Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T21:14:09.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

American County Government: A Mid-Century Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Clyde F. Snider
Clyde F. Snider
Affiliation:
University of Illinois
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Government in the United States is in considerable part local government, and of all local governmental units the county is most widely prevalent. Every state has counties (they are called parishes in Louisiana); in all states but Rhode Island the county is organized for governmental purposes; and, not with standing the existence of some areas without county organization, county government may be said virtually to blanket the nation. A generation ago, in a sub-title to one of the earlier books on the subject, the county was characterized as the “Dark Continent” of American Politics. Now, at mid-point in the century, it seems appropriate to reëxamine the county with a view to determining the extent to which the backward institution of the early 1900's has since been modernized and the directions in which further improvement may reasonably be expected in the future.

Perhaps most striking, in a comparison of present-day counties with those of a half-century ago, is the fact that, in total number of organized units (now 3,051) and in geographic outline, the county setup remains practically unchanged. Most present-day counties were established well before the turn of the century and, by and large, subsequent boundary changes have been few and of minor nature. A map of the nation's counties as of today would be scarcely distinguishable from one portraying the counties as of 1900 or even earlier.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , March 1952 , pp. 66 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Census Bureau reports, as of 1942, 40 areas lacking county government and 10 “county governments not independently organized.” The former include: 26 “independent” cities—Baltimore, St. Louis, and 24 Virginia cities—located outside of counties and administering functions performed elsewhere by counties; Rhode Island's 5 counties, which are without county government; 5 unorganized counties in South Dakota, which are attached to neighboring counties for governmental purposes; the District of Columbia; and 3 Yellowstone Park areas—one each in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Included in the classification of county governments not independently organized are those of 8 metropolitan counties—Suffolk (Boston) in Massachusetts, Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, Orleans parish in Louisiana, and the 5 counties within New York City—which retain some county offices but have become merged for most purposes with their central cities; and the city-county governments of San Francisco and Denver, which operate primarily as municipalities (United States Bureau of the Census, Governmental Units in the United States: 1942 [Washington, Government Printing Office, 1944], p. 4Google Scholar).

2 Gilbertson, H. S., The County: The “Dark Continent” of American Politics (New York, National Short Ballot Organization, 1917)Google Scholar.

3 Two of South Dakota's five unorganized counties were consolidated into one in 1943.

4 Tennessee, when authorizing consolidation of rural James county with urban Hamilton (the merger in that state which was ultimately effected), provided for referendum in James county only, making consolidation compulsory upon Hamilton when approved by the voters of James.

5 The home-rule states and the dates of their respective enabling amendments are: California (1911), Maryland (1913), Ohio (1933), Texas (1933), Missouri (1945—new constitution), and Washington (1948).

6 International City Managers' Association, The Municipal Year Book: 1951 (Chicago, 1951)Google Scholar. The states having manager counties, and the number in each, are: California (3), Georgia (1), Maryland (2), Montana (1), New York (1), North Carolina (2), Tennessee (1), and Virginia (5).

7 Under the setup now existing in most counties, appointing authority would best be vested in the county governing board except that law-enforcement officers, perhaps, might be state-appointed. With the establishment of a chief county executive officer, the local appointing power should, of course, be largely centralized in his hands.

8 See Bollens, John C., “Administrative Integration in California Counties”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 11, pp. 26–34 (Winter, 1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 State and local employees administering federally subsidized programs of public assistance under the Social Security Act are required by the federal law to be under the merit system. Where counties participate in the administration of such programs and general civil service provisions do not exist, special merit systems are provided for county welfare employees engaged in this work.

10 Citizens' Governmental Research Bureau, Citizens at Work (Milwaukee, 1950)Google Scholar; Los Angeles County Bureau of Efficiency, Growth of County Functions, Los Angeles County, California, 1852 to 1934 (Los Angeles, 1936)Google Scholar.

11 In New England, where the town has always overshadowed the county as a local government unit, any effort to simplify the local pattern by eliminating one layer of government would logically be directed at the county rather than at the town. Significant in this connection is the fact that the 1951 Connecticut legislature very nearly enacted a bill to abolish county government in that state.

12 Peel, Roy V., “Political Implications of the 1950 Census of Population”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 3, pp. 615–619 (Dec., 1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.