One of the most peculiar aspects of the U.S. foreign-policy process is the low regard in which the non-military institutions of foreign affairs are held by the rest of the federal government.The author would like to acknowledge the research assistance of James Bralski and David Rothstein in preparing this article. Distrust of the State Department and its diplomatic milieu is deeply embedded in U.S. political culture, never far beneath the surface in Congress, the White House, and other agencies of the executive branch. As a result, the State Department is routinely neglected in each of its primary areas of responsibility: the development and articulation of foreign policy; the conduct of private and public diplomacy; and the transfer of foreign assistance. The State Department's marginalized status, codified and institutionalized with the passage of the National Security Act of 1947, persists in the administration of President George W. Bush. The costs of this bureaucratic neglect are difficult to gauge. They can be detected, however, in the mixed signals coming from the myriad government agencies regarding U.S. foreign policy, in the problems experienced by the foreign service in recruiting and retaining personnel, and in the failure of many aid programs to achieve their stated goals. Widely publicized accounts of the State Department's interagency disputes and lack of clout undermine the credibility of foreign service officers (FSOs) as they engage daily with foreign governments and private citizens.