Review of Joseph Heath’s The Machinery of Government: Public Administration and the Liberal State (Oxford, 2020)

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Stephen M. King
April 25, 2025

In Considerations of Government, J.S. Mill coined the phrase “machinery of government,” referring to the “ordinary operations of bureaucracy.” Joseph Heath, professor of philosophy at the University of Toronto, adopts Mill’s phrase for the title of his book, The Machinery of Government: Public Administration and the Liberal State (2020). Heath explores the role that philosophy—specifically modern liberal normative principles such as efficiency, equality and liberty—informs in civil servants’ policy-making authority. Heath affirms the age-old truth that civil servants are not cogs in the wheels of government bureaucracy operating purely objectively under the guise of political neutrality; rather, they exercise legitimate discretionary authority in the context of the moral principles of modern liberalism.

According to Heath, the thrust of the book is less about public administration and more “…about the history of the liberal-democratic state,” specifically the adoption of philosophical principles that contribute to framing the administrative state. While the traditional constitutional republican government structure augments the separation of powers and checks and balances between the three co-equal branches with the goal of tempering the growth and negative impact of administrative power, Heath argues that “congruent with the rise of the ‘administrative state’” is the expansion and influence of administrative law and professional ethics, two rules which provide legal and moral guidance regarding the foundation and use of discretionary authority. To demonstrate the validity of his thesis, he scrutinizes the influence efficiency, equality and liberty have upon civil servant discretionary authority regarding several policy areas.

First, Heath argues the rise of the liberal state is less about equality and more about efficiency, particularly in healthcare and healthcare insurance. For example, while healthcare can be delivered by market forces such as use of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), Heath contends universalized healthcare systems are far more efficient, largely because of the redistributive nature of tax systems. While the market system may work for the exchange of individual goods (i.e. cars) and basic services (i.e. groceries), it fails for the welfare system overall and healthcare insurance in particular. Greater attention by civil servants to the efficient delivery of public health services incentivizes ethical oversight of these services.

Second, Heath contends cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is not singularly anchored in utilitarian ethics when contrasting costs and benefits of a public good or service. Instead, the principle of efficiency is largely “embedded in CBA” and amplified by the Pareto Principle, which is a useful statistical tool used by civil servants for determining how to mitigate costs and enhance benefits for various public policy issue areas including public goods (i.e. use of public parks) and the imposition of regulations (i.e. including noise reduction in residential areas). However, Heath notes equality too is a moral imperative for the use of CBA, primarily when deciding how to allocate finite public resources toward other public issues such as the ethical assessment of road safety or the rationing of healthcare.

Finally, Heath critiques J.S. Mill’s “reformulation of the liberal conception of individual freedom as anti-paternalism constraint.” Heath alleges that while Mill’s “argument is resolutely welfarist,” his defense of non-ordered individual liberty is not morally sustainable. Further, Heath demonstrates that state paternalism should not violate citizens’ “right to exercise individual liberty,” principally because it infringes on the moral authority of civil servants to respect individual autonomy. In short, it is essential the liberal state act with moral responsibility when administering rules and regulations that may negatively impact individual liberty.

Heath’s book, while sometimes tedious, provides greater insight into the role normative theoretical principles have in the administrative development, implementation and evaluation of various public policies in the liberal state. The administration of sound laws and regulations is critical to a well-functioning administrative apparatus and is particularly necessary for granting significant discretionary authority to civil servants. Although I am less convinced than Heath regarding the virtue of the modern liberal state, I do support Alexander Hamilton’s dictum in Federalist 70 that “energy in the executive (is) the leading character…of good government…and the steady administration of the laws…” It is the proper use of executive authority that is tantamount to finding and adopting long-term political and administrative approaches for addressing the stability of the constitutional republic, especially in light of the recent tendency to form a loose definition for separation of powers, while at the same time elected officials must hold public servants accountable for the abuse or misuse of their discretionary authority. Failing on both fronts will have long-lasting consequences regarding how government operates for the foreseeable future.

In conclusion, I am reminded of President Reagan’s famous line in his first inaugural, “…government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Later, he noted “…it’s not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work—work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back.” Government is and always will be a vital institution that affects all aspects of our lives. However, if our democratic experiment is to remain viable, we must address the challenge of how to effectively and ethically weigh the expression and protection of individual rights and liberties with the administrative state’s moral responsibility to exercise government power. Heath’s book sheds light on just how we as a nation might strive to overcome this challenge.

---

Author: Stephen M. King is Professor of Government at Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA. He teaches undergraduate courses in American politics, state and local government and public policy, and has taught graduate courses in public policy analysis and ethical leadership and administration. He frequently publishes on the topics of ethics and public administration and leadership and spirituality in the public workplace. He is President (AY24-25) of the Hampton Roads Chapter of ASPA. He served on the Advisory Council for SEIGov, ASPA (AY21-24). His latest book is Ethical Public Leadership: Foundation, Organization and Discovery. Contact him at [email protected].

 

(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...