The impact of the federal bureaucracy has been on public policy.
The impact of the independent regulatory agencies has been significant.
One of the landmark regulatory cases is the Supreme Court decision of Munn v Illinois.
There was a dispute over whether Illinois had the power to regulate the railroad haulage rates of grain.
The railroad was forced to follow state rates by Illinois Grange laws.
The state had the right to regulate this private industry because it was in the public interest.
The interstate commerce act and the interstate commerce commission were influenced by this ruling.
In 1994 the agency came under fire by Congress and was defended by the same interests who were critical of its creation.
The first independent agency to be created was slashed by Congress.
To see how influential regulatory agencies have become, you have to trace your daily routine.
Each example has a linkage component described in the last section.
Presidential direction, acts of Congress, and court decisions are what motivated them.
The public, interest groups, and the media reacted to the process.
Critics of regulation point to the fact that the costs far exceed the benefits of the entire regulation process, even though many of these regulations and policies are in the public interest.
One of the issues that is still being debated is the fear of an over regulated society.
The budgetary process of bureaucratic agencies is controlled by Congress.
The independence of some bureaucratic agencies comes from laws passed by Congress.
Choice C is incorrect because bureaucrats don't usually have close contact with the media.
Many bureaucrats are appointed for longer terms than the president, so they have a continuity of service.
Choices A, B, C, and D would all have an impact on the Defense Department's budget.
The minority party doesn't control the agenda so Choice E wouldn't be a significant influence.
The agency is responsible for the president.
Congress uses congressional oversight and has some control over the budgetary process.
There have been calls to abolish the Departments of Education and Energy.
Legislators see choice D as a weakness of the modern bureaucracy.
President Clinton and Vice President Gore came out with REGO, or reinventing government, because they wanted to downsize the federal government.
You will be able to make connections if you think of the Food and Drug Administration or Environmental Protection Agency.
The agencies' regulations can be nullified by court rulings.
In the name of national security, the Central Intelligence Agency may want to act independently.
It is responsible to the president.
The other agencies have their own status.
Choices B, C, D, and E reflect that issue.
The abolition of a non functioning department in another agency is suggested by Choice A.
That isn't within the authority of a bureaucracy.
Administrative responsibilities are given to Choices A, B, D, and E.
The president can use a bully pulpit to influence the direction of an agency, can issue an executive order that negates an agency directive, and can recommend a reduction or increase in the budgets of these agencies.
An iron triangle relationship is when a bureaucratic agency, special interest group, and legislative arm work together to develop policies.
Many programs have returned to the states because they had to deal with the issue of the size of their agencies.
The Unfunded Mandates Act was passed in 1994.
Laws or quasi legislative directives can be used for these policies.
Unfunded mandates are when the states are required to implement the policies and also pay for them, regardless of whether the states support the objective of the policy.
The legislation requires the federal government to analyze and evaluate every mandate imposed on the states in an attempt to reduce those mandates that would create an undue burden on the states.
This legislation was one of the first pieces of legislation signed by the 104th Congress and was supported by President Clinton.
Legislative regulations that have been imposed on the states include social security payroll taxes, wages and hours regulations, clean air requirements, as well as implementation of entitlement programs.
The states have argued that the states should be protected from the federal government.
Many states simply raise state taxes to pay for unfunded mandates, which puts a burden on the taxpayer.
There is an unfunded mandate imposed by the EPA.
Guidelines to control pollutants were required by the EPA as part of the 1972 Clean Air Act.
The goal of the act is for the EPA to develop air-quality standards.
The provisions of law are executed by establishing national pollution limitations, such as requiring automobiles to meet emission standards and factories to establish pollutant controls.
Penalties were established by the EPA.
It instituted lawsuits to enforce its environmental regulations.
An oversight process is part of the law.
Congress can hold hearings to see how the law is working.
The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the establishment of a Superfund were all updated.
The EPA was given more responsibility to implement the new law.
One example of how the EPA created a regulation that impacted on the states was the installation of centralized emission control stations to replace local service stations in states with higher than normal pollution problems.
The affected states had to ask for a waiver because they weren't prepared to implement the directive.
Sometimes law to regulation results in regulation not being implemented.
An unfunded mandate is a policy imposed on the states by the federal government.
Two points are earned for explaining the law.
One point is earned for giving a legislative example of how the Unfunded Mandates Act impacted the states and one point is earned for giving a legislative example of how the Unfunded Mandates Act impacted the federal government.