Congressional Assertions of the Spending Power: Institutional Conflict and Regulatory Authority

IF 1.3 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of Law Economics & Organization Pub Date : 2016-05-01 DOI:10.1093/JLEO/EWV030
Miranda Yaver
{"title":"Congressional Assertions of the Spending Power: Institutional Conflict and Regulatory Authority","authors":"Miranda Yaver","doi":"10.1093/JLEO/EWV030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study seeks to answer a crucial and unexplored question about American regulatory law and policy: How do majority coalitions in Congress use the spending power to circumvent intra-branch conflict and judicial constraints against regulating by finding alternate avenues to regulate states and private actors? This study provides the first large-scale empirical evidence of congressional use of the spending power to assert implementation authority in the face of constraints against more direct legislating. It is through this process of conditioning funds upon regulatory compliance that Congress works toward ideal policy outcomes without inciting institutional conflict with the other branches or from the opposing party. I base my conditional spending analysis on data on statutory specificity and congressional delegation from the 80th to the 110th Congresses provided by Farhang, and include additional measures of institutional conflict. The above argument is supported by the empirical analysis. (JEL K20, K23)","PeriodicalId":47987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Economics & Organization","volume":"56 1","pages":"272-305"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Economics & Organization","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JLEO/EWV030","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study seeks to answer a crucial and unexplored question about American regulatory law and policy: How do majority coalitions in Congress use the spending power to circumvent intra-branch conflict and judicial constraints against regulating by finding alternate avenues to regulate states and private actors? This study provides the first large-scale empirical evidence of congressional use of the spending power to assert implementation authority in the face of constraints against more direct legislating. It is through this process of conditioning funds upon regulatory compliance that Congress works toward ideal policy outcomes without inciting institutional conflict with the other branches or from the opposing party. I base my conditional spending analysis on data on statutory specificity and congressional delegation from the 80th to the 110th Congresses provided by Farhang, and include additional measures of institutional conflict. The above argument is supported by the empirical analysis. (JEL K20, K23)
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
国会对支出能力的主张:制度冲突与监管权威
本研究试图回答关于美国监管法律和政策的一个关键而未被探索的问题:国会中的多数联盟如何通过寻找监管州和私人行为体的替代途径,利用支出权来规避部门内部冲突和司法约束?本研究提供了第一个大规模的经验证据,证明国会在面对更直接立法的限制时使用支出权来维护执行权。正是通过这一过程,国会才能在不引发与其他部门或反对党的制度冲突的情况下,朝着理想的政策结果努力。我的有条件支出分析基于Farhang提供的从第80届到第110届国会的法定专一性和国会授权数据,并包括额外的制度冲突措施。上述观点得到了实证分析的支持。(凝胶k20, k23)
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
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Organization of the State: Home Assignment and Bureaucrat Performance The Behavioral Effects of (Unenforceable) Contracts† Unintended Consequences of Products Liability: Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Market* Is a Corruption Crackdown Really Good for the Economy? Firm-Level Evidence from China Voter Turnout and City Performance: Evidence from Italian Municipalities
×
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