Building on Wilsonian foundations, this article present the normative case for a special, central role for public servants in the design and redesign of public law, including constitutions. Central to the author’s argument are Wilson’s characterization of public administration as “the State’s experiencing organ” and his contention that public administration is the primary institution engaged day to day in negotiating the dynamic tension between public and private in a liberal democracy. The author identifies and counters three probable objections to public administrators fulfilling this distinctive role. He concludes with a defense of this role conception for public administration, stressing the obstacles to full realization, and the obligations it imposes on future scholars and public servants.
BimberB. (1996). The politics of expertise in Congress: The rise and fall of the office of technology assessment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
2.
CarpenterD. P. (2001). The forging of bureaucratic autonomy: Reputations, networks, and policy innovation in executive agencies, 1862-1928. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
CookB. J. (2007). Democracy and administration: Woodrow Wilson’s ideas and the challenges of public management. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
4.
EdenL. (2004). Whole world on fire: Organizations, knowledge, & nuclear weapons devastation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
5.
FungA.GrahamM.WeilD. (2007). Full disclosure: The perils and promise of transparency. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
6.
GoldsmithS.KettlD. F. (2009). (Eds.). Unlocking the power of networks: Keys to high-performance government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
7.
HoodC. C.MargettsH. Z. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
8.
KettlD. F. (2002). The transformation of governance: Public administration for twenty-first century America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
9.
KingdonJ. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
10.
KrauseG. A. (2002). Separated powers and institutional growth in the presidential and congressional branches: Distinguishing between short-run versus long-run dynamics. Political Research Quarterly, 55, 27-57.
11.
LindblomC. E.CohenD. K. (1979). Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
LinkA. S.HirstD. W.LittleJ. E. (Eds.). (1966-1994). The papers of Woodrow Wilson (69 vols.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13.
LongN. E. (1952). Bureaucracy and constitutionalism. American Political Science Review, 46, 808-818.
14.
LowiT. J. (1991). Toward a legislature of the first kind. In RobinsonW. H.WellbornW. H. (Eds.), Knowledge, power, and the Congress (pp. 9-43). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
15.
McCubbinsM. D.SchwartzT. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 165-179.
16.
NORC. (2007). General social surveys 1972-2006: Cumulative codebook. National Opinion Research Center. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
17.
RohrJ. A. (1986). To run a constitution: The legitimacy of the administrative state. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
18.
RoseR. (1989). Signals for steering government: A symposium of the Wissenschaftszentrum, Berlin. Journal of Public Policy, 9, 233-240.
19.
RosenbloomD. H. (2000). Building a legislative-centered public administration: Congress and the administrative state, 1946-1999. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
20.
SalamonL. M. (Ed.). (2002). The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21.
SchickA. (1991). Informed legislation: Policy research versus ordinary knowledge. In RobinsonW. H.WellbornW. H. (Eds.), Knowledge, power, and the Congress (pp. 99-119). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
22.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (1988). Systematically pinching ideas: A comparative approach to policy design. Journal of Public Policy, 8, 61-80.
23.
SkowronekS. (1982). Building a new American state: The expansion of national administrative capacities, 1877-1920. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
24.
SkowronekS. (2006). The reassociation of ideals and purposes: Racism, liberalism, and the American political tradition. American Political Science Review, 100, 385-401.
25.
TerryL. D. (2003). Leadership of public bureaucracies: The administrator as conservator. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
26.
Van CreveldM. (1999). The rise and decline of the state. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
WhitemanD. (1995). Communication in Congress: Members, staff and the search for information. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
28.
WilsonW. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197-222.
29.
WilsonW. (1908). Constitutional government in the United States. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
30.
WilsonW. (1981). Congressional government: A study in American politics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1887)
31.
WoodB. D.WatermanR. W. (1994). Bureaucratic dynamics: The role of bureaucracy in a democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview.
