The People We Depend Upon Part 3 of 3
Who are Often the Last Bastion When Our Democracy is Assaulted?
The Road to Valuing Public Service Again
Democracy must function well on daily basis to receive its citizens’ support. For that to happen, democracy requires a strong public service with dedicated, competent public servants. In turn, for Americans to receive the kind of government and its services they want, their understanding and appreciation of the need for a strong public service to administer democracy is paramount.
We have been examining the importance of public service to democracy. Here we will focus on, despite all the negativity, why people choose public service in this country as a career. After all, if we want good government, we want the best people possible working it, do we not? We will also look at the danger of undoing bureaucracy, as well as what we can do to restore a high view of public service in this nation. Finally, we will see a real-life example of how public servants often are a last bastion for keeping our democracy when it is attacked.
Our Public Service Conundrum
Today Americans’ view of public service is a mass of contradictions, lack of knowledge, misinformation, and divisive stereotypes. Americans can generally come to agreement that we are called to serve as Dr. King and President Kennedy exhorted us to. We generally acknowledge that our democracy requires good quality public service and qualified, competent public servants. We want our government to serve us well. But, for many our lack of civic literacy means that we do not understand the origins of our government’s bureaucratic organization and why bureaucracy works better than our previously dominant government administrative structure- the spoils system.
Nor do we understand the increasingly complex bureaucratic structure required for today’s increasingly complex world in which government must operate and deliver services. We have a tendency not to trust that government, nor do we think very highly of those we entrust as career public servants and their institutions to deliver the government services we believe we need and depend on. These perceptions of lack of trustworthiness of government, as well as a low view of public service provided by government employees, have been exploited for political advantage by hosts of incumbent or want-to-be elected officials for at least the last forty years.
Civic literacy requires that we recognize that for us to get this figurative “ocean liner” called the U.S. government to be able to successfully complete its “voyage”, we must stop “drilling holes in the bottom of the boat”. Accordingly, we must restore a high view in American society for public service. We cannot afford to keep trying to sink the very “ship” (our government) we depend on to keep from “drowning” by undermining our own confidence in our own government with negative stereotypes of those in public service. Where do we begin?
Teaching that Public Service is Important and Honorable
There are several starting points for restoring a high view of public service. Many of them should and can be pursued concurrently. First, public service must be taught, in fact, extolled as our founding fathers did. A key place for this to happen is in our school’s civic education curriculums teaching it not only as a virtue, but as a necessity for our republic’s continued existence. We must also teach the reasons why people choose public service as a career. This motivation has long been identified and studied. It is called “Public Service Motivation” or PSM and, as noted by Leonard Bright, is simply the “…altruistic intentions that motivate individuals to serve the public interest. Many believe that PSM has an important impact on the characteristics, attitudes, and behaviors of public employees…”[1]
Not only should we talk to young people about PSM as being key to why our public servants choose government work, but that public service is a rewarding career to which everyone should give serious consideration if we want our “best and brightest to be drawn to and be interested in it. Public service should be taught in schools as a viable career, not an option of last resort. Instead of saying things like “good enough for government work”, we need to be encouraging our youth to ask themselves- are they good enough for government work? We should be encouraging our students to strongly consider public service as a life’s work, a viable, rewarding career choice. And yes, they may not make as much money as those in the private sector, but public service has its own intrinsic rewards, many of which are derived from the satisfaction of serving others.
