A case study on rule-making for DoD procurement policy: Effects of policy changes for mergers and downsizing of defense contractors considering Congressional oversight, Executive Branch administrative responsibility, and industry roles

This dissertation looks at how the Executive Branch responds to oversight and how the bureaucrat views the workings of the checks and balances of the American federal system through the process of legislative oversight. In the studies on how the bureaucracy responds to oversight, the focus is generally on Congress.;Studied was a rule created in the Executive Branch, evaluated by Congress, as to the policy behind the rule and the rule itself; the Executive Branch responded to Congress and finally a public administrator dealing with the underlying context of the rule as it was being formed. This study focused on one aspect of the DoD's relationship with the Congress, procurement regulations. Review of this relationship helps explain the effect of oversight by the Congress over the DoD acquisition process. An analysis of the records produced by the regulation-creating process was combined with qualitative interviews to verify and enrich the document review after initial analysis was completed. Congressional oversight is the independent variable, while executive department responses are the dependent variables. The overriding question is how effective is Congressional oversight of the Department of Defense procurement process?;The results show that the bureaucrat in DoD has great respect for the system and control of the Executive Branch by elected representatives. However, the study also showed that the DoD bureaucrats felt they knew the system better than the elected officials. That existing system was created to a great degree by elected officials of the past. In practice, the role of one branch of government can be taken or passed to another branch, so "conflict," in the form of what is the intent of the policy, arises between the elected officials of the past and those of the present. The arguments, inside this conflict, are not over the appropriateness of new policies but on how to put those policies into an already developed system.;The public administrator's actions can influence the policy to be formed, and the policy being formed in turn changes the actions taken by the public administrator. Policy making and administration are neither separate activities nor sequential activities.