Summary of reports of the Hoover Commission: Part II
| Published date | 01 December 1949 |
| Date | 01 December 1949 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1949.tb02710.x |
Summary
of
Reports
of
the
Hoover
Commission
Part
I1
FOREIGN
AFFAIRS
Legislation which grants new foreign
affairs powers
of
an executive nature
otherwise than to the President or to an
established executive department
or
agency will normally cause serious
difficulty in efficient administration.
Such legislation should not be adopted
unless there are overwhelming advan-
tages in creating a new agency. Legis-
lation making specific grants of foreign
affairs powers and of supporting funds
below the level of the appropriate
department or agency head should
be
avoided.
Recommzndarions concerning the Pr2siden:
Cabinet level committees,
with
their
inemheiships and assignments fixed by
the President clre necessary
in
crucial
areas in the conduct
of
foreign affairs
where the issues transcend the respon-
sibility of any single department and
where Presidential consideration
or
decision
is
necessary. The successful
functioning of Cabinet-level and other
interdepartmental committees in the
foreign affairs area should be facilitated
by the assistance of specific institutional
aids in the Executive Office and the
State Department.
Each permanent
or
semi-permanent
Cabinet-level comrittee, moreover,
such as the present National Security
Couxil
and National Advisory Council:
wiil ordinarily require a full-time execu-
x.ij:e
secretary, and
a
small nucleus
of
xiff
supplemented by additional staff
drawn from the regdar pdicy units
of'
rhu
depmments and agencies partici-
p:iilg
ir~
:he
work
of
the
various
mi-m:::tes.
Recommendaticiis relating to the Stat<
Departmen!
and
the Foreign Service
The State Department should con-
centrate
02
obtaining definition
of
proposed cbjectives for the United
States
in
r'oreign affairs, on formulating
proposed policies in conjunction with
other departments and agencies
to
achieve thosc objectives, and on recorn-
mending the choice and timing
of
the use
of various instruments to carry out
foreign policies
so
forrnu1a:ed.
The State Department
as
a
general
rule should not be given responsibility
for the operation of specific programmes,
whether overseas or at home.
The State Department should con-
tinue to discharge its traditional res-
ponsibilities of representation, reporting,
and negotiation.
The State DEpartment should be
organised
so
that
the Secretary
of
State,
legaily aEd practically, is in command
of
the Department and the Foreign
Service,
SQ
that the line of command
from the Secretary of State through the
Under and Assistant Secretariesa to the
lowest level is clear and unencumbered,
and
so
that the SecreIary of State is
provided with adequate staff services
at
:he top level. The Department
should also have authority and funds to
equip itself with persons of the highest
capacity to represent this country
at
international organisations and con-
ferences.
Internal Organisation, General Pattern
The strengthening
of
the Secretary
and Under Secretary level by the addi-
tion
of
two Deputy Under SecretariesY8
the one to act in matters
of
substance,
and the other, as
"
general manager," to
administer the Department and the
overseas service.
The fixing
of
responsibilir- for action
in five iine units under five Assistant
Secietaries.@ Four of these Assistant
Src;e:arics
wodd
head
u?
rzgional
units, wi.;tii the
res;>oncibl!ity
fx
the
fmr irndiGona1
gagrazhic
segments of
rhe world.
A
fifth would be in charge
of relatioxhips with internxional
organisations, inchding the United
Nations and its affiliated organisations.
The provision of adeq:!ate staff services
70
the Secretary and Under-Secretary and
to the line units consisring
of:
an Assist-
ant
Secretary, Economic and Social
Affairs
.
. .
;
an Asistant Secretary for
congressiona! relations
. . .
;
an Assistant
To continue reading
Request your trial