Civil Service Is Service, Too
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Patrick Mulhearn
September 22, 2019
“I have yet to meet a bureaucrat who was not petty, dull, almost witless, crafty or stupid, an oppressor or a thief, a holder of little authority in which he delights, as a boy delights in possessing a vicious dog. Who can trust such creatures?” -Cicero
Civil servants get a bum rap.
Big thinkers since (at least) the time of Cicero have agreed that government officials are a scourge to the polis—one can imagine Sumerians queuing up to the tax bureau, cuneiformed tablets clutched tight, hoping that they won’t have to spend the day waiting in line for a surly, curly-bearded bureaucrat. Modern patrons of any DMV can commiserate.
Yet government administrators are still the fabric of government, responsible for delivering services that are fundamental to a civil society; Recruiting young, talented people to these institutions is vital. So how does an agency recruit the best and brightest to deliver those services when the institution itself is at best mistrusted and at worst reviled?
Where “Government Bureaucrat” is an epithet
Is it just a branding issue, then? Perhaps it’s just a matter of referring to government administrators and technical experts as public servants rather than bureaucrats in a nod to what they do rather than how they’re organized. The ideal of service could be employed to reform the crustiest of pencil-pusher, even in the face of general public mistrust of government. Americans generally trust those who serve in the military twice as much as any other institution, so could this be a model for rebranding?
Military service is lauded as the ultimate expression of patriotism and service, but while there are plenty of civil service jobs which could be just as dangerous—law enforcement stands out—civil servants are never thanked for their service. Serving the everyday needs of the population should be a noble calling, but the quotidian nature of the work makes a less compelling narrative than jumping out of a perfectly good airplane into a combat zone.
Or perhaps it’s a matter of also appealing to the better angels of people’s nature. James Perry in 1996 posited four dimensions of public service motivation: attraction to public policy-making, commitment to the public interest and civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice. For Perry people are attracted to public service because of their inherent disposition, so a finance major looking to make it rich managing a hedge fund is never going to be interested in civil service regardless of institutional reputation.
Threading the needle, then, between people’s inherent attraction to service and the negative public opinion of public institutions seems to be a viable strategy
The Call to Serve
Mandatory service—martial or civil—is a controversial topic in the United States. Whether its conscription through the draft or mandatory public service Americans dislike compulsion, perhaps because we’re all such rugged individuals.
But can institutions rely on individual inclinations to drive their recruitment? The consensus appears to be no as generations of politicians have sought ways to incentivize public service. Peace Corps and AmeriCorps were efforts to encourage public service. And in 2016 Congress commissioned the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service develop service at every level of government. The interim report on their efforts provided this terrifying tidbit:
“Americans under the age of 35 make up 35 percent of the nation’s workforce but only 17 percent of federal civilian employees. Ready or not, generational change will come to federal agencies, because 30 percent of civil servants, including a majority of senior agency executives, will be eligible to retire in five years. Yet young adults are avoiding or being turned away from federal employment.”
So the problem of public service is being driven by two countervailing forces: lack of interest from one side, and the impenetrability of the civil service system on the other.
Lots of Carrots
While succession is a perineal problem, the epochal shift of the Silver Tsunami is upon us and governments must continue their attempts to bolster public sector recruitment. In fact there are legislative proposals working their way through Congress right now.
While a few of these ideas rely on some kind of national public service in the vein of AmeriCorps, there are also efforts to salvage one of the Obama Administration’s efforts to encourage people to join the Civil Service: the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. This program was intended to provide loan forgiveness for people who serve in the public sector for ten years while making what are referred to as, “Qualifying payments.” While the definition of these payments and program eligibility have been a moving target, the intent to incentivize public service was clear.
Several senators have proposed legislation to salvage this program from management and implementation issues by would simplifying the loan-forgiveness process and making eligibility determinations more straightforward. It’s an incremental reform, but it comes at a critical time: government accounts for around 21 million jobs in the United States—more than any other sector—but with fewer young people considering public service we’re at risk of structural decay within the institutions we all rely upon for everyday.
