Thinking the Unthinkable in Public Administration

Abstract

This article argues for ending tenure in the federal civil service. Arguments for tenure, and by extension against the old spoils system, are lacking. Even in the 19th century, relatively few federal managers lost their jobs after party changes. At the same time, limited rotation made the civil service relatively innovative and legitimate. Today, media scrutiny, more programmatic parties and presidents, and the limited capacity of the White House suggest that if presidential appointment authority were vastly expanded, the results would be modest. Such results as would occur might empower political leaders to accomplish more of their objectives and to remake under performing organizations, as well as empower career managers (who would still exist) to better lead their organizations. Each tendency would increase the effectiveness, representation, and legitimacy of the bureaucracy without necessarily increasing corruption. My arguments do not apply to state and local governments, which often operate in less competitive political environments.