Senior leaders of the executive and legislative branches have differing views of the government and some deeply felt reservations about each other that contribute to government “disserving” the public, and only some of the divide is rooted in partisanship, according to a report from the Partnership for Public Service.
“There is a pervasive lack of understanding of and appreciation for the concerns of the executive branch among many members of Congress and staff, and agency leaders exhibit a similar attitude toward members of the House and Senate. Political appointees believe lawmakers do not appreciate how their actions negatively affect the management of agencies and the delivery of services to the public. Members of Congress, in contrast, are considerably more focused on the battles over policy, funding and the proper role and size of government than they are about effective agency operations,” it says.
Executive branch officials meanwhile “respect the importance of congressional oversight regarding policy, how programs are administered and how efficiently money is being spent. But there is a pervasive sense among executive branch appointees that lawmakers are more interested in grabbing headlines and scoring political points than improving agency operations.”
“Former lawmakers and congressional aides defend the oversight role, but acknowledge it is not as thorough or productive as it should and could be, and that this function has become less effective over time. Data show the amount of time spent by lawmakers at committee and subcommittee meetings to delve into agency operations, debate policy and legislate has declined from earlier eras, particularly in the House,” it says.
