The Administrative Agencies in the United States and their Implications

The Administrative Agencies in the United States and their Implications.
Administrative agencies are apart from the other branches of the government, the executive, judicial and the legislative, but are able to exercise the functions of the three. These agencies are authorized and supported by the legislative orders, and are capable of implementing and creating regulations, enforcing and adjudicating. They say that courts do not possess these capabilities.

The continuous prevalence of this kind of system has increased the popularity of administrative laws in the Supreme Court. It came to the point that almost 1/3 of the decisions to be made by the court is about the administrative actions.

Take note that administrative agencies function on the most sensitive areas of the society, and thus were called the fourth branch of the government. The agencies have a comparable scope of authority and perimeter to the three above-mentioned branches, and thus their impact is very much anticipated (Barry and Whitcomb, 2005, p. 25).
One of the disadvantages with this kind of system is that the administrative office takes itself apart from the people under their functions. Because of this, the decisions they make are lacking in sympathetic flavor and thus are prone to the erosion of public interest.
The executive part may decide on the basis of a single person, and because of this there might be narrowness in the judgment of that person, which makes the decision not applicable to many, thus is susceptible to initiating conflict (Zwart and Verhey, 2003, p. 58).
The United States has become an increasingly administrative form. In line with this, implications were identified and patterned before the American character (democracy, justice, quality of life). Aside from the implication mentioned above, there are other troubling implications which are even historical but still this kid of system has prevailed.
The democratic options made this kind of order, and still are renewable as dictated upon by the many. To stick with this kind of thinking, the decision makers in the administrative office must be free from interpersonal influences, and be strong-willed also in order to come up with the necessary actions.
When the customary administration has come into abuse or distortion, this is a possible threat to the American governance (Salyer,1995, p 246). Interest groups are everywhere, and they may greatly influence the administrative actions (policy implementation) and even the legislation (policy adoption), or take control of them.
It is of high tendency that government policies may be formulated in the absence of law, and the law be just allowed to be made by this fourth branch (Williams and Torrens, 2001, p, 357).
Barry, D. D., & Whitcomb, H. R. (2005). The Legal Foundations of Public Administration. Retrieved July 8, 2009, from
Salyer, L. E. (1995). Laws Harsh as Tigers: Chinese Immigrants and the Shaping of Modern Immigration Law. Retrieved July 9, 2008, from
Williams, S. J., & Torrens, P. R. (2001). Introduction to Health Services. Retrieved July 8, 2008, from
Zwart, T. L., & Verhey, F. M. (2003). Agencies in European and comparative perspective. Retrieved July 9, 2008, from

The Administrative Agencies in the United States and their Implications

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>