Privatization and Government Service Provi Sample Clauses

Privatization and Government Service Provi sion Classic liberalism, theorized by scholars like Xxxx Xxxxx and Xxxx Xxxxx, has re- mained preeminent in American political development, as politicians such as Xxxxxx Xxxxxx continued to espouse the benefits of the market and emphasized the effi- ciency gains from transferring power from the government to the private sector. In the 1980s, Xxxxxx’x declaration that “government is the problem” spurred a num- ber of industries as diverse as freight services, air-traffic control, the postal service, schools, and even corrections to privatize all or part of their operations (Xxxxx 1989). Private companies, at the behest of the government, perform government functions more efficiently than the government can, according to this perspective. Proponents of privatization emphasize this point, asserting that competition amongst private firms encourages innovation and efficiency, whereas government-run programs do not compete or innovate, thus resulting in a bloated, inefficient bureaucracy (Starr 1988). Moreover, the ideal government from a classic liberal perspective can be achieved via privatization: the government is minimally involved in each individual’s life and the market, by way of private operation of government services, efficiently provides public goods. Savas (2000) characterizes privatization as encompassing ten categories that de- scribe varying levels of government involvement, the two extremes of which are gov- ernment service and constituency self service2. In addition to the practical differences between the two poles of this continuum, there are also differences in the extent to which privatization policies move ownership, finance, and accountability out of the public sector (Starr 1988). That is, the implications of privatization for governmental policies may be distinct even within the same broad category, such as contracts. Most commonly, privatization occurs as the government and a private company both retain partial ownership and operation of a particular service. These arrange- ments, often called public-private partnerships, occur when the government delegates the day-to-day operation of a service to a private company but retains ultimate re- sponsibility for that service (Savas 2000). These partnerships aim to deliver essen- tial services to citizens while adapting businesslike traits of efficiency and innovation (Xxxxxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxxxxx 2011). Though the normative implications of implement- ing businesslike concerns into government ...