6
of the states in amending Section 505 of the Homeland Security Act, which governs the
health and human service components of counter bioterrorism policy and administration.
Conceptually, this paper explores broadly the contributions of political scientists
and administration scholars to our understanding of theoretical and practical issues
concerning federal reorganization. The aim is to identify a preliminary framework for
exploring the hypothesized effect of collaborative federalism -- particularly, the
interdependent relationships among federal, state, and local governments -- on the U.S.
public health system’s capacity to ensure the nation’s public health including national
counter bioterrorism goals and objectives.
I posit that public policy and administrative studies that focus on federal
organization among the executive, congressional, and judicial branches do not necessarily
provide insight into the implications for intergovernmental relations and by extension do
not depict the fundamental role of the states in national policy and administration. I
contend that the states play a key role in the conceptual framing of the policy and the
public administration of counter bioterrorism policy. This paper applies a cooperative
federalism model to complete an exploratory analysis of comparative federal
reorganizations to test the hypothesized effect of institutional design on changes in the
performance of the U.S. public health system. The paper concludes that the cooperative
nature of the public health system has served to shape the policy process and intermediate
outcomes of the health and human services components of the DHS. The case study
examines the role of key local, state and national leaders who successfully advanced
national counter bioterrorism policy. The analyses is based on interviews conducted
primarily by phone and analyses of congressional testimonies,. The paper connects
Convention