small salary, but experience has shown that for every salary offered there are numerous office seekers, the majority of whom scarcely measure up to the salaries to be paid. We believe that there are many public-spirited men in the state who cannot be induced to enter the employ of the state on a salary basis, but who would cheerfully give their services if they are afforded fair opportunity to have a voice in shaping the policies of the state and improving general conditions." Such was the plan proposed in New Jersey, for getting trained men as department executives. The single head responsible to the board could then be chosen to execute policies, could then be selected because of his training and fitness; and an inducement could be held out to men who would make public service a career. If politics were allowed to come in there was in their opinion little hope of securing efficiency and economy in the service. This is also one of the accepted doctrines in Wisconsin. All of the commissions except that of Wisconsin devoted their inquiries and reports largely to questions of reorganization and budget-making procedure. The State Board of Public Affairs of Wisconsin was controlled by men who had taken leading parts in the development of the board idea in that state and had advocated its adoption elsewhere- men interested in specialized services of government rather than in questions of coördination of functions and giving balance and proportion to administrative plans and state finances. This is clearly shown by the list of inquiries made and reports rendered, some of which were conducted by the board itself and others in coöperation with departments and institutions. Twelve of the eighteen subjects reported were: Farm tenancy in Wisconsin. Rural credit conditions in portions of Wisconsin. Distribution of Wisconsin potatoes. Distribution of Wisconsin cheese. Distribution of Sheboygan County cheese. Feasibility of adopting a state brand to standardize Wisconsin products. Agricultural coöperation and coöperative methods. Survey of Wisconsin high schools. Survey of Wisconsin normal schools. Survey of Wisconsin State University. The reports bearing on questions of administration and finance included: Budget practices of various states and nations. Feasibility of a central board of control for all public educational institutions. Departmental reorganization and efficiency of state employees. In these reports the "government by commission "idea was taken for granted or staunchly defended. The independent, specialized board idea prevailed; and the recommendations for budget procedure were an adaptation to the existing establishments which had been put under board control. Recommendations for Single-Headed Administration The most complete plans of the early proposals for administrative reorganization were those of Minnesota, Iowa, and New York. The Iowa and Minnesota plans excluded the constitutional officers, while the New York plan contemplated a revision of the constitution and the inclusion of all administrative agencies in the reorganization. Each of these plans proposed to divide the administrative branch into a few departments which were to be under the control of single heads appointed by the governor and responsible to him, the only exceptions being under the New York plan in the case of departments performing quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative functions. The opinion of Mr. E. Dana Durand, chief of staff of the Minnesota commission, is of special interest when considered in relation to the conclusions of the New Jersey commission quoted above. He said: "Minnesota, like most other states, is commissioned to death. Some of these boards are paid, but most of them are unsalaried or made up of groups of state officials serving ex officio. Boards are all right in their place . . . but that place is not in the administration of government, the execution of the law. The board system tends to delay, to dissipate responsibility, to inefficiency generally. You cannot put your finger on the man who is to blame if anything goes wrong. Several or many minds for counsel; one mind for action that is a principle long ago enunciated but strangely departed from." The plans of administrative reorganization and consolidation now in operation in Illinois, Idaho, and Nebraska provide for single-headed departments under the direct control of the governor. These, as well as the several proposed plans for administrative reorganization, are described in detail under Part II. CHAPTER VII GENERAL DISCUSSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REORGANIZATION PLANS TO PROVIDE FOR RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP THE fight in England in the reign of King John, to make the executive responsible through control over the purse, was the beginning of a long series of conflicts between the forces for self-government and a legalized autocratic ruling class. In America the fight to make the executive responsible through control over the purse has been long delayed expedient finally resorted to as a means of making popular control effective. It comes at the end of a century-old contest between the forces of popular self-government and those which stand for class rule; latterly this has meant war on the irresponsible "party" organizations that in turn have profited from class rule. In this conflict the battle has been waged around the stronghold of the irresponsible boss, the head of an irresponsible party system. The forces of the boss were always well organized, and under capable leaders; when not occupied in self-defense, they planned and executed forays for spoils. This was made possible because of lack of responsible leadership-a thing that the American people had been taught was dangerous. As has been pointed out many times, the whole history of American politics has been the history of a struggle not for something, but against something; ours was a negative political philosophy; first we fought against an irresponsible foreign autocracy, which was forced to acknowledge defeat after an eight years' war for independence; then the electorate asserted itself against an irresponsible American commercial and landed aristocracy which was first defeated under the leadership of Jefferson and was finally overthrown by the old warrior, Jackson; then began the struggle of American democracy against the domination of an unaristocratic, and still more irresponsible, "party" organization, the leadership of which was entirely outside the government and beyond the reach of what had come to be a broadly democratic electorate. Boss Rule vs. Responsible Leadership For nearly a hundred years the struggle against this last form of autocracy, bred in and of a desire for power and thriving on a fat and privileged plutocracy, has been going on with indifferent success. Under these conditions the wellsprings of democracy, impregnated with ideals of human liberty, equality, and brotherhood, have become turbid with passion. Popular resentment has increased, until it has threatened disorder; and by this fact the future of our institutions has been made more uncertain. From frontal attack, special privilege, thus organized, proved to be fully protected, its intrenchment invulnerable. The overthrow of one irresponsible boss or party resulted only in the enthronement of another. Finally, thoughtful men interested in the cause of democracy began to point out the fundamental weakness, not of our Constitution, but of the institutions which the people have permitted to grow up under them. They began to point to the fact that what we needed was a positive philosophy which might speak in terms of human service. We needed to organize to do something good and not simply to prevent something bad. To accomplish what the people desired, it was necessary to provide for an able, effective leadership within the government. And no one did more to emphasize the need for calling the electorate to the support of responsible leader |