IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rrpaxx/v5y2000i1p107-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interests and Political Institutions in U.S. Long-Distance Telecommunications Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kwang-Ho Sim

Abstract

This study analyzes the “adjudicative rule-making decisions” made by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the long-term dominant carrier, AT&T, in the U.S. long-distance service market over the period of 1965–1995. With the goal of identifying the determinants of FCC’s telecommunications policy decisions that were made in favor of AT&T over other common carriers or public interest groups, this study seeks to test regulation theories regarding interest group power and the roles of political institutions. A logistic regression model characterizing the conditions under which the FCC actually adopted policy decisions in favor of or against AT&T’s interests was developed to understand the response of the FCC and assess the relative effects of interest groups and political institutions on the FCC’s 699 decision cases. The logit analysis shows that FCC policy making is significantly influenced by simultaneous modes of interest group power, coming from AT&T, other common carriers, and other public interest groups, and the roles of political institutions, including the federal agency itself, Congress, Presidents, and the courts.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwang-Ho Sim, 2000. "Interests and Political Institutions in U.S. Long-Distance Telecommunications Policy," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 107-123, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rrpaxx:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:107-123
    DOI: 10.1080/12294659.2000.10804947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/12294659.2000.10804947
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/12294659.2000.10804947?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olson, Mary, 1996. "Substitution in Regulatory Agencies: FDA Enforcement Alternatives," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 376-407, October.
    2. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    3. Weingast, Barry R & Moran, Mark J, 1983. "Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(5), pages 765-800, October.
    4. Moe, Terry M., 1985. "Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: The Case of the NLRB," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 79(4), pages 1094-1116, December.
    5. Carpenter, Daniel P., 1996. "Adaptive Signal Processing, Hierarchy, and Budgetary Control in Federal Regulation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 90(2), pages 283-302, June.
    6. Ferejohn, John & Shipan, Charles, 1990. "Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(0), pages 1-20.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
    2. Olson, Mary K, 1999. "Agency Rulemaking, Political Influences, Regulation, and Industry Compliance," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 573-601, October.
    3. Mary K. Olson, 1997. "Firm Characteristics and the Speed of FDA Approval," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 377-401, June.
    4. Andrew B. Whitford, 2002. "Decentralization and Political Control of the Bureaucracy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(2), pages 167-193, April.
    5. Mary K. Olson, 2000. "Regulatory Reform and Bureaucratic Responsiveness to Firms: the Impact of User Fees in the FDA," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 363-395, June.
    6. Jodi L. Short, 2021. "The politics of regulatory enforcement and compliance: Theorizing and operationalizing political influences," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 653-685, July.
    7. Michael Makowsky & Thomas Stratmann, 2014. "Politics, unemployment, and the enforcement of immigration law," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 131-153, July.
    8. Moszoro, Marian W. & Spiller, Pablo T., 2014. "Third-Party Opportunism and the Theory of Public Contracts: Operationalization and Applications," MPRA Paper 101592, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Ian R Turner, 2017. "Working smart and hard? Agency effort, judicial review, and policy precision," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 69-96, January.
    10. P. Hägg, 1997. "Theories on the Economics of Regulation: A Survey of the Literature from a European Perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 337-370, December.
    11. Ellig, Jerry, 2016. "Evaluating the Quality and Use of Regulatory Impact Analysis: The Mercatus Center’s Regulatory Report Card, 2008–2013," Working Papers 06878, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    12. John M. de Figueiredo & Edward H. Stiglitz, 2015. "Democratic Rulemaking," NBER Working Papers 21765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Matthew Eshbaugh‐Soha, 2008. "The Impact of Presidential Speeches on the Bureaucracy," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(1), pages 116-132, March.
    14. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    15. Rui J. P. De Figueiredo & Geoff Edwards, 2007. "Does Private Money Buy Public Policy? Campaign Contributions and Regulatory Outcomes in Telecommunications," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 547-576, September.
    16. Kutsal Yesilkagit & Sandra Thiel, 2008. "Political Influence and Bureaucratic Autonomy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 137-153, June.
    17. Matthew E.K. Hall, 2017. "Macro Implementation: Testing the Causal Paths from U.S. Macro Policy to Federal Incarceration," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 438-455, April.
    18. Jordan Carr Peterson, 2018. "All Their Eggs in One Basket? Ideological Congruence in Congress and the Bicameral Origins of Concentrated Delegation to the Bureaucracy," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-15, May.
    19. Lehr, William & Sicker, Douglas, 2017. "Communications Act 2021," 28th European Regional ITS Conference, Passau 2017 169478, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    20. Ando, Amy, 1998. "Delay on the Path to the Endangered Species List: Do Costs and Benefits Matter," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-43-rev, Resources for the Future.

    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:taf:rrpaxx:v:5:y:2000:i:1:p:107-123. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRPA20 .

    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.