Government by the Experts: The Rise and Controversy of the Administrative State
Introduction:
The populist Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement aims to dismantle what its members refer to as “the administrative state.” This term encompasses the vast bureaucracy that regulates a significant portion of the U.S. government, foreign policy, and economy. The roots of the administrative state can be traced back to President Woodrow Wilson, who championed a government run by an expert class. However, this vision has faced opposition from small-government conservative populists who believe in limited government intervention.
The Birth of the Administrative State:
President Woodrow Wilson, known for his progressive views, laid the foundation for the administrative state with his 1887 essay, “The Study of Administration.” Wilson envisioned a government led by experts, similar to Britain’s Whitehall. He believed that governing the public, who now held the power through popular rule, required instruction and persuasion rather than immediate executive expertise. This perspective led to the expansion of the bureaucracy, which has continued to grow over time.
Government by the Experts:
Wilson’s vision of governance by experts remains deeply embedded in American government. His successors, such as Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, also contributed to the expansion of the bureaucracy. One prominent example of expert-led governance within the executive branch is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), established by Wilson in 1914 to protect the public from deceptive business practices and unfair competition.
Lina Khan and Unaccountable Governance:
Lina Khan, the current chair of the FTC, embodies unaccountable governance by unelected experts. As a law student, Khan gained recognition for her groundbreaking 2017 Yale Law Journal article, which criticized U.S. antitrust laws and accused Amazon of utilizing aggressive pricing strategies and monopolistic tactics. President Joe Biden appointed Khan as FTC chair in March 2021, garnering support from progressive senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar. However, industry groups expressed concerns about Khan’s proposed reforms, emphasizing the need to enforce existing antitrust laws rather than advocating for personal policy changes.
Controversies Surrounding Khan:
Khan’s appointment quickly sparked controversies within the FTC. Republican member Christine Wilson accused Khan of disregarding the rule of law and due process, leading to her resignation. House Republicans also criticized Khan’s leadership, accusing her of neglecting and mismanaging the agency in pursuit of her political and ideological goals. Additionally, Khan faced scrutiny for attempting to evade congressional oversight, further fueling concerns about her disregard for accountability.
Criticism from Biden Administration Supporters:
Even self-proclaimed proponents of “Bidenomics” have criticized Khan’s performance. While acknowledging her trailblazing work, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian from the Yale School of Management highlighted her poor track record in challenging large mergers in court. They argued that Khan was overreaching from enforcement into active policymaking, suggesting that she should focus on administering the law rather than shaping it.
The Need for Accountability and Constitutional Principles:
While Khan may possess valuable insights into antitrust law, it is essential to recognize that she has never been elected to any public office. Critics argue that she should not have the privilege of legislating from within the bureaucracy without accountability to voters. The Founding Fathers meticulously designed a system of checks and balances to prevent the concentration of power in one person or branch of government. If Khan wishes to shape the law, she should run for Congress, and if she aims to administer it, she should abide by congressional legislation.
Conclusion:
The rise of the administrative state, championed by President Woodrow Wilson, has sparked a significant debate within the MAGA movement. Supporters of limited government intervention oppose the bureaucracy’s unchecked power and advocate for more accountability and adherence to constitutional principles. The controversies surrounding Lina Khan’s tenure as FTC chair highlight the concerns regarding unaccountable governance by unelected officials. As the discourse continues, it is crucial to strike a balance between expertise and democratic accountability in order to ensure effective and just governance.
