IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/shs/wpaper/0603.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Elected Public