Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Legislative Organization with Informational Committees

Bibliographic Data

ID6232180
AuthorsDavid P Baron (0000-0001-5551-2802, corresponding author)
Year2000
Volume44
Issue3
Pages485
Publication date2000-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0092-5853 • E-ISSN: 1540-5907
PublisherJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/2669260
OpenAlexW1990277457
LanguageEN
Citations received29
References cited10

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

    Tiberiu Dragu, Xiaochen Fan et al.•Quarterly Journal of Political…•2014

  • The informational effects of competition and collusion in legislative politics

    Open Access•David Martimort, Aggey Semenov•Journal of Public Economics•2008

  • How much discretion for risk regulators

    Open Access•Yolande Hiriart, David Martimort•The RAND Journal of Economics•2012

  • Designing Institutions to Aggregate Preferences and Information

    Adam Meirowitz•Quarterly Journal of Political…•2006

  • Veto players, policy change, and institutional design

    Open Access•Tiberiu Dragu, Hannah K Simpson•Research & Politics•2017

  • Controlling the Agenda with Special Rules

    Open Access•Bryan W Marshall•Politics & Policy•2003

  • Information and Judicial Review

    James R Rogers•American Journal of Political…•2001

  • Information and political institutions

    Open Access•Alan E Wiseman•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2013

  • Delegation, capture and endogenous information structures

    Open Access•Perrin Lefebvre, David Martimort•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2022

  • The Uncovered Set and the Limits of Legislative Action

    Open Access•William T Bianco, Ivan Jeliazkov et al.•Political Analysis•2004

  • Delegation to an Overconfident Expert

    Scott Ashworth, Greg Sasso•The Journal of Politics•2019

  • Coalition Governance with Incomplete Information

    Tiberiu Dragu, Michael Laver•The Journal of Politics•2019

  • Cabinets, Committees, and Careers

    Alessio Cirone, Alexandra Cirone et al.•The Journal of Politics•2018

  • Party Affiliation and Individual Incentives

    Open Access•Nicolás Mimica, Patricio Navia•Revista de ciencia política•2022

  • Discretion Rather than Rules

    Open Access•Sean Gailmard•Political Analysis•2009

  • On the buyability of voting bodies

    Open Access•John Morgan, Felix Várdy•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2011

  • Multiple Principals and Oversight of Bureaucratic Policy-Making

    Open Access•Sean Gailmard•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2009

  • Foundations of Legislative Organization and Committee Influence

    Open Access•Jaehoon Kim, Lawrence S Rothenberg•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2008

  • An Informational Rationale for Congruent Bicameralism

    Open Access•James R Rogers•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2001

  • A Dynamic Model of Generalized Social Trust

    Open Access•T K Ahn, Justin E Esarey et al.•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2008

  • The role of procedural commitment in informational theories of legislative organization

    Open Access•Fang-Yi Chiou, Fang‐yi Chiou•Journal of Theoretical Politics•2011

  • Theories Ofdelegation

    Jonathan Bendor, Amihai Glazer et al.•Annual Review of Political Science•2001

  • The Three As of Government Formation

    Open Access•Torun Dewan, Rafael Hortala-Vallve•American Journal of Political…•2011

  • Policy‐Specific Information and Informal Agenda Power

    Open Access•Alexander V Hirsch, Kenneth W Shotts•American Journal of Political…•2012

  • Procedural Choice in Majoritarian Organizations

    Open Access•Daniel Diermeier, Carlo Prato et al.•American Journal of Political…•2015

  • Uncertainty and Incentives in Crisis Bargaining

    Open Access•Mark Fey, Kristopher W Ramsay et al.•American Journal of Political…•2011

  • Politics and Administration

    Open Access•Michael M Ting•American Journal of Political…•2017

  • Legislative Organization

    Open Access•Keith Krehbiel•The Journal of Economic…•2004

  • Asymmetric Information and Legislative Rules

    Open Access•Vijay Krishna•American Political Science Review•2001

  • The giant jigsaw puzzle

    Kenneth A Shepsle•The giant jigsaw puzzle•1978

  • Information and Legislative Organization

    Keith Krehbiel•Information and Legislative…•1991

  • Regulating a Monopolist with Unknown Costs

    David P Baron, Roger B Myerson et al.•Econometrica•1982

  • An informational rationale for committee gatekeeping power

    Open Access•David Epstein, David Mark Epstein•Public Choice•1997

  • Procedural Choice and the House Committee on Rules

    Douglas Dion, John D Huber•The Journal of Politics•1996

  • "Rejoinder to "Sense and Sensibility

    Keith Krehbiel•American Journal of Political…•1997

  • Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature

    Thomas W Gilligan, Keith Krehbiel•American Journal of Political…•1990

  • Restrictive Rules Reconsidered

    Keith Krehbiel•American Journal of Political…•1997

Unique citing works29
Citations per year1,16
Citation span2001 - 2022 (22)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 29

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae