Takes a visionary look at what it will take to create a constructive national dialog on political choices that the next decade will bring. Explores a sweeping range of concerns and describes eight proposals that would return ownership of the government to the American majority, with chapters on the government's changing capacity to respond, the changing political process, the role of the public sector, and the changing shape of US federalism. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

The years after World War I have often been seen as an era when Republican presidents and business leaders brought the growth of government in the United States to a sudden and emphatic halt. In When Good Government Meant Big Government, the historian Jesse Tarbert inverts the traditional story by revealing a forgotten effort by business-allied reformers to expand federal power—and how that effort was foiled by Southern Democrats and their political allies. Tarbert traces how a loose-knit coalition of corporate lawyers, bankers, executives, genteel reformers, and philanthropists emerged as the leading proponents of central control and national authority in government during the 1910s and 1920s. Motivated by principles of “good government” and using large national corporations as a model, these elite reformers sought to transform the federal government’s ineffectual executive branch into a modern organization with the capacity to solve national problems. They achieved some success during the presidency of Warren G. Harding, but the elite reformers’ support for federal antilynching legislation confirmed the worries of white Southerners who feared that federal power would pose a threat to white supremacy. Working with others who shared their preference for local control of public administration, Southern Democrats led a backlash that blocked enactment of the elite reformers’ broader vision for a responsive and responsible national government. Offering a novel perspective on politics and policy in the years before the New Deal, this book sheds new light on the roots of the modern American state and uncovers a crucial episode in the long history of racist and antigovernment forces in American life.

This book demonstrates both successes and failures in attempts to get closer to the ideal of good urban governance in cities in North-America, Europe, and Asia. It presents a value menu and deliberately does not come up with “one best way” for improving urban governance. Good urban governance is presented as a balancing act, an interplay between government, business and civil society in which the core values need careful and timely attention. The authors address questions such as “What is deemed “good” in urban governance, and how is it being searched for?”, and “What (re)configurations of interactions between government, private sector and civil society are evolving, and to what results?”.

The selections, all from "Public Administration Review", have been chosen to enlighten and enliven the contents of any standard administrative law textbook. Each of the book's main sections begins with introductory text and discussion questions by the volume editors, followed by relevant readings from PAR.