While the federal bureaucracy has considerable influence on the United States government, it is subject to constraints that limit its power and independence. Some of those constraints are procedural. For example, government agencies cannot hire or fire employees, or buy or sell goods, without following procedures established by law.

There are five major legislative constraints on bureaucratic authority. The first legislative constraint is The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, which requires government agencies to take certain steps before adopting a new rule or policy. The agency must give notice to parties that may be affected by the change and solicit comments from those parties, before approving the new rule or policy.

Another legislative constraint is The Freedom of Information Act, which has been used frequently by journalists to gain access to government documents. Passed in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act gives citizens the right to inspect all government records, except those that contain information about military or intelligence activities, trade secrets, or private personnel records.

Before an agency can initiate any action that affects the environment, The National Environmental Policy Act (1969) requires the agency to issue an environmental impact statement. The statement must detail the ways in which the action may affect the environment, wildlife, and natural habitats.

Another legislative constraint is The Privacy Act of 1974. This Act mandates that agencies keep government files about private citizens confidential. It includes information such as Social Security files and tax records.

A final legislative constraint is The Open Meeting Law (1976), which states that all government agency meetings must be open to the public unless issues such as military information or trade secrets are being discussed. The law applies to all parts of the meeting.

Along with these legislative constraints, agencies also face checks on their authority that are imposed by the executive branch. However, presidential oversight of the bureaucracy, which consists of budget proposals and direct inquiry, has not always been effective.

The president can appeal for bureaucratic cooperation, and if an agency does not comply, he may pursue several options. The president can call for the resignation of the head of the department or agency, but this action is only effective if the top department appointee is the sole impediment to the White House proposals. At times, department heads are not able to convince their employees to support the White House plans, in which case, the selection of a new secretary would not help to advance the president's proposal.

The president can use the threat of future funding cuts or investigation to encourage agency cooperation. A threatened cut in funding might be seen as counterproductive because the White House must rely on the department or agency to implement its policy. The threat of investigation can be effective, but usually requires congressional cooperation.

The president can also use his power of personal persuasion and presidential authority to promote agency action on his programs. This strategy may be successful if the president is perceived as a forceful advocate for his agenda.

In addition to legislative and executive constraints, agencies face other impediments. The overlapping functions of agencies can serve as a constraint on the independence of any single agency. For example, the Customs Service, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the FBI are all involved in controlling the trafficking of drugs, making the activities of the agencies interdependent. States may also modify or add restrictions to agency authority. For example, many states have strengthened privacy laws in recent years.

The constraints on agency independence can affect bureaucratic behavior in several ways. It takes longer to get things done when constraints must be satisfied. Agency actions may be inconsistent when efforts to satisfy one constraint conflict with another constraint. The agencies can be hesitant to take action because they must be receptive to public comment. Lower-level bureaucrats can hesitate to act for fear of making a mistake, leaving their bosses to make the decisions. Ultimately, all of these behaviors will contribute to public complaints about bureaucratic red tape.

Copyright 2006 The Regents of the University of California and Monterey Institute for Technology and Education