with the power to nominate the
principal officers of the bureaucracy and the president has the power to
request in writing the opinions of department heads, but no clause states the
extent to which presidents can tell department heads what to do, this limits the
president’s control over the federal bureaucracy. Furthermore, when it comes
to the president nominating people to jobs within the federal bureaucracy it
could be argued that congress causes the president to struggle in controlling
the federal bureaucracy. Congress carefully reviews the nominees the
president puts forward, restrict by law the number of appointed people, or
write specific statutes that limit who the president can nominate and under
what conditions appointees can be removed.
Another argument to suggest that congress limits the president’s control over
the federal bureaucracy is the fact that congress anticipates and responds to
presidential abuses of re organization and spending powers. In the 1960’s
President Kennedy, after being rejected in his attempt to create a Department
of Urban Affairs by statute, proposed a reorganization plan to accomplish the
same goal. Congress subsequently included a new provision in the presidents
reorganization authority that no new cabinet departments could be created by
reorganization plans. In addition, when congress worries about presidential
budgetary influence it can remove an agency from the executive budget
review and mandate that it submit it budget requests directly to congress.
It is not very often that congress to asserts control over the federal
bureaucracy but when it does its in a rather defensive and partial fashion. It
would be wrong to say that congresses actions have had no effect on the
distribution of power, congress has successfully limited presidential control
over the federal bureaucracy in a number of cases. These include; fixed terms
for appointees, which limit the presidents removal power, statutory exclusion
from budget review, which limits the presidents budgetary powers, exclusion
from the presidents reorganization authority; and party balancing
requirements for presidential appointments. The number of agencies created
with one or more of these characteristics has increased over time and
evidence that a small but growing proportion of the federal bureaucracy have
factors which limit direct presidential control. These cases further show how
the president struggles to control the federal bureaucracy.
As the size of the federal bureaucracy has increased and its orders and
advice have become more frequent, the bureaucracy has also become
increasingly independent from presidential control. Past Presidents, realizing
this, have sought to try and bring the federal bureaucracy under their control
more in various ways. The Reagan Administration was determined to check
Most modern day presidents have said that they found it nearly impossible to
control the federal bureaucracy. The president presides over fifteen cabinet
departments and fifty five to sixty independent agencies staffed by two and a
half million federal civilian employees. The president must struggle to control
the federal bureaucracy, he can’t be in more than one place at one time.
The constitution endows the president with the power to nominate the
principal officers of the bureaucracy and the president has the power to
request in writing the opinions of department heads, but no clause states the
extent to which presidents can tell department heads what to do, this limits the
president’s control over the federal bureaucracy. Furthermore, when it comes
to the president nominating people to jobs within the federal bureaucracy it
could be argued that congress causes the president to struggle in controlling
the federal bureaucracy. Congress carefully reviews the nominees the
president puts forward, restrict by law the number of appointed people, or
write specific statutes that limit who the president can nominate and under
what conditions appointees can be removed.
Another argument to suggest that congress limits the president’s control over
the federal bureaucracy is the fact that congress anticipates and responds to
presidential abuses of re organization and spending powers. In the 1960’s
President Kennedy, after being rejected in his attempt to create a Department
of Urban Affairs by statute, proposed a reorganization plan to accomplish the
same goal. Congress subsequently included a new provision in the presidents
reorganization authority that no new cabinet departments could be created by
reorganization plans. In addition, when congress worries about presidential
budgetary influence it can remove an agency from the executive budget
review and mandate that it submit it budget requests directly to congress.
It is not very often that congress to asserts control over the federal
bureaucracy but when it does its in a rather defensive and partial fashion. It
would be wrong to say that congresses actions have had no effect on the
distribution of power, congress has successfully limited presidential control
over the federal bureaucracy in a number of cases. These include; fixed terms
for appointees, which limit the presidents removal power, statutory exclusion
from budget review, which limits the presidents budgetary powers, exclusion
from the presidents reorganization authority; and party balancing
requirements for presidential appointments. The number of agencies created
with one or more of these characteristics has increased over time and
evidence that a small but growing proportion of the federal bureaucracy have
factors which limit direct presidential control. These cases further show how
the president struggles to control the federal bureaucracy.
As the size of the federal bureaucracy has increased and its orders and
advice have become more frequent, the bureaucracy has also become
increasingly independent from presidential control. Past Presidents, realizing
this, have sought to try and bring the federal bureaucracy under their control
more in various ways. The Reagan Administration was determined to check
