Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNehls, Kathleen Ann
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-03T05:30:16Z
dc.date.available2015-12-03T05:30:16Z
dc.date.issued2015-05
dc.identifier.othernehls_kathleen_a_201505_phd
dc.identifier.urihttp://purl.galileo.usg.edu/uga_etd/nehls_kathleen_a_201505_phd
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10724/33590
dc.description.abstractRed Tape Fraternities examines how the modern administrative state was less a product of Washington politicians than a new technocratic system of federal–state relations shaped by decentralized networks of mid-level professionals and bureaucratic managers. Based on a system of grants-in-aid, this fundamentally new form of state building both expanded democratic allocations of power and created new forms of exclusion. One of the distinctions between grants-in-aid and earlier federal aid or regulatory programs was how the cost-sharing mandate facilitated the emergence of a new class of autonomous, bureaucratic managers. They operated at the periphery, rather than the centers of power and force us to rethink where power was centered. The defining feature of this new class of managers was their mobility. Rather than working out of offices, they spent much of their time traveling to oversee new state agencies and programs. They conducted a vigorous cross-agency correspondence with other state and non-state actors. Meetings between stakeholders occurred in agency-neutral locations—national parks, hunting preserves, fishing cabins, and golf courses—places also associated with new forms of male leisure activities. Amidst these all-male venues, lines between work and leisure blurred to create new centers of male political power where managers engaged in the informal negotiations that shaped modern state policies. Using these powerful, networked policy coalitions, they tempered the forces of national politics as they bent federal programs to local needs. The homosocial nature of these gatherings have important implications for assessing questions of gender and state power, because intentional or not, they effectively excluded women from key policymaking centers of the modern state. Nowhere did the re-centering of state power play out more powerfully than in the contest between public health officials and maternalist reformers and force us to reevaluate how successful women reformers were. I argue that although women were making progress in gaining access to the stationary bureaucracies of Washington, D.C., the mobile bureaucratic managers that comprised the emerging red-tape fraternities used alternative workspaces to reconstruct, for women, the gendered disadvantages of an earlier era.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisheruga
dc.rightsOn Campus Only Until 2017-05-01
dc.subjectGrants-in-aid
dc.subjectState building
dc.subjectgender
dc.subjecthomosocial networks
dc.subjectSheppard-Towner Act
dc.subjectAssociationalism
dc.subjectmasculinity
dc.subjectfraternity
dc.subjectAmerican Child Health Association
dc.subjectChildren's Bureau
dc.subjectRockefeller Foundation
dc.subjectInternational Health Board
dc.subjectUnited States Public Health Service
dc.subjectAmerican Public Health Association
dc.titleRed tape fraternities
dc.title.alternativestate building in the age of associationalism, 1870-1935
dc.typeDissertation
dc.description.degreePhD
dc.description.departmentHistory
dc.description.majorHistory
dc.description.advisorPaul Sutter
dc.description.committeePaul Sutter
dc.description.committeeClaudio Saunt
dc.description.committeeShane Hamilton
dc.description.committeeKathleen Clark


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record