In Arizona as well as in many other states, the Attorney General and the county attorneys are elected into office for 4 years. What are the pros and cons of filling these offices by election rather than appointment?
Below is a Sample Solution.
Remember! This is just a sample. You can get a custom paper from one of our expert writers.
Election is described as the structured and formal process by which a person is elected to an official position in which they would be responsible for carrying out our management and administrative responsibilities. It is one of the most popular methods for appointing leaders to positions of power. Because of its fundamental qualities, this technique is linked to a number of benefits. It is the most democratic method of selecting leaders. This is owing to the fact that the chosen leader is the one who receives the most votes among the many contenders, making it democratic.
Elections promote public engagement in the management of public interests; this is because the people are the ones who hold a leader responsible because they are the ones who voted him or her into office. Placing leaders through elections is that they are more open to scrutiny; this is because public participation allows for analysis of how a leader is performing, as opposed to where the leader is placed through appointment, which increases the likelihood of the leader prioritizing the core interests of the people.
However, because of its fundamental attribute of being democratic in nature, it is linked to plenty of issues. First and foremost, there is the issue of competence to consider. Because it is a democratic process, the person selected is usually the one who is capable of persuading the people of their potential performance; nevertheless, this is not always the case, as they frequently turn out to be inept. On the other hand, when someone is appointed, the appointing authority ensures that the person is capable of functioning at their best; this aids performance.
The issue of accountability is another disadvantage of electing leaders. When someone is elected, the extent of their accountability is either limited or non-existent. On the side of an appointed leader, the appointing authority’s only goal is to ensure that the person selected is held accountable for their actions while performing their duties. Embezzlement of finances and misuse of resources are two major drawbacks connected with the election of leaders. This is due to a lack of accountability and an atmosphere that fosters resource waste to a significant extent.