government

Bürgermeister and more

Governors in the German states are called Ministerpräsident or Minister President or Premier. They are president of those ministers, who run the various departments of a state. The state parliaments have the same structure as the Bundestag, Germany‘s national parliament.

The minister president is a colleague among the members of the state parliament‘s largest elected faction and is elected by his or her colleagues to form a government, typically a coalition of two parties.

The minister presidents, like the chancellor, manage and coordinate the work of the ministers, who, however, lead their departments independently. The minister president is a primus inter pares, a first among equals.

Like the ministers at the federal level, the ministers at the state level are powerful political figures from the regions of the state. Each is capable, and in most cases willing, to become minister president. The acting minister president, therefore, has to balance out carefully the interests of these power brokers.

Germans mayors are called Bürgermeister. Again, like the chancellor and the minister presidents, the Bürgermeisters are selected by their colleagues in the largest elected party in their city councils. They form a city government, typically a coalition of two parties.

And like the chancellor and the minister presidents, the mayor is a primus inter pares, managing powerful local politians who head up the city‘s most important departments.

How a society organizes itself

How a society fundamentally defines the everyday working relationship between leader and led – between two levels of hierarchy – is imbedded in how that society makes decisions. In its political system.

If that working relationship does not function well, if it fails, not only are the political policies of those elected to office in jeopardy, the direction of the country, state, city or municipality is at risk. Defining and managing the line between strategy and tactics is in the political context a matter of moving forward or backward as a society.

The American political tradition involves a close working relationship between president and cabinet, between governor and mayor and their respective cabinets, between all holders of public office and their direct reports.

The American president is the head of the executive branch of government. The president‘s cabinet – the next level of management within the executive – reports directly to him or her and does not possess any domestic political power which could challenge the president‘s authority. Members of the Cabinet serve at the pleasure of the President, who may dismiss them or reappoint them to other posts at will.

Article Two of the U.S. Constitution provides that the President can require „the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices.“ The Constitution did not then establish the names (or list or limit the number) of Cabinet departments. Those details were left to the Congress to determine.

There is no explicit definition of the term „cabinet“ in either the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations. However, there are occasional references to „cabinet-level officers“ or „secretaries“, which when viewed in context appear to refer to the head of the „executive departments“ as listed in 5 U.S.C. §101.

The President’s Cabinet is an institution whose existence rests upon custom rather than law. Presidents have differed in their opinions as to the utility of the Cabinet, but all have found some political and administrative strengths in its continuance.

The Cabinet is retained because it provides to the President: political and managerial advice; a forum for interdepartmental conflict resolution; a location where he can address most of the executive branch and thereby enhance administrative coherence; and a source of political support for his programs and policies.

The Cabinet is not now, and is not likely to become, a body with collective responsibility. Presidents cannot appropriately share their legal authority or  responsibilities with the Cabinet. The Cabinet, its members, and its sub-groups provide the President with an adaptive resource with which to manage the executive branch of government. (from CRS Report for Congress. The President’s Cabinet: Evolution, Alternatives, and Proposals for Change, September 12, 2000).

Presidents and Cabinets

President Lincoln held Cabinet meetings on Tuesdays and Fridays. These meetings were informal gatherings of equals with no formal structure or assigned seats. The President, however, preferred to deal with matters directly with individual members rather than have discussions with the full group.

Lincoln was deeply involved in the day-to-day affairs of the War Department. According to the diary of Gideon Welles, the president went to the War Department three to four times per day to look over communications in the telegraph office. Lincoln was known for his deliberative style, patiently listening to what his Cabinet members had to say before making a decision.

President Obama did not convene frequent Cabinet meetings during his first term. The meeting held in July 2012 was only the eighteenth. Obama does, however, hold daily meetings with White House advisors in which they discuss specific policies. The president reportedly prefers to understand problems with a high degree of detail. Some have criticized him for micromanaging his staff.

Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan are considered to be the classic examples of delegators. Both brought a broad, bold vision of the role of government to the White House, and each relied heavily upon staff, executive agencies, and cabinet heads to implement their policies. Not coincidentally, both were largely successful in advancing their agendas, though at opposite ends of the political spectrum. In the first two years of his presidency, George W. Bush had exhibited many of the leadership traits of Reagan and Roosevelt.

Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Jimmy Carter were known as micromanagers. As a former Senate majority leader, Johnson took an unusually active role in Congressional affairs, and was fond of monitoring the minutiae of the legislative process. He took a similar approach to managing the Vietnam War, picking many of the bombing targets himself during late-night strategy sessions with his generals.

Although Jimmy Carter campaigned as an outsider to the political system (having served one term as the governor of Georgia), he quickly developed a reputation as a “policy wonk” and micromanager. He was faulted for lacking the grand vision of previous presidents, and for obsessing over the administrative details of the office at the expense of seeing the big picture. It was reported that Carter once took time to resolve a scheduling dispute between staffers over the use of the White House tennis courts.

Richard Nixon’s leadership style has been described as “keeping his own counsel.” The thirty-seventh president had few advisors that he trusted, and rarely sought out dissenting opinions or advice from others. It is believed that Nixon’s mistrust of virtually everyone around him contributed to his downfall following the Watergate break-in.

Article 65, German Basic Law

Germany‘s Grundgesetz or Basic Law is the equivalent of a constitution. Artikel 65 of the Grundgesetz defines the working relationship between the Chancellor and the cabinet:

„The Federal Chancellor defines and is responsible for the overall political goals of the government. Within the framework of these goals each cabinet member is responsible for leading their department independently.”

It continues:

“Differences of opinion among cabinet members are clarified by the Chancellor and the other cabinet members. The Chancellor leads the government based on a political platform formulated by the Chancellor and the cabinet, and which has been approved of by the Federal President.“

German civil servants

German bureaucracy is equally confusing to many Germans as it is to foreigners. This is why most major services have open office hours with personal counselors. However, even one of these personal consultations can result in you accidentally setting up a road-block for yourself.

How could this happen? Usually because you asked for something that was not possible on their part, or at least perceived to be that way. You could be asking the impossible of them without even being aware of it, or you could be asking for something that apparently extends beyond their job description. The majority of German civil servants are really not that touchy, but not being able to get around one who is can be extremely difficult.

German civil servants tend to put the structure of their organization ahead of their own part. Their tasks were given to them for a reason, and it is not in the interest of the organization to let small issues spread to the attention of other departments if not necessary. After all, even the smallest component of a system is necessary to keep the whole from falling apart.

Providing information is always in the job description of these counselors, and they are happy to give it to anyone who takes consideration of their busy schedule by coming in advance. Coming well prepared is critical, also. In most cases they will take care of all of your needs to the fullest possible extent right there and then.