Dominican Republic and Haiti: Country Studies

Dominican Republic and Haiti: Country Studies
the governments of Guzman (1978-82) and Jorge Blanco
(1982-86) did not attain as extreme a level of centralization,
their administrations were marked by clientelist favoritism,
nepotism, and corruption. Fernandez's government has sought
to initiate significant state reforms, while not totally ignoring
clientelist uses of the state; one of its first measures was to
increase the salary offered for high posts in government from
the extremely low levels to which they had fallen under Balaguer.
In addition to receiving low salaries, Dominican public officials
historically had little protection in their jobs. A civil service
law was approved in 1991 and finally implemented by the
executive in 1994. However, at that time only an extremely limited
number of employees, primarily those working in fields
related to insurance and banking services, were allowed to seek
incorporation into the civil service. Under the Fernandez
administration, the civil service was expanded to include
employees in several secretariats of state, including the Technical
Secretariat of the Presidency, Labor, Foreign Affairs, and
the Attorney General's office. Indeed, without further restructuring
that set guidelines for determining professionalism,
qualifications, and salary rates in other areas of the public sector,
such a law could conceivably complicate public-sector efficiency
rather than improve it.
From the cabinet level to the lowest ranks, traditionally
almost all civil servants have been appointed, served, and could
be removed largely at the will of the president. The result was a
patronage-dominated system in which public-sector jobs were
given out in return for loyalty and service. Hence merit,
achievement, and competence were not always the main criteria
guiding government appointments. The public bureaucracy
was often characterized by incompetence even at the highest
levels. Nepotism and corruption—a favor in return for a favor,
the granting of special governmental privileges to favored persons,
private enrichment stemming from public service, outright
bribery—were also widespread. Those who tried to be
honest were scorned and considered foolish by their colleagues.
Indeed, for some, government service was thought of
not so much as an honored career but as a brief opportunity to
indulge oneself at the public trough. The frequent failure of
government programs could often be attributed directly to the
corruption and incompetence of the bureaucracy. And, just as
the use and abuse of state funds were common at election time,
182