1. Some observers have argued that much of what Congress does is oversight, but at the same time, oversight as a priority ranks low for congressional members. Why is this the case? What is the “fire-alarm” style of oversight? The “police-patrol” style? Why do you think the fire-alarm style is practiced more often? Would you remedy this situation? If so, how?

2. Barriers to information flow interfere with the quality of congressional oversight. Congress has responded by increasing the size of its staff. In what ways did Congress adjust its staff to meet this need? How does this staff increase compare with the president’s staff increase?

3. What are some of the purposes of legislative oversight? How would you prioritize these purposes? As a citizen, why would you be concerned with maintaining legislative oversight?

4. The chapter ends by discussing ethics and the public service. According to the chapter, ethics are substantially dependent on the decisions that individual administrators make and the values they hold. How does that seem to you? Do you trust the decisions of individual administrators? Do you think ethics can be taught? Or do you agree, like the text, that a careful balance must be maintained between “. . . the individual values of public administrators and the professional training they bring to the job . . . a balance between the cultures of their agencies and the oversight of external forces. . . . and a strong relationship between public administrators and the citizens to whom they ultimately are responsible.” Is it possible to promote or maintain this kind of balance?

5. Describe the “paradox of oversight.” What do you think about it? Should congressional members make oversight a bigger priority or should it stay the same? If you agree it should become a bigger priority, how would you deal with the fact that congressional leaders want to be reelected and oversight does not generally translate to voters back home? In general, is congressional micromanagement a danger or does it add to increased accountability?

6. What are the purposes of congressional oversight? How important is it that congressional leaders perform these functions in order to keep government accountable? Finally, since many consider Congress to be the “most democratic” of all the branches because its leaders are elected by district and there are so many congressional leaders who have to act together for something to happen, how does American democracy benefit and/or suffer from congressional oversight?

7. Discuss the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Do you think it is an important office or do you think it is redundant? Does it have a legitimate role to play or is its role overrated? In your opinion, during which historical period was the GAO doing its job the “right” way (and define what you mean by the “right” way)?

8. The text states that the most important question in public administration is how to give administrators enough power to accomplish the work that policymakers want done, without having them exercise that power in a way that threatens democracy and liberty. In essence, effectiveness exists alongside of accountability and, according to the text, accountability becomes a matter of “balancing internal norms with external processes.” The way this is done is through a combination of “independence” and “redundancy.” Describe exactly what this means and evaluate it. Is this the best way to keep government systems accountable? Can you think of a better way? How can politics play a part in muddying the waters of government accountability?