Seeing Public Service as a High Calling in Our Culture
More than teaching it to school students, we must tackle restoring our view of public service as a high calling as a general cultural issue. According to Stanford University Professor Francis Fukyama:
“…The United States has never trusted its public servants, since the 1980s, the denigration of bureaucrats, the Washington milieu and government in general has intensified…There is a general feeling that government is incompetent and cannot be trusted to manage anything…”[2]
Fukyama offers the antidote for this negativity:
“…What is lost in this culture is the older view that public service is an honorable calling and that citizens do not simply have rights, they have responsibilities…[3] (emphasis mine)
Those responsibilities include holding in high regard those who serve us, for if we disrespect them, we are showing disrespect not only for them, but disrespect for the government institutions that we expect to serve us well. To negatively impact ourselves even further, we then increase the difficulty in attracting talent to consider public sector employment. New York University Professor of Public Service Paul C. Light put it this way:
“The real damage under Trump has been to corrode interest in government among the nation’s best and brightest. If you break interest in government, you steadily erode government’s ability to deliver on the promises we make”.[4]
The Raleigh News & Observer Editorial Board maintains that “…widespread and lasting reversal of the bashing of government employment will not come until the spirit of Kennedy’s call returns”.[5] They are referring, yet again, to JFK’s 1961 call to serve one’s country that Reagan did so much to damage with his negative view of government that he cast. That call to public service can return, if we pursue the ideas outlined here and other ideas as well. We must consciously decide as a nation that it is in our best interest to change how we think about public service.
The Real-Life Consequences of No Longer Valuing Public Service
And make no mistake, when this low view of public service is aggressively activated at the highest levels of our elected leadership, it has had real life consequences for Americans in terms of the quality of our government. Ben-Ghiat points out that under former president Trump overall, 100,000 career civil servants left, retired, or were fired (as Trump did to rid himself of experts and critics).
In turn, as Ben-Ghiat contends, the quality of our government service suffers ethically and in terms of corruption, as well as accountability. She points to evidence supporting this claim that in the “new era Trump civil service”, “…employment applications eliminated questions about real estate holdings, finances, and professional references…” making “…it harder to discover conflicts of interest and easier to hire those who can corrupt others or won’t object to administration practices.”[6]
We must proactively and consciously decide that instead of a collective low view of government, we will replace it with a high value on public service and the public servants who deliver those services. These are the thousands upon thousands of Americans who make their living in the public sector at the state, local, and federal levels of government, as well as those Americans who work for public school districts and special government districts. Many of these are career public servants who are highly educated, with advanced degrees in fields such as public health, education, public safety, criminology, emergency management, the sciences, as well as public administration and public policy, to name just a few.
We must face a hard societal untruth- that public service is a place where an individual who could not get a job in business (or anywhere else for that matter) looks for work. This lack of appreciation by the public must change as to why, as a rule, Americans go into public service in the first place. After all, as is often said, or in the very least is thought, why go into government work when you can make so much more money in the business world? A fresh understanding by Americans of PSM can help change that perspective. People choose public service to serve, to make a difference, not to make a lot of money. And for that opportunity to serve, many in public service make conscious sacrifices about their lifestyle so that they can serve us.
As William J. Burns maintains, “…it is long past time to end the war on government…” After all, the only ones ultimately injured in such conflict are us, the American people. Burns also advocates for Americans to “…think big about public service”.[7] A good “road map” for improving public service, according to Burns, is the 2017 report generated by the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service[8] which contains many recommendations to restore a “service mindset” to the American psyche.
Improving Public Service in the U.S.
That is not to say that public service and the bureaucracy it operates within cannot be improved or made to serve us better. It most certainly can be. Many attempts have been made to do so at the federal level over the last thirty years. If the recommendations in the 1989 and 2003 Reports from the two iterations of the Volcker Commission were utilized, they would be a good starting point for a reform agenda for the public service and the bureaucracy of our federal government. Sadly, according to Fukuyama, “…Public sector reform has been at the bottom of the reform agenda for both Republican and Democrats for the past three decades due to ingrained hostility to the state, and particularly to the federal bureaucracy, but this hostility is a huge mistake.”[9] One can only conclude that it is easier to complain about “draining the swamp” than engaging in the hard work of making things better.
