ADMINISTRATORS OF DEMOCRACY:
IMPLEMENTING AND INNOVATING ELECTION ADMINISTRATION
CHRISTINA SARA BARSKY
Today’s electoral landscape requires administrators to operate within a context of dynamic policy, constrained resources, and emerging security threats. As such, the individuals responsible for administering American democracy work in an arena where the previous status quo is no longer appropriate and yet new structures and implementation strategies have not been codified. This raises the question as to whether election administrators are best considered policy implementers, policy innovators, or both. This study addresses the lack of a consensus concerning the motivation and actions of election administrators. By offering a new framework that expands our understanding, this dissertation explores how election administrators implement, and unexpectedly innovate, in their delivery of the democratic process.
To ground this dissertation, I begin with a discussion of the theory of street-level bureaucracy and the central tenant of discretion. Street-level theory suggests that as front-line workers, election administrators will wield discretion to simplify their jobs, make judgements about service recipients, and implement policy objectives. What street-level theory does not anticipate is bureaucratic innovation, a trait expressed by some election administrators. Next, I provide an in-depth look at election administration and the roles of election administrators in the U.S. This provides the legal and administrative backgrounding necessary to investigate election administrators.
I propose that street-level bureaucracy may not best define how the individuals responsible for the delivery of the electoral process operate, and offer civic entrepreneurship as a new way to conceptualize front-line workers. Ten semi-structured interviews with election officials and more than 1,000 Election Day worker survey responses from select Arizona counties are used to assess how election administrators perform their roles in terms of discretion, motivation, collaboration, adaptability, and innovation. In analyzing the data, I find election administrators are best considered not in terms of their job titles, but instead by their level of process discretion and distance from constituents. Ultimately, I offer a new framework for understanding election administrators as street-level bureaucrats, boundary spanners, process implementers, and civic innovators, and demonstrate how innovations occur within the austerity of today’s electoral process. I propose the need to broaden our conceptualization of the individuals on the front-line of public service, redefining street-level bureaucrats for the 21st century.
|Advisor:||Solop, Frederic I|
|Commitee:||Otenyo, Eric E, Phelps, Glenn A, Rinfret, Sara R|
|School:||Northern Arizona University|
|Department:||Politics and International Affairs|
|School Location:||United States -- Arizona|
|Source:||DAI-A 81/12(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Public administration, Public policy|
|Keywords:||Civic entrepreneur, Election administration, Elections, Local election official, Poll worker, Street-level bureaucrat|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be