01553pab a2200181 454500008004000000100002300040245005100063260000900114300001300123362001200136520100400148650003301152650001801185773003301203909001101236999001901247952010501266180718b2015   xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aFeldman, Daniel L.  aThe legitimacy of U.S. government agency power  c2015  ap.75-84.  aJan-Feb  aA synthesis of the work of two political and legal scholars, John Rohr and Lon Fuller, properly balances constitutional and managerial values, supplementing other theories that offer useful but insufficient support for American government agency legitimacy. Agencies reflecting that balance would strengthen their legitimacy a particularly valuable goal in an era of low confidence in American government. Rohr's focus on the constitutional oath of office and American regime values, and Fuller's insistence that law must serve human needs, leave a great deal indeterminate and discretionary but nevertheless set boundaries. Bureaucrats who risked or sacrificed their jobs to avoid transgressing those boundaries offer models of loyalty to the Rohr-Fuller balance of values. The behavior of officials in the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in thwarting measures that could have averted the financial crisis of 2007 offers a model of bureaucrats who violated those boundaries. - Reproduced.  aCivil service - Unite States  aCivil service  aPublic Administration Review  a108333  c108328d108328  00104070aIIPAbIIPAd2018-07-19hVolume no: 75, Issue no: 1pAR108793r2018-07-19w2018-07-19yAR