The Harvard Business Review ran an article in 2020 advocating a non-partisan model for improving leadership in the federal public service. This model is intended for all levels of the Federal government’s leadership, not just the senior leadership (for which there has long been an exceptionally good model and professional development program). Additionally, this model is intended for both career public servants and political appointees. McDonald et al’s model is based on two core values: “stewardship of public trust and commitment to public good” which they maintain:
“…are unique to government and derived from the constitutional oath all employees take when they enter the federal service. Given the vast and unmatched influence and resources of our government, trust in Federal leaders and their integrity is paramount. The concepts of unity, justice, domestic tranquility, defense, liberty, and the general welfare of the American people must be at the heart of what it means to be a leader in government and ingrained in all development efforts.”[10]
To pursue these two core values, McDonald’s group centered this public service leadership development model around four key leadership competencies- becoming self-aware, achieving results, engaging others, and leading change. Within each of these four competencies are “sub-competencies” including emotional intelligence, evidence decision making, equitably engaging a diverse work force, understanding the importance of technology, and encouraging innovation and creativity.[11]
A value driven leadership model like McDonald’s, used throughout the Federal public service, coupled with a clear national vision to advocate for, repair, and restore, the importance of public service in the public’s eye, could do much to improve this key component of our civic literacy.
The Destructive Threat of “Deconstructing” Merit Based Public Service
In December 2020, Susan E. Dudley, a Professor and Director of George Washington University’s Regulatory Studies Center authored an interesting article for Forbes magazine. Dudley noticed something that had flown “under the radar” in the last days of the Trump administration. She was asking why a lame duck president with barely a month left in his term would be issuing an executive order that created new civil service rules that govern staff at federal agencies? As Dudley describes, “With the stroke of a pen, this order would overturn more than a century of civil service law for these positions designated as “policy-determining, policymaking, or policy advocating”.[12]
With this presidential executive order, these positions no longer enjoyed civil service status and its related protections from the political whims of hiring and firing, but now made them political appointees. The answer to why this was done, especially at such a “late hour” in a lame duck presidency, was to place these positions directly under the “thumb” of the president and his White House political appointees’ behest for hiring, firing, and demotion purposes.
As Dudley explains, many of these positions are housed at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an important policy formulation arm of the Executive Branch and critical to smooth transitions from one presidential administration to another. Dudley is an advocate for civil service reform, but since the time President Trump’s action was being taken amid a supposed transition, she has joined the ranks of those asking why this was done. It certainly attracted much attention, and raised many questions.[13] Trump’s Executive Order was rescinded by President Biden. But, since that time, now 2024 presidential candidate Trump has announced his intention, if elected again, of firing up to 50,000 civil service positions entirely, replacing civil service with the old spoils systems, hiring cronies and loyalists, many of which will have no qualifications for the position they fill.[14] The corruptive destruction Trump tried to do to career federal servants in 2020 was just the “tip of the iceberg” of what he would do in 2025, if given the chance.
This move to declassify senior civil service positions into positions of political appointment spotlights the importance of career public servants, especially those that are not political appointees. These career public service personnel are vital for the continuity they bring to their work of formulating policy, making recommendations, and policy advisory expertise. Perhaps even more vital, these positions can become a first line of defense for our democracy when political appointees and elected officials are assailing it. Historian Heather Cox Richardson highlights this key point of the value of public service in preserving democracy:
“…Democracy depends on a nonpartisan group of functionaries who are loyal not to a single strongman but to the state itself. Loyalty to the country, rather than to a single leader, means those bureaucrats follow the law have an interest in protecting the government. It is the weight of that loyalty that managed to stop Trump from becoming a dictator- he was thwarted by what he called the “Deep State”, people who were loyal not to him but to America and its laws. That loyalty was bipartisan. For all that Trump railed that anyone who stood up to him was a Democrat, in fact many- Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger,…were Republicans.”[15] (emphasis mine)
As Richardson explains, authoritarian figures expect and demand loyalty to them alone, rather than to the institutions of government, especially institutions of a bipartisan government. These “underlings” obtain this loyalty not because they are qualified for their position within the government or because they are talented and rose within a bipartisan system. According to Richardson,
“…They are loyal to their boss because they could not make it in a true meritocracy, and at some level they know that (even if they insist they are disliked for their politics). In the previous administration (of Trump), the president tried to purge the government of career officials, complaining they were not loyal enough to him…Trump’s politicization of the government during his term is a problem…for American democracy…”[16] (emphasis mine)
A Final Word on the Value of Public Service –
Teaching Its Vital Role in Maintaining Democracy
Who, since November 3, 2020, have been the guardians of our democracy? Certainly not former President Trump, most of his former Executive Office inner circle, or a large part of Republican membership of Congress. Although to be fair, then Vice President Pence did eventually make a stand for democracy, albeit briefly, on January 6, 2021. He did this by refusing the president’s request for him, as the presiding officer over the Senate, to not certify the 2020 Electoral College’s official election results with Congress. As we all know now, this resulted (based on Trump’s Twitter exhortations and speech on the morning of January 6th) in some of the mob rioting at the Capitol, attempting to capture the Vice President with the apparent intent to hang him (gallows had been erected by some of the insurgents on the Capitol lawn).
