1791在美国通过了权利法案（理论上）建立了一套制衡机制，将其嵌入美国公共行政的结构中，并使滥用政治程序谋取私利几乎是不可能的。这一历史特征的美国自由民主已被证明是长期存在的，仍然提供了一个经常使用和强大的一套行政工具，以打击任何不公平现象发生在系统内。它也应该限制任何特权精英的权力。宪法是一个强大的，内生的文件，占主导地位的结构，任何给定的政府系统，意识形态或公共行政系统的一个例子。然而，它的影响是双重的。而宪法保护多年统治的公民开放，它也在它的财富拥有者优先，被增加的社团利益与意识形态指向这个专业社团模式。这些新的经济模式，如弗里德曼经济学已为非政府组织如世界银行和国际货币基金组织改变和适应在政府贷款交换穷国的公共政策，政策的学校，而他们从美国出来，也影响结构和公共管理的平衡中间接和直接的方式。例如，近年来的外交政策增加了国防和国土安全的公共开支，而牺牲了公共管理的其他因素。这可以视为外源性因素如远东地区伊斯兰教的兴起和“反恐战争”的效果，否则可能被视为著名的跨国机构在特定区域的地缘政治利益可以干完全经济效应，企业平台（已被写入了大量有关对石油企业在特定的地区，美国的外交政策一直集中在其“反恐战争”）。然而一看某些内源性和外源性因素在塑造美国的公共管理权力，它是明确的，系统本身的复杂性来自于美国文化结构各部件的未遂形态的宪法和人权法案来实现自己的目标。其结果是复杂和多方面的。J. A. Chandler（2000）评论说，“自由经济需要复杂的监管，以避免建立强大的剥削垄断和欺诈。一个成功的经济体还需要一个复杂的经济基础设施，提供电力、水、通讯和环境保护。一个强大的经济体还需要一支庞大的军队保卫国内外的利益。因此，美国发展了一个高度复杂的政府系统和管理机构，以监督其自由和管理民主。（201）。这种复杂性增加了“自由市场”公共管理的迷人性质，并且已经引入的制衡机制使得我们很难准确地确定政府公共政策的确切来源，这些政策旨在改变公共管理的结构。
In 1791 the Bill of Rights was passed in America which (theoretically) created a system of checks and balances that would be embedded into the structure of American public administration, and would make the abuse of the political process for personal gain virtually impossible. This historical feature of the American liberal democracy has proven to be longstanding, and still provides an often-used and powerful set of administrative tools to fight against any perceived injustices that occurs within the system. It also supposedly curbs the power of any particularly privileged elite. The constitution is an example of a powerful, endogenous document that dominates the structure of any given governmental system, ideology or public administration system. However, its effects have been twofold. While the constitution has protected the citizenry against open domination for many years, it has also, in its prioritisation of wealth-owners, been dominated by an increased corporatist interest and ideology that points towards this pro-corporatist model. Many of these new economic models, such as the Friedman school of economics which has underpinned the policy for NGOs such as the World Bank and the IMF to change and adapt poorer nation’s public administrative policies in exchange for government loans, while they emerge from the US, also affect the structure and the balance of public administration in both indirect and direct ways. For instance, foreign policy in recent years has increased the amount of public spending on defence and homeland security at the expense of other factors of public administration. This could be seen as the effect of exogenous factors such as the rise of Islamism in the far East and the “war on terror”, or else it could be seen as the effect of prominent Multinational Organisations whose interest in a particular geopolitical area could stem entirely for economic, corporatist platforms (a great deal has been written about the interest of oil companies in the specific regions where US foreign policy has focussed upon in its ‘war on terror’). However one looks at the power of certain endogenous and exogenous factors in shaping US public administration, it is clear that the apparent complexity of the system itself derives from the attempt by various components of the American cultural fabric to shape the constitution and the Bill of Rights to their own ends. The result is complex and multifaceted. J. A. Chandler (2000) comments that “A free economy needs complex regulation to avoid the creation of powerful exploitative monopolies and fraud. A successful economy also needs a complex economic infrastructure providing power, water, communications and environmental protection. A powerful economy also needs a substantial army to defend its interests at home and abroad. The United States has, therefore, developed a highly complex governmental system and administration in order to police its freedoms and regulate its democracy” (201). This complexity adds to the intriguing nature of “free market” public administration, and the system of checks and balances that have been introduced makes it very difficult to pinpoint the exact origins of every government policy designed to change the structure of public administration.