Fiscal Bicameralism: The Core of a EU Constitution

A. Leen
{"title":"Fiscal Bicameralism: The Core of a EU Constitution","authors":"A. Leen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2238647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present approach to what steps to take as a result of the rejection of the proposed European Constitution is almost guaranteed to be a very toilsome process inside the realm of partisan advocacy. Moreover the approach is almost irrelevant in terms of both explanatory content and normative potential. There is another way: fiscal constraints. Instead of streamlining existing EU Treaties, and giving more room for majority voting, it would be better to shift the emphasis to the making of authentic fiscal rules. The paper is based on the idea that the EU is not a benevolent despot but a Leviathan; shifting the grounds of the discussion to the question of within which constitutional framework should the EU’s fiscal powers be exercised. A separation of fiscal powers, fiscal bicameralism and a sharp border between tasks of the EU and its members seems to be required. The method used cannot be empirical. There is a clear difference between our empirical knowledge of decision-making within a given framework and discussions about the framework itself. In the wake of the demise of the Constitution a model fiscal constitution for the EU budget can become an agenda-setting focal point for a new research program and future EU policy.","PeriodicalId":166057,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Global & Regional Governance (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Global & Regional Governance (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2238647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present approach to what steps to take as a result of the rejection of the proposed European Constitution is almost guaranteed to be a very toilsome process inside the realm of partisan advocacy. Moreover the approach is almost irrelevant in terms of both explanatory content and normative potential. There is another way: fiscal constraints. Instead of streamlining existing EU Treaties, and giving more room for majority voting, it would be better to shift the emphasis to the making of authentic fiscal rules. The paper is based on the idea that the EU is not a benevolent despot but a Leviathan; shifting the grounds of the discussion to the question of within which constitutional framework should the EU’s fiscal powers be exercised. A separation of fiscal powers, fiscal bicameralism and a sharp border between tasks of the EU and its members seems to be required. The method used cannot be empirical. There is a clear difference between our empirical knowledge of decision-making within a given framework and discussions about the framework itself. In the wake of the demise of the Constitution a model fiscal constitution for the EU budget can become an agenda-setting focal point for a new research program and future EU policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
财政两院制:欧盟宪法的核心
目前关于在欧洲宪法草案被否决后应采取何种步骤的做法,几乎可以肯定是一个非常艰难的过程,属于党派倡导的范畴。此外,就解释内容和规范潜力而言,这种方法几乎是无关紧要的。还有另一种方法:财政约束。与其精简现有的欧盟条约,给多数表决留出更多空间,不如将重点转移到制定真正的财政规则上。这篇论文基于这样一种观点:欧盟不是一个仁慈的暴君,而是一个利维坦;将讨论的基础转移到欧盟财政权力应在何种宪法框架内行使的问题上。财政权力的分离、财政两院制以及欧盟和成员国之间任务的明确划分似乎是必需的。所用的方法不能是经验性的。我们对给定框架内决策的经验知识与对框架本身的讨论之间存在明显的差异。随着欧盟宪法的消亡,欧盟预算的财政宪法模型可以成为一个新的研究项目和未来欧盟政策的议程设置焦点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Temporal Validity of International Investment Agreements: A Large Sample Survey of Treaty Provisions The Role of Civil Society in EU Financial Regulation Law and Politics in Europe's Crisis: On the History of the Impact of an Unfortunate Configuration The EU Decarbonisation Roadmap 2050: What Way to Walk? Fiscal Bicameralism: The Core of a EU Constitution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1