Difference between politics and public administration
The first proposal to separate the fields of politics and public administration was made in the late 19th century. Former United States President Woodrow Wilson was one of the ardent advocates of making public administration a distinct academic discipline. President Wilson, in his essay “The Study of Administration” (1887), said that administration as a business sector should be overcome by the troubles and conflicts of politics. Despite many claims by staunch defenders, the field of public administration was a field of political science during the 1950s and 1970s, but it was not long before public administration was recognized as an administrative science. Hence, politics and public administration an independent field of study. Although we can now say that the century’s epidemic debate is finally over, some questions are yet to be answered: Why is there a need to spark the debate in the first place? Better yet, how important is it to discuss the need to tarnish politics and administration? We will answer these questions in the last part of our analysis.
Politics vs administration
Before delving deeper into politics and public administration, it is better to first distinguish administration policy. For President Wilson, the policy field aims to answer the question, “Who will make the law and what will it be?”, While the administration tries to address the question, “How should the law be administered?” Using similar thinking, Wilson’s law and contemporary expert Frank Gooden stated that while politics has something to do with the policies or expression of the will of the state, the administration has to do with such execution of policies. Wilson and Frank Gooden made it clear that politics is limited to the elaboration of policies and laws, an act that is usually for the legislative body of a state; And the administration concentrates on the implementation of laws, usually carried out by the executive power of the state.
While these definitions are valid, it would be somewhat problematic if we used this in our current (or any future) analysis. For example, the Philippine Congressional legislative veto and supervisory function can be seen as a way to act and share with the executive branch the administrative branch. Furthermore, the special power of the President of the Philippines to present the proposed budget to Congress shows how the President can play a major role in the political agenda. Apart from the overlap (if not the cohesion) of the functions of politics and public administration, the problem that now remains is the obsolescence of the long-standing discrimination of these areas.
If we were to see politics as a field that referred to the allocation of public resources, I think a superficial definition being used by scholars of our time, the resonance of the essentially meaning of public administration Will be. In the words of Professor John Weig, public administration “encompasses all areas governed by public policy. Including formal procedures through which the legislature exercises its power. The role of courts in administration is justice.” In modern usage, the public Administration is no longer confined to the domain of the executive branch, because over time, it has been through the creation of necessary laws. Was more concerned to serve the public through active implementation of efficient provision of detailed legislation and public services.
Why is the debate going on
In fact, it is really difficult to distinguish between politics and public administration, because the first strongly influences the second, or vice versa. However, this has been discussed long back. While some scholars claim that Wilson called for a complete separation of politics and public administration, Wilson himself admitted that the dialectics of the two are imaginary. If this is not likely to happen in the first place, why say a dichotomy? This is now the part where we will answer our first question asked in the introduction.
Wilson gave four reasons why the science of administration should be: (1) straightening the streets of government; (2) Make your business professional; (3) strengthen your organization; And (4) the crown of their obedience. Wilson knew that achieving complete isolation from politics and public administration is not possible, because what he really wants is to keep public administration away from the evils of politics and institutionalize the practice of effective administration. As today’s governments serve many teachers (people), their functions became more complex, which underscored Wilson’s need for great dominance in government administration. For this monumental work, the role of administration studies is to create competent administrators who work not only as passive instruments of power, but also in the public interest and promote a type of government which is in need of the public and Be reflective.
Finally, we will answer the last question asked: How important is it to discuss the need to double politics and public administration? This has never been so necessary, and has always been relevant. As it seems, the need for bifurcation is more than the birth of public administration as a field of study rather than an epidemiological issue and an academic milestone. The root of the debate brings with it another great cause and a big call. Now more than ever, the call for an administration, which will always be attentive to the demands of the people, for public administrators who serve as a voice of marginalization, and for future administrators who face the challenge of saving their rule will do .