Assessing Civil-Military Relations and the January 6th Capitol Insurrection

The events of January 6, 2021, when violent rioters attacked the Capitol building in Washington in order to disrupt validation of the 2020 presidential election, forced an unprecedented reckoning with the state of American politics. Members of Congress struggled to account for the rhetoric that gave rise to the event; law enforcement grappled with the challenge of holding accountable those who perpetrated the violence; and journalistic outlets wrestled with reporting a complex web of conspiracy theories and disinformation that gave rise to the insurrection. But for senior military leaders, the question was how to explain the troubling presence of active duty servicemembers and veterans in the first attack on the American seat of government in two centuries. The result is a profound and urgent discussion in U.S. civil-military relations.     

The R and D contract and democratic theory

The purposes of this essay are to describe how federal research and development policy has altered authority relationships and to suggest a new concept of legitimacy in accord with the changed conditions. Research and development (R and D) creates an indeterminate future. Thus, the politics of research and development incorporates an apparent contradiction : political leadership demands that jobs be done which require creative and unpredictable actions on the part of private organizations, while it also demands that contractors be held responsible for fulfilling goals efficiently, avoiding deleterious secondary consequences, and refraining from abuses of power. The paradox can be resolved by creating norms of responsibility that allow for judgments on how a job is done rather than what is to be done. New institutions for technological assessment to check on unintended consequences of projects and citizen review boards to estimate the quality of life engendered by projects may provide such norms of responsibility.     

On economic values in policy analysis

Analyses of public policy are rooted in the economic theory of the private sector. How relevant is this approach to the public sector? Specifically, where the organization is generally viewed as a controlled variable it often exhibits the characteristics of an independent variable working to constrain the feasible solution space. An illustration of this phenomenon is discussed, using a state rehabilitation agency as the case in point. Conclusions of an analysis based mainly on maximizing the economic value of return on investment conflicted with the agency professional values of individualized client service. This external/internal value conflict led to the apparent inability of the agency to implement the study conclusions in the near term. The substance of this conflict is seen as the main problem facing many public administrators. Recognition of economic values as but one element of public agency analysis is suggested as an approach superior to sole concentration on maximization of the return on public investment. By taking a broader view, the analyst may be able to encourage more rapid implementation of his recommendations.