Guerrilla Government in Seattle

Guerrilla Government in EPA's Seattle Regional Office In the case study of the 'Guerrilla Government in EPA's Seattle Regional Office', the primary ethical violation seems to be the appointment of John Spencer himself as he was handpicked for the post of EPA regional administrator for Seattle. Spencer was handpicked by Roland Regan and Gorsuch as he was believed to be Gorsuch's good friend. There was no competition for the post and seemingly no consideration of others for the post.

While administering his duty as the head of regional head of EPA at Seattle, Spencer engaged in a number of activities that were not only ethical but also illegal to certain extent. According to the U.S. federal ethics law, an official in public service has to conduct himself so that public trust is maintained and the actions should be conversant with the Constitution, the laws and the ethical principles which should be placed well above private gains for any individual (Office of Government Ethics (OGE), n.d.).

The officials and the employees should conduct themselves in ways that should not allow for any financial conflict of interest with the performance of duty. One of the most important ethical considerations in this federal law is the non-engagement in financial transactions where nonpublic Government information is used or allowing of the improper use of such information that can allow for financial or other forms of gain for other private entities or any private interest (Office of Government Ethics (OGE), n.d.).

The announcement of Spencer to use taxpayer's money to buy an official membership for the EPA in the Chamber of Commerce was seen to be a clear case of conflict-of-interest that were capable to affect the decision-making processes of the agency (O'Leary, 2006). Moreover Spencer's trips for supposedly private reasons on government money and his demand for a personal driver were examples of misuse of public money for personal benefits. All of the above were not granted by federal law related to spending of public money.

Spencer also engaged in management by stark terror which was evident by the sudden transfer of the director of the Management Division of EPA as the director had objected repeatedly to Spencer's use of public money for personal benefits. The director was also denied finalization of his SES appointment. Spencer also violated federal ethical law that entails that no preferential treatment should be given to any private organization or individual.

Spencer directed his subordinates to part with confidential information about a private company lying with the EPA office to another private company supposedly for private gains. Employees who are dissatisfied with the actions of public organizations, programs or people and those who strategically choose not to reveal themselves even while they go public with their concerns are termed as guerrilla government. There are several motivations that drove the employees at the EPA office to engage in guerrilla government activities.

These include reasons like being altruistic or doing the thing that they felt was right and their notion to uphold the laws and concern for the use of public money, etc. The motivation can also stem from the anger generated by ongoing activities in the agency that they felt were wrong like the transfer of the director of Management Division of EPA (O'Leary, 2006).

Guerrillas in a government establishment often are also motivated by the power struggle and tussle between the career bureaucrats and the political appointees and the tensions between them. Most often this tension is a result of the organizational culture in the EPA where political appointments were rare and seemingly autocratic governance was not the organizational culture. The motivations behind the guerrilla activities despite the possible threat to the career of the employees were also a result of the sense of responsibly, ethics and integrity as a public servant (O'Leary, 2010).

Some of the employees were also motivated by their rebel against a tiring hardball power politics and wanted to get it replaced by collaboration and inclusivity. The employees were also seemingly driven by the agency's formal and informal statements of mission while others were evidently more concerned about stopping a wrong doing and yet trying to stay hidden even while they take the liberty to leverage their position about issues that they feel they were right about in the EPA.

The employees were correct in their use of guerrilla tactics to combat Spencer, a political appointee. There seemed no other means or ways to try and stop the misuse of the power that was vested in Spencer and hence the activities of the employees in engaging in guerrilla government were justified. The actions of the employees were instrumental in creating awareness and opinion.