4
"Somewhere in the Executive Office must be centered a concern for the structure of
federalism -- a responsibility for guiding the evolution of the whole system of the federal-
state-local relations, viewed for the first time as a single system." James L. Sundquist and
David W. Davis
i
Introduction
In the face of national crisis and attending political and administrative uncertainty,
the response of theorists and practitioners alike has tended to embrace federal
reorganization as the solution. The historically held convictions and normative
assumptions are particularly apparent in policy and administrative decisions concerning
national security. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security – the largest
federal reorganization in over 50 years – arguably exemplifies this principle. A persistent
debate among political scientists and public administration scholars, however, compels a
rigorous review of this persistent tool of government. Attempts to identify and explain the
effect of federal reorganization on government performance are in short supply. The
methodological and measurement challenges to demonstrating performance provide a
logical if partial explanation for the scant literature. This paper attempts to address this
void.
I posit that the federal-state interdependencies inherent to the U.S. public health
system served to significantly alter the reach of federal reorganization and by extension,
also served to sustain the fundamentally collaborative federal model that is emblematic of
the federal-state-local public health system. Three research questions inform the approach
undertaken. How might the nature of intergovernmental relations inherent to the U.S.
public health system shed light on their endurance during the creation of the Department
of Homeland Security -- the largest federal reorganization in over 50 years? What
Convention