IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v17y2001i2p319-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The President versus the State: Appointments in the American System of Separated Powers and the Federal Reserve

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Kelly H

Abstract

For politicians, appointments are an instrument of policy influence. By installing their representatives in an institution, politicians can count on policy influence for the duration of their appointees' terms. Given the stakes, the occasional controversy regarding nominees is understandable. On the whole, however, nominations are not controversial; in fact, Senate confirmation votes are often unanimous. Nevertheless, the Senate can have substantial influence in the appointment process. Using a formal model, this article examines how the president and Senate strategically bargain with one another within the confines of the Federal Reserve appointment process to influence monetary policy. With a new way to estimate monetary policy preferences, this article shows empirically that policy influence occurs via appointments. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Kelly H, 2001. "The President versus the State: Appointments in the American System of Separated Powers and the Federal Reserve," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 319-355, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:319-55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Niklas Potrafke, 2018. "Government ideology and economic policy-making in the United States—a survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 145-207, January.
    2. Krehbiel, Kieth, 2006. "Supreme Court Appointments as a Move-the-Median Game," Research Papers 1942, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Aggey Semenov & Hector Perez Saiz, 2014. "The Effect Of Campaign Contributions On State Banking Regulation And Bank Expansion In U.S," 2014 Meeting Papers 1265, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Marco Sorge, 2015. "Lobbying (strategically appointed) bureaucrats," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 171-189, June.
    5. Dodge Cahan & Luisa Doerr & Niklas Potrafke, 2019. "Government ideology and monetary policy in OECD countries," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(3), pages 215-238, December.
    6. Federico M. Giesenow & Jakob de Haan, 2019. "The influence of government ideology on monetary policy: New cross‐country evidence based on dynamic heterogeneous panels," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 216-239, July.
    7. Eijffinger, Sylvester & Mahieu, Ronald & Raes, Louis, 2015. "Hawks and Doves at the FOMC," CEPR Discussion Papers 10442, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Schnakenberg, Keith & Turner, Ian R & Uribe-McGuire, Alicia, 2021. "Allies or Commitment Devices? A Model of Appointments to the Federal Reserve," SocArXiv b5zts, Center for Open Science.
    9. David M. Primo & Sarah A. Binder & Forrest Maltzman, 2008. "Who Consents? Competing Pivots in Federal Judicial Selection," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 471-489, July.
    10. Baerg, Nicole Rae & Krainin, Colin, 2022. "Divided committees and strategic vagueness," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    11. Gary E Hollibaugh Jr, 2015. "Vacancies, vetting, and votes: A unified dynamic model of the appointments process," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 206-236, April.
    12. Jinhee Jo & David M Primo & Yoji Sekiya, 2017. "Policy dynamics and electoral uncertainty in the appointments process," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 124-148, January.
    13. Lossani, Marco & Natale, Piergiovanna & Tirelli, Patrizio, 2001. "A Reform Proposal for EMU Institutions," MPRA Paper 18694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Aggey Semenov, 2008. "Bargaining in the appointment process, constrained delegation and the political weight of the Senate," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 165-180, July.
    15. Caitlin Ainsley, 2022. "Federal reserve appointments and the politics of senate confirmation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 93-110, January.
    16. Sylvester Eijffinger & Ronald Mahieu & Louis Raes, 2016. "Monetary Policy Committees, Voting Behavior and Ideal Points," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 1628, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    17. Keith E. Schnakenberg & Ian R. Turner & Alicia Uribe-McGuire, 2017. "Allies or commitment devices? A model of appointments to the Federal Reserve," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 118-132, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:319-55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.