Presidential politicization and congressional oversight of the bureaucracy: Presidential leadership strategies for EPA during Reagan's first term

During the Anne M. Burford period President Ronald Reagan adopted a strategy of "penetrative" (in the sense that presidential politics penetrated administrative operations thoroughly) presidential politicization of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to ensure its responsiveness to his environmental deregulatory policy goals and strengthen his leadership of EPA.; Reagan politicized EPA penetratively through appointments of persons very loyal to his policy goals as political officials, sharp cuts in budget and personnel requests to Congress, reorganizations for weakening enforcement, conspicuous relaxations of rules and regulations, and sharp reductions in enforcement referral cases. His environmental deregulatory goals appeared to be achieved through these tactics. However, Congress responded to the strategy with very hostile oversight of EPA. Eventually, this strong oversight brought several major adverse impacts on presidential leadership of EPA, including his being forced to request the resignation of Burford who was extremely loyal to him.; Due to the strong congressional backlash Reagan changed his strategy into a "moderate" (in the sense that presidential politics influenced administrative operations moderately) politicization strategy during the William D. Ruckelshaus period. The moderate strategy was characterized by appointments of independent-minded and able persons as political officials, increases in budget and personnel requests to Congress, reorganizations for strengthening enforcement, strengthening of rules and regulations, and increases in enforcement referral cases. In response to the "moderate" strategy congressional oversight of EPA was remarkably weakened. This weakened oversight did not bring any major adverse impacts on presidential leadership of EPA during this period.; The penetrative strategy failed in maintaining the President's strong leadership of EPA because it was confrontational and imperial-oriented leadership strategy and the moderate strategy succeeded in maintaining slightly limited but still substantial presidential leadership of EPA because it was legitimate and consensual-oriented leadership strategy. Based on these findings I recommend, as a desirable strategy for presidential leadership of the bureaucracy in a constitutional, pluralistic, and competitive political system, a "reconciliatory" politicization strategy which is intended to properly "reconcile" the President's legitimate demand for the bureaucracy's responsiveness to him, Congress' legitimate demand for the bureaucracy's responsiveness to Congress, and bureaucrats' legitimate demand for respect for their professional competence.