2.14 Holding the Bureaucracy Accountable 

Due to the fragmented political control over the federal bureaucracy, it operates with a level of independence from both legislative and executive branches that is uncommon in other democracies. There is no singular authority overseeing it, allowing the bureaucracy to often pit legislative, executive, and judicial branches against one another, as well as compete with other agencies within the same executive branch, including those in the same department. Consequently, the process of creating public policy becomes quite complicated, lengthy, and often contentious. While Chapter 7 outlined how a bill moves through Congress, this passage is just one part of the entire legislative process. After a bill is enacted, it enters a new phase where federal departments and agencies must draft, debate, and implement the rules and regulations that translate policies into programs. In this context, the role of the bureaucracy is essential. Most bills that pass through Congress and receive the president's approval tend to be vague and open to various interpretations. This ambiguity is often a necessary aspect of securing the support of the majority in the House, Senate, and from the president.

Compromise is essential for creating a law that everyone can accept. To address disagreements and reach a consensus, it often helps to agree on certain details being left unspecified; this is not just about collaboration but also a practical necessity. Lawmakers cannot foresee every possible situation when drafting laws. Officials responsible for enforcing these laws must have some level of discretion and are given authority to create rules published in the Federal Register. In this way, these officials inherently shape policy while implementing it.

Controversial issues do not simply disappear; they shift focus to regulatory agencies, which are tasked with outlining the specifics of laws enacted by Congress. For instance, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for establishing clean air regulations. Those most impacted by a new or modified law are often given the opportunity to comment on its implementation, which can include industry representatives, environmental groups, and local residents. This allows them to influence the agency, engage with the Office of Management and Budget, or even approach the president during the rule-making process.

The sponsors of the original legislation usually play a role as well. A diligent agency director will pay close attention to how key congressional figures interpret any ambiguously written sections. If there is a conflict between the law and the agency's regulations—such as if the agency exceeds Congress's intent in regulating clean air or workplace safety—the matter often ends up in the federal courts. Judges review legislative history, including testimonies, committee reports, and debates, to uncover the original intent of Congress, thus completing the cycle. They may also infuse their own views into their decisions regarding the policy's validity. Should the courts rule against an agency, that agency has the option to seek further authority from Congress to revert to previous provisions.