Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1984-7
Political and Occupational Barriers to the Implementation of Affirmative Action: Administrative,Executive,and Legislative Attitudes toward Representative Bureaucracy 1
This article reports the results of a five-state survey of administrators, executives, and legislators from Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, and Wisconsin. The survey was conducted in 1979 regarding attitudes toward representative bureaucracy/affirmative action and policies in support of improved conditions for ethnic minorities and women.
Government elites are divided in their views of representative bureaucracy with more registering disapproval than approval; however, this “opposition” is not supported by demands that less effort be expended on such efforts. Political and occupational characteristics (ideology, party, state, age, seniority, and education) show slight effect. Some evidence exists supporting a self-interest thesis among administrators and a general politicization of the topic.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AberbachJ.RockmanB. (1976). “Clashing Beliefs Within the Executive Branch: The Nixon Administration Bureaucracy.”American Political Science Review70: 456–468.
2.
AberbachJ.RockmanB. (1977). “The Overlapping Worlds of American Federal Executives and Congressmen.”British Journal of Political Science7: 23–47.
3.
ConoverP. J.FeldmanS. (1981). “The Origins and Meanings of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications.”American Journal of Political Science25: 617–645.
4.
DavisC. E.WestJ. P. (1980). “Support for Affirmative Action Among Non-Minority Public Employees,” pp. 138–145 in HayesS. W.KearneyR. C. (eds.) Public Personnel Management: Problems and Prospects. Columbia, SC: Bureau of Governmental Research and Services, University of South Carolina.
5.
ElazarD. J. (1972). American Federalism: View from the States. New York: Thomas Crowell.
6.
EpsteinL. (1967). Political Parties in Western Democracies. New York: Praeger.
LowiT. (1969). The End of Liberalism. New York: Norton.
12.
MainzerL. (1973). Political Bureaucracy. Glenview, IL: Scott Freeman.
13.
MariniF., ed. (1971). Toward a New Public Administration. Scranton, PA: Chandler.
14.
MeierK. J. (1975). “Representative Bureaucracy: An Empirical Analysis”American Political Science Review69: 526–542.
15.
MeierK. J. (1979). Politics and Bureaucracy. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press.
16.
MeierK. J.NigroL. (1976). “Representative Bureaucracy and Policy Preferences: A Study of Attitudes of Federal Executives.”Public Administration Review36: 458–469.
17.
MosherF. C. (1968). Democracy and the Public Service. New York: Oxford.
18.
RinehartJ.BernickE. L. (1975). “Political Attitudes and Behavior Patterns of Federal Civil Servants.”Public Administration Review35: 603–611.
19.
SaltzsteinG. H. (1979). “Representative Bureaucracy and Bureaucratic Responsibility: Problems and Prospects.”Administration and Society. 10: 465–475.
20.
ShafritzJ. M. (1974). “Political Culture—The Determinant of Merit System Viability.”Public Personnel Management3: 39–43.
SigelmanL. (1976). “The Quality of Administration: An Exploration in the American States.”Administration and Society8: 107–144.
23.
SmithR. L. (1980). “Representative Bureaucracy: A Research Note on Demographic Representation in State Bureaucracies.”Review of Public Personnel Administration1 (Fall): 1–14.
24.
StahlO. G. (1981). “To the One Who Merits It.”The Bureaucrat10, 1 (Spring): 15–22.
25.
SubramanianV. (1967). “Representative Bureaucracy: A Reassessment.”American Political Science Review61: 1010–1019.
26.
ThompsonF. J. (1978). “Civil Servants and the Deprived: Socio-political and Occupational Explanations of Attitudes Toward Minority Hiring.”American Journal of Political Science22: 325–347.
27.
WaldoD., ed. (1971). Public Administration in a Time of Turbulence. Scranton, PA: Chandler.