Who, for the most part, has it been that has “stood in the gap” for democracy since the 2020 presidential election? It has been those in public service- career public officials. It was Acting Attorney (AG) General Jeffrey Rosen who refused former President Trump’s unsubstantiated repeated attempts to have the DOJ investigate voting procedures and election results in swing states Trump had lost in the presidential election. It was Rosen’s various Deputy Attorneys General who all threatened to immediately resign if Trump replaced Rosen with DOJ attorney Jeffrey Clark (who was willing to investigate those states’ voting procedures and replace Rosen as Acting AG, if Trump would appoint him). Many Americans still do not realize how close democracy came to being severely damaged by Trump if these DOJ employees had not stood their ground based upon democratic principles. They stopped an attempted coup
It was the career public service officials who came forward in 2019 and provided damaging testimony at President Trump’s first impeachment hearings. They told the truth about the President’s own words and his activities as he used United States’ foreign policy in Ukraine for personal political gain. They did so at their own peril and were “rewarded” by President Trump with termination of their employment. It was Rick Bright, who led the government’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), who spoke up critically about the various untested Covid “cure-all” drugs being pushed by former President Trump. His reward for truth telling was reassignment to what appears to be a lesser position, and ultimately leaving public service.[17]
And let us not forget the brave officers of the Capitol Police and the Washington, DC Metro police who were vastly outnumbered, yet fought for hours with thousands of rioters who were attempting to subvert our government. Many officers were injured and traumatized during the riot. Some later died from their trauma. Additionally, we cannot forget the Inspectors’ General, doing their jobs as “watchdogs” of various Federal departments, who have been fired for bringing forth reports of wrongdoing that reflected poorly on Mr. Trump or his political appointees. There are many stories like these.
These are “faceless bureaucrats”, the public servants who stood for our democracy, yet are often alleged members to be members of the so-called nefarious “deep state”. Far from being faceless, these are true patriots, and they paid a price for their patriotism for which we are indebted to them. As Ryan Sullivan says in “The Value of Institutions”:
“…Our institutions might be one of the best defenses against radicalism or tyrannical takeover. For the most part, they are composed of career public servants who got their jobs through the civil service process. They are usually dedicated and genuinely believe in the work they are doing. They want to work towards a better country and want to be a part of getting us there…These public servants often don’t seem affected by the cyclical changes in agency leadership…And when new leaders are appointed who are viewed as more radical, the civil servants approach them with increased skepticism…With courage and conviction, they sometimes standup to leaders for negative actions…That is why they are so important…The bureaucracy can thus provide a buffer against more authoritarian behavior. If a president becomes increasingly radical, institutions still stand in between him and the people. The resistance of career civil servants who believe new orders go against the mission of their agency can prevent authoritarian actions from being inflicted on the public…”[18] (emphasis mine)
Many former Trump officials have been coming forward even now. Public servants like these, as we have seen recently, “put it all on the line” for their country, for our democracy. While they all performed multiple, various, and widely different types of jobs, they all had one thing in common- they were motivated by serving the public. They were motivated by the high calling of public service, just as many Americans have been over the course of our democracy’s history. Perhaps because these public servants served, in many cases, as a last line of defense for democracy, that this is the single most important reason to place urgency upon restoring in Americans a high view of public service as a part of our civic literacy. Bottom line, dedicated, responsible public service is vital to preserving our democracy for future generations. It is that important.
