Advertisement

Conclusions

  • Steven G. KovenEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The issue of accountability remains at the core of democratic governments. Voting is meaningless if elected officials are unable to control the actions and general behavior of public sector agents who, at times, appear to act with impunity according to their own sets of norms and objectives. The chapter revisits the threat to democracy posed by insulated bureaucratic organizations that operate at the local, national, and international levels. Exposure by legislative institutions or the media represents possible checks on abusive behavior; however, the chapter notes that those who step forward to expose wrongdoing often place themselves at risk. The chapter explores approaches to reining in strong organizations such as whistleblowing, external oversight, and internal oversight. Finally, the existential question of the extent to which insular bureaucracies endanger democracy is posed. The limitations of average voters are well recognized. However, the final call is to strengthen democracy through better communication, greater candidness, and trust in the ability of the people to reverse course when it appears that the train of government has gone seriously off the tracks.

References

  1. Anderson, M. (2013). As the Trayvon Martin case goes to trial, remembering a major media event. Pew Research Center. Retrieved August 20, 2015, from http://www.pewresearch.org/
  2. Andrzejewski, A. (2015, May 24). The VA scandal one year later. Forbes. Retrieved October 8, 2018, from https://www.forbes.com/
  3. Dahl, J. (2013, July 12). Trayvon Martin shooting: A timeline of events. CBS News. Retrieved October 9, 2018, from https://www.cbsnews.com/
  4. Follman, M., & Clark-Flory, T. (2006, March 14). Prosecutions and convictions. Salon. Retrieved October 9, 2018, from https://www.salon.com/
  5. Grynbaum, M. M. (2017, February 17). Trump calls the news media the ‘Enemy of the American People.’ New York Times. Retrieved October 9, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com
  6. McGrath, R. J. (2013). Congressional oversight hearings and policy control. Legislative Studies Quarterly, XXXVIII(3), 349–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Niskanen, W. (1971 [1994]). Bureaucracy and public economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  8. Olmsted, K. (2018). Terror Tuesday: How Obama refined Bush’s counterterrorism policies. In J. E. Zelizer (Ed.), The presidency of Barack Obama (pp. 212–226). Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Riley, D. R. (1987). Controlling the federal bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Scher, S. (1963). Conditions for legislative control. Journal of Politics, 25(3), 526–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Stephens, B. (2017, February 26). Don’t dismiss president Trump’s attacks on the media as mere stupidity. Time. Retrieved October 9, 2018, from https://time.com/
  12. Svara, J. (2015). The ethics primer for public administrator in government and nonprofit organizations. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning.Google Scholar
  13. Wagner, D. (2014, May 31). The doctor who launched the VA scandal. AZCentral. Retrieved October 8, 2018, from https://www.azcentral.com/
  14. White, L. D. (1945). Congressional control of the public service. American Political Science Review, XXXIX(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wilson, W. (1885). Congressional government. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations