IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v15y2021i1p185-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Get in line: Do part‐time legislatures use sunset laws to keep executive agencies in check

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Baugus
  • Feler Bose
  • Jeffry Jacob

Abstract

Sunset provisions are clauses embedded in legislation that cause a piece of legislation or a regulatory board to expire on a certain date unless the legislature takes affirmative action to renew the legislation or board. Supporters and legislators offer several reasons why sunset laws are valuable and useful. An article by Baugus and Bose (2015), reported on the king‐and‐council model of Congleton (2001), suggests that sunset laws are a key tool legislatures use in asserting themselves against an executive branch that often dominates state government. We investigate this possibility using empirical analysis, which suggests that part‐time legislatures, specifically, a form of part‐time legislature referred to as hybrid legislatures, are more prone to use sunset legislation as a tool to keep the executive preferences in check.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Baugus & Feler Bose & Jeffry Jacob, 2021. "Get in line: Do part‐time legislatures use sunset laws to keep executive agencies in check," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 185-199, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:185-199
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12283
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12283?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arnold, R Douglas, 1987. "Political Control of Administrative Officials," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 279-286, Fall.
    2. Clausen, Aage R. & Cheney, Richard B., 1970. "A Comparative Analysis of Senate-House Voting on Economic and Welfare Policy, 1953–1964," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(1), pages 138-152, March.
    3. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    4. Alt, James E. & Lowry, Robert C., 1994. "Divided Government, Fiscal Institutions, and Budget Deficits: Evidence from the States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 811-828, December.
    5. James W. Endersby & Michael J. Towle, 0. "Effects of Constitutional and Political Controls on State Expenditures," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 83-98.
    6. Fagan, Frank & Bilgel, Fırat, 2015. "Sunsets and federal lawmaking: Evidence from the 110th Congress," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Hammond, Thomas H & Knott, Jack H, 1996. "Who Controls the Bureaucracy?: Presidential Power, Congressional Dominance, Legal Constraints, and Bureaucratic Autonomy in a Model of Multi-institutional Policy-Making," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 119-166, April.
    8. Bawn, Kathleen, 1997. "Choosing Strategies to Control the Bureaucracy: Statutory Constraints, Oversight, and the Committee System," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 101-126, April.
    9. Roger Congleton, 2001. "On the Durability of King and Council: The Continuum Between Dictatorship and Democracy," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 193-215, September.
    10. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Elizabeth I. Dorssom, 2021. "Does Legislative Institutionalization Impact Policy Adoption? New Evidence from the Colonial and Early State Legislatures 1757–1795," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1451-1465, July.

    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. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2013. "Essays on Electricity Market Reforms: A Cross-Country Applied Approach," MPRA Paper 47139, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Hahn Robert, 2010. "Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, July.
    3. Benoît Le Maux, 2009. "Governmental behavior in representative democracy: a synthesis of the theoretical literature," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 447-465, December.
    4. Cyril Benoît, 2021. "Politicians, regulators, and regulatory governance: The neglected sides of the story," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 8-22, November.
    5. Matthew D. Mitchell, 2019. "Uncontestable favoritism," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 167-190, October.
    6. Gawel, Erik & Lehmann, Paul & Strunz, Sebastian & Heuson, Clemens, 2018. "Public Choice barriers to efficient climate adaptation – theoretical insights and lessons learned from German flood disasters," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 473-499, June.
    7. Birner, Regina & Linacre, Nicholas A., 2008. "Designing Regional Systems of Biotechnology Regulation A Transaction Cost Approach to Regulatory Governance," 2007 Second International Conference, August 20-22, 2007, Accra, Ghana 52218, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    8. Jeffrey Church, 2017. "Defining the Public Interest in Regulatory Decisions: The Case for Economic Efficiency," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 478, May.
    9. Dallin Overstreet, 2020. "The negative impact of barriers to entry on income inequality," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 344-357, October.
    10. Gawel, Erik & Heuson, Clemens & Lehmann, Paul, 2012. "Efficient public adaptation to climate change: An investigation of drivers and barriers from a Public Choice perspective," UFZ Discussion Papers 14/2012, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    11. Bharatee Dash & Angara Raja, 2014. "Do political determinants affect revenue collection? Evidence from the Indian states," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 61(3), pages 253-278, September.
    12. Roger Congleton, 2013. "On the inevitability of divided government and improbability of a complete separation of powers," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 177-198, September.
    13. Leo Wangler & Juan-Carlos Altamirano-Cabrera & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2013. "The political economy of international environmental agreements: a survey," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 387-403, September.
    14. Patrick Newman, 2018. "Revenge: John Sherman, Russell Alger and the origins of the Sherman Act," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 257-275, March.
    15. 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.
    16. Farvaque, Étienne & Foucault, Martial & Joanis, Marcelin, 2012. "Les règles budgétaires dans les provinces canadiennes : nomenclatures et éléments d’analyse," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 88(3), pages 281-315, Septembre.
    17. M. Maegli & C. Jaag & M. Finger, 2010. "Regulatory Governance Costs in Network Industries: Observations in Postal Regulation," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 11(2), pages 207-238, June.
    18. Vlad Tarko & Andrew Farrant, 2019. "The efficiency of regulatory arbitrage," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 141-166, October.
    19. Maria Rita Loureiro, 2001. "Controlling the Public debt in Presidential Systems: Constitutional And Legal Restrictions in the US and Brazil," Anais do XXIX Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 29th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 006, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    20. Cetin, Tamer & Oguz, Fuat, 2007. "The politics of regulation in the Turkish electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1761-1770, March.

    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:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:185-199. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.