We will continue exploring topics like this one that are not given near enough time and emphasis in our civic education efforts, if they are even taught at all. Democracy is so important. But it’s hard to keep, and it’s easy to lose. It’s up to us, and only us, to protect it. Support democracy, become a Democratist!
[1] “Does Public Service Motivation Really Make a Difference on the Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions of Public Employees?”, by Leonard Bright, The American Review of Public Administration, 2008 38: 149, Published by SAGE Publications on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration, https://sites.duke.edu/niou/files/2011/05/Bright-Does-Public-Service-Motivation-Really-Make-a-Difference-on-the-Job-Satisfaction-and-Turnover-of-Public-Employees.pdf
[2] “Restore Honor in Public Service, Recent Events Have Shown Why Having a Capable Civil Service Is of Critical Importance”, by Francis Fukuyama, The Dallas Morning News, August 30, 2020, https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/30/francis-fukuyama-our-next-president-must-restore-the -idea-that-there-is honor-in public-service/
[3] Restore Honor in Public Service, Recent Events Have Shown Why Having a Capable Civil Service Is of Critical Importance”, by Francis Fukuyama, The Dallas Morning News, August 30, 2020, Ibid
[4] After Trump, Let’s Appreciate Public Service Again”, Editorial Board, Raleigh News & Observer, November 15, 2020, 1:34PM, Ibid
[5] After Trump, Let’s Appreciate Public Service Again”, Editorial Board, Raleigh News & Observer, November 15, 2020, 1:34PM, Ibid
[6] Strongmen, How they Succeed, How they Fail, by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, pg., 162, Copyright 2020, Ibid
[7] “America Needs a Rebirth of Public Service”, by William J. Burns, May 4, 2020, The Atlantic, Ibid
[8] National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, est. 2017, www.inspire2serve.gov
[9] Restore Honor in Public Service, Recent Events Have Shown Why Having a Capable Civil Service Is of Critical Importance”, by Francis Fukuyama, The Dallas Morning News, August 30, 2020, Ibid
[10] “A Nonpartisan Model for Developing Public-Service Leaders” by Robert McDonald, Douglas Conant, and Andrew Marshall, Harvard Business Review, April 20, 2020, https://www.hbr.org/2020/04/a-nonpartisan-model-for-developing-public-service-leadership
[11] “A Nonpartisan Model for Developing Public-Service Leaders” by Robert McDonald, Douglas Conant, and Andrew Marshall, Harvard Business Review, April 20, 2020, Ibid
[12] “Civil Service Reform is Needed But Trump’s Lame Duck Initiative Is Not The Answer (And Could Make Things Worse”), by Susan E. Dudley, December 16, 2020, 08:13am EST, https://www.forbes.com/sites/susandudley/2020/12/16/civil-service-reform-is-needed-but-trumps-lame-duck-initiative-is-not-the answer-and-could-make-things-worse/?sh=2aa546202706
[13] “Civil Service Reform is Needed But Trump’s Lame Duck Initiative Is Not The Answer (And Could Make Things Worse”), by Susan E. Dudley, December 16, 2020, 08:13am EST, Ibid
[14] Conservatives aim to restructure U.S. government and replace it with Trump’s vision | PBS NewsHour, August 29, 2023, www.pbs.org
[15] Letters From An American, by Heather Cox Richardson, January 23, 2021, Copyright 2021 Heather Cox Richardson
[16] Letters from An American, by Heather Cox Richardson, January 23, 2021, Copyright 2021, Heather Cox Richardson
[17] “Director of Key Federal Vaccine Agency Says His Departure Was Retaliation”, by Kaitlan Collins, Jeremy Diamond, and Betsy Klein, April 22, 2020, Updated 6:17 PM ET, https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/22/politics/rick-bright-barda-trump-coronavirus/index.html
[18] “The Value of Institutions”, by Ryan Sullivan, May 14, 2018, Positics Media, https://www.positicsmedia.com/2018-05/14/value-of-institutions/