The Procedure Fetish
"These aren’t tasks for lawyers, with their fetish for procedural rules. They are tasks for legislators, managers, and policy experts."
What It’s About
Nicholas Bagley criticizes America's reliance on extensive procedural rules, arguing that these rules, originally intended to safeguard accountability and legitimacy, have paralyzed government action. He argues that a culture that so highly values procedure simply empowers special interests and makes it harder to solve problems.
Upshot
Bagley explains that:
- Excessive Proceduralism Paralyzes Action: Layers of intricate rules bog down agencies, causing delays and inefficiencies, rather than enhancing accountability.
- Special Interests Thrive on Complexity: Well-funded groups exploit procedural complexities to disproportionately influence policies, leading to outcomes that favor entrenched interests over public good.
- Misplaced Constitutional Fears: Rigid adherence to procedural constraints doesn't enhance governmental legitimacy. Agencies with less public participation like the Department of Defense enjoy high approval ratings
Did you know? One study found that affected industry groups submitted 80% or more of the comments yielded through the public comment process.
Why It Matters
The American public sector must focus on results to break free of the focus on process, which has hobbled its ability to act effectively.
Who Wrote It
Nicholas Bagley is a law professor at the University of Michigan, where he specializes in administrative and health law.