Author: Patrick Mulhearn, MPA, is a public policy analyst for the Santa Cruz County, California, Board of Supervisors. He focuses primarily on policies relating to telecommunications and transportation infrastructure and may be reached at [email protected].
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
Civil Service Is Service, Too
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Patrick Mulhearn
September 22, 2019
Civil servants get a bum rap.
Big thinkers since (at least) the time of Cicero have agreed that government officials are a scourge to the polis—one can imagine Sumerians queuing up to the tax bureau, cuneiformed tablets clutched tight, hoping that they won’t have to spend the day waiting in line for a surly, curly-bearded bureaucrat. Modern patrons of any DMV can commiserate.
Yet government administrators are still the fabric of government, responsible for delivering services that are fundamental to a civil society; Recruiting young, talented people to these institutions is vital. So how does an agency recruit the best and brightest to deliver those services when the institution itself is at best mistrusted and at worst reviled?
Where “Government Bureaucrat” is an epithet
Is it just a branding issue, then? Perhaps it’s just a matter of referring to government administrators and technical experts as public servants rather than bureaucrats in a nod to what they do rather than how they’re organized. The ideal of service could be employed to reform the crustiest of pencil-pusher, even in the face of general public mistrust of government. Americans generally trust those who serve in the military twice as much as any other institution, so could this be a model for rebranding?
Military service is lauded as the ultimate expression of patriotism and service, but while there are plenty of civil service jobs which could be just as dangerous—law enforcement stands out—civil servants are never thanked for their service. Serving the everyday needs of the population should be a noble calling, but the quotidian nature of the work makes a less compelling narrative than jumping out of a perfectly good airplane into a combat zone.
Or perhaps it’s a matter of also appealing to the better angels of people’s nature. James Perry in 1996 posited four dimensions of public service motivation: attraction to public policy-making, commitment to the public interest and civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice. For Perry people are attracted to public service because of their inherent disposition, so a finance major looking to make it rich managing a hedge fund is never going to be interested in civil service regardless of institutional reputation.
Threading the needle, then, between people’s inherent attraction to service and the negative public opinion of public institutions seems to be a viable strategy
The Call to Serve
Mandatory service—martial or civil—is a controversial topic in the United States. Whether its conscription through the draft or mandatory public service Americans dislike compulsion, perhaps because we’re all such rugged individuals.
But can institutions rely on individual inclinations to drive their recruitment? The consensus appears to be no as generations of politicians have sought ways to incentivize public service. Peace Corps and AmeriCorps were efforts to encourage public service. And in 2016 Congress commissioned the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service develop service at every level of government. The interim report on their efforts provided this terrifying tidbit:
So the problem of public service is being driven by two countervailing forces: lack of interest from one side, and the impenetrability of the civil service system on the other.
Lots of Carrots
While succession is a perineal problem, the epochal shift of the Silver Tsunami is upon us and governments must continue their attempts to bolster public sector recruitment. In fact there are legislative proposals working their way through Congress right now.
While a few of these ideas rely on some kind of national public service in the vein of AmeriCorps, there are also efforts to salvage one of the Obama Administration’s efforts to encourage people to join the Civil Service: the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. This program was intended to provide loan forgiveness for people who serve in the public sector for ten years while making what are referred to as, “Qualifying payments.” While the definition of these payments and program eligibility have been a moving target, the intent to incentivize public service was clear.
Several senators have proposed legislation to salvage this program from management and implementation issues by would simplifying the loan-forgiveness process and making eligibility determinations more straightforward. It’s an incremental reform, but it comes at a critical time: government accounts for around 21 million jobs in the United States—more than any other sector—but with fewer young people considering public service we’re at risk of structural decay within the institutions we all rely upon for everyday.
Author: Patrick Mulhearn, MPA, is a public policy analyst for the Santa Cruz County, California, Board of Supervisors. He focuses primarily on policies relating to telecommunications and transportation infrastructure and may be reached at [email protected].
Follow Us!