An Appraisal of the Hoover Commission Approach To Administrative Reorganization in the National Government

• Author: G. Homer Durham
• Published date: 01 December 1949
• Date: 01 December 1949
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/106591294900200408
• Subject Matter: Articles

615

AN

APPRAISAL

OF

THE

HOOVER

COMMISSION

APPROACH

TO

ADMINISTRATIVE

REORGANIZATION

IN

THE

NATIONAL

GOVERNMENT

G.

HOMER DURHAM

University

of

Utah

HE

LATEST

approach

to

national

administrative

reorganization

ap-

I

t

pears

to

continue

the

doctrinaire

thinking

that,

despite

considerable

criticism,

has

characterized

what

is

called

&dquo;public

administration&dquo;

for

the

last

half,century.

The

primary

article

of

faith

in

this

tradition

seems

to

be

the

assumption

that

good

government

is

essentially

good

administration,

and

that

both

can

be

approached,

if

not

assured,

by

con-

centrating

power

and

authority,

with

staff

services

for

their

implementa-

tion,

in

the

hands

of

the

Chief

Executive.

A

variation

on

this

theme

is

provided

by

the

fact

that

the

Hoover

Commission,

unlike

the

President’s

Committee

on

Administrative

Management

(1937),

is

not

overly

exer-

cised

by

any

&dquo;threat&dquo;

to

presidential

powers

implied

in

the

existence

of

independent

regulatory

commissions.

On

the

contrary,

the

Commission

is

inclined

to

let

the

&dquo;headless

fourth

branch&dquo;

exist,

provided

the

chair-

man

of

each

is

vested

with

administrative

powers

for

agency

housekeeping.

In

view

of

the

Commission

finding

that

nine

regulatory

commissions

employ

a

mere

twelve

thousand

persons,

with

a

total

annual

charge

on

the

taxpayers

of

fifty-seven

million

dollars

for

regulatory

services,

this

disposition

of

the

1937

cause

célèbre

appears

quiet

and

dignified.’

Fifty.

seven

million

dollars’

worth

of

quasi-legislative

and

quasi-judicial

power

is,

after

all,

a

small

item

compared

with

forty-odd

billions’

worth

of

executive

agencies.

To

be

sure,

the

scope

of

inquiry

and

decision

was

circumscribed

by

the

statute

creating

the

Commission:

It

is

hereby

declared

to

be

the

policy

of

Congress

to

promote

economy,

efficiency,

and

improved

service in

the

transaction

of

the

public

business

in

the

departments,

bureaus,

agencies,

boards,

commissions,

offices,

independent

establishments,

and

instru,

mentalities

of

the

executive

branch

of

the

Government

by

1.

Limiting

expenditures

to

the lowest

amount

consistent

with

the

efficient

per-

formance

of

essential

services,

activities,

and

functions;

2.

Eliminating

duplication

and

overlapping

of

services,

activities,

and

functions;

3.

Consolidating

services,

activities,

and

functions

of

a

similar

nature;

4.

Abolishing

services,

activities,

and

functions

not

necessary

to

the

efhcient

con-

duct

of

Government;

5.

Defining

and

limiting

executive

functions,

services,

and

activities.’

1

The

Independent

Regulatory

Commissions,

H.

R.

Doc.

No.

116,

81st

Cong.,

1st

Sess.,

1

(1949).

Cf.,

C.

Herman

Pritchett,

"The

Regulatory

Commissions

Revisited,"

Part

III

of

"The

Hoover

Commission:

A

Symposium,"

American

Political

Science

Review,

Vol.

43

(October,

1949),

pp.

978-989.

2

Public

Law

162,

80th

Congress,

approved

July

7,

1947.

See

also

First

Report

of

the

Commission

on

Organization

of

the

Executive

Branch

of

the

Government,

H.

R.

Doc.

No.

55,

81st

Cong.,

1st

Sess.,

vii,

viii

(1949).