Should we defend the adminstrative state? (Record no. 514943)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01490nam a22001457a 4500 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 210102b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Reoberts, Alasdair. |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Should we defend the adminstrative state? |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. (IMPRINT) | |
| Place of publication, distribution, etc | Public Administration Review |
| 300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION | |
| Extent | 80(3), May-Jun, 2020: p.391-401 |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc | Troubled by actions of the Donald Trump administration, some academics have defended the administrative state. This may be a mistake. The scholarly definition of the administrative state has shifted over decades, and today scholarly usage of the term often diverges substantially from popular usage. When academics invoke the concept, they may unwittingly trigger negative associations in the minds of nonacademics and defeat their own cause. This mistake is easily avoided, because academics often do not need to talk about the administrative state at all. Research would be improved by using different terms to describe three distinct ideas: the state, administrative systems within the state, and the administrative state, which is best understood as a type of state that emerged at a specific moment in American history. If academics want to defend the public service in the realm of politics, it would be better to do so in those terms, rather than using a phrase that often triggers fears about big and irresponsible government. - Reproduced |
| 773 ## - HOST ITEM ENTRY | |
| Main entry heading | Public Administration Review |
| 906 ## - LOCAL DATA ELEMENT F, LDF (RLIN) | |
| Subject DIP | ADMINISTRATIVE STATE - UNITED STATES |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Item type | Articles |
No items available.