Your Humble Blogger has not yet finished Whitehall, by Peter Hennesy (New York: Free Press © 1989), and perhaps never will. I’m a good deal less than halfway through, in fact, just learning about the actual workings of cabinet government.
In the British system, evidently, there really is a Cabinet, a mini-deliberative body of twenty or so, who each have specific policy areas of responsibility, but who are expected to contribute to the general discussion of policy outside those areas. The US, of course, has a Cabinet in name, but it scarcely serves the purpose of one; I don’t imagine Gail Norton or Elaine Chao were asked to contribute much to the discussion of homelessness. Not that the British Cabinet likely works like that anyway; in any decision-making group, there will be an inner circle whose voices will be heard more than the others. Still, it’s an interesting difference, and it’s an odd anachronism that the US still has a Cabinet and still has Cabinet Meetings.
There are many reasons why Cabinet Government works in England and doesn’t here; for one, the Cabinet can oust the Prime Minister, and has done so many times, so consultation is pretty key. For another, Britain (particularly England) has the tradition of the generalist, while America has the expert. If an American leader dabbles in a lot of different things, it’s viewed as an eccentricity; if a Briton doesn’t, he’s got blinkers on. The British want there to be experts to consult, probably foreign experts when it comes down to it, but the decisions should be made by somebody who is well-rounded, who sees the big picture, who can compare the current situation to the Gallic Wars or to Blake’s visions, equally inaccurately. We want the transportation decisions made by the transportation guy, who knows about transportation, and has lots of experience with transportation (and likely has been on the board of several big transportation companies). We don’t like the idea that the transportation guy will be the education guy next year and the agriculture guy the year after; we prefer the idea that the transportation guy go back and serve on the boards of several big transportation companies, until he’s needed back in government, to be the transportation guy again.
Another difference that connects to that is that the US is big, and Britain is small. Even the Big Picture for the UK is manageable; so it’s easier to be a generalist there. The joke over there about the Minister coming in knowing nothing and being crammed with information by the Permanent Secretary is feasible (tho’ not entirely accurate). If you don’t know much about transportation in the US, it’ll take years just to get up to the line. Which leads us to yet another difference—we don’t have Permanent Secretaries. We have career civil servants at the lower levels, of course, but not at the top. The neutrality of Whitehall is a byword; the spoils system in the US is controversial but, in general, accepted.
So there isn’t any real chance of Cabinet government in the US anytime soon; we’re not set up for it. The thing is, I like it as an idea; I like generalists, and I like the idea of getting views from people who don’t know the specifics, but are charged with looking at the big picture. It might not work at the national level here, but it might work in governing other things. I know Boards of Directors are, in theory, supposed to serve this purpose among others, but don’t. The Deans at a College or University may sit as a Cabinet, and it’s possible some act as one, but I don’t have any information on that actually happening anywhere.
Redintegro Iraq,
-Vardibidian.