Legislative Organization with Informational Committees
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6232180 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David P Baron (0000-0001-5551-2802, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2000 |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 485 |
| Publication date | 2000-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0092-5853 • E-ISSN: 1540-5907 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2669260 |
| OpenAlex | W1990277457 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 29 |
| References cited | 10 |
Legislative organization in the face of uncertain policy outcomes has been investigated from the perspective of signaling models in which an informed committee reports a bill and the legislature then amends, enacts, or rejects the bill. As the political principal, however, the legislature could take the lead rather than react to the work of its agent. This article presents a new theory of legislative organization with informational committees in which the legislature as the principal explicitly structures its arrangement with a committee before the committee begins its legislative work. The theory provides a number of quite different predictions. For example, in the signaling theory a closed rule can create stronger incentives for specialization by a moderate committee than an open rule, whereas in this theory an open rule provides stronger incentives. Moreover, the legislature prefers to structure the arrangement with the committee rather than simply react to its efforts. egislatures such as the U.S. Congress are self-organizing in the sense that they choose their internal organization and develop procedures and norms under which they operate. A central theme in the legislative organization literature is that, as in other forms of work, there are gains from the division of labor and specialization through committees. Specialization can be particularly important when policies have uncertain outcomes. The desire to avoid uncertainty and make informed policy choices provides a rationale for establishing committees that specialize in policy areas and develop information that can be used in writing legislation. Political institutions, however, have limited means of generating incentives for informational specialization. They cannot grant property rights, enter into contracts enforceable by a third party, or explicitly pay for performance.1 A legislature's principal instruments for providing incentives are grants of parliamentary advantage, resources that lower the costs of specialization and committee work, and rewards to committee members for their work. In their seminal research on legislative organization, Gilligan and Krehbiel (1987, 1989a, 1989b, 1990; Krehbiel 1991) studied the relationship between a parent legislature and a committee that specializes by obtaining private information about policy outcomes.2 In developing their theory Gilligan and Krehbiel use a legislative signaling model in which an informed committee moves first by reporting a bill followed by the parent legislature taking a final passage vote possibly after amendments. In contrast to the signaling approach, a legislature need not wait passively for a committee to report a bill. Instead, a legislature can choose its internal organization before it and its committees begin their work. To the extent it has instruments at its disposal to structure the work of the committee, the legislature gains by moving first rather than waiting for the committee to act. As the political principal in the relationship, the legislature thus would be expected to take the lead rather than be passive with respect to the work of its agent. This article presents a theory of legislative organization with informational committees in which the legislature as the principal explicitly structures its arrangement with a committee before the committee begins its
Economics · Incentive · Law and economics · Legislation · Legislature · Microeconomics · Political science · Politics · Principal (computer security · Public relations · Work (physics · Auction Theory and Applications · Computer Science · Engineering · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Public Administration
Designing Checks and Balances
The informational effects of competition and collusion in legislative politics
How much discretion for risk regulators
Designing Institutions to Aggregate Preferences and Information
Veto players, policy change, and institutional design
Controlling the Agenda with Special Rules
Information and Judicial Review
Information and political institutions
Delegation, capture and endogenous information structures
The Uncovered Set and the Limits of Legislative Action
Delegation to an Overconfident Expert
Coalition Governance with Incomplete Information
Cabinets, Committees, and Careers
Party Affiliation and Individual Incentives
Discretion Rather than Rules
On the buyability of voting bodies
Multiple Principals and Oversight of Bureaucratic Policy-Making
Foundations of Legislative Organization and Committee Influence
An Informational Rationale for Congruent Bicameralism
A Dynamic Model of Generalized Social Trust
The role of procedural commitment in informational theories of legislative organization
Theories Ofdelegation
The Three As of Government Formation
Policy‐Specific Information and Informal Agenda Power
Procedural Choice in Majoritarian Organizations
Uncertainty and Incentives in Crisis Bargaining
Politics and Administration
Legislative Organization
Asymmetric Information and Legislative Rules
The giant jigsaw puzzle
Information and Legislative Organization
Regulating a Monopolist with Unknown Costs
An informational rationale for committee gatekeeping power
Procedural Choice and the House Committee on Rules
"Rejoinder to "Sense and Sensibility
Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature
Restrictive Rules Reconsidered
| Unique citing works | 29 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,16 |
| Citation span | 2001 - 2022 (22) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 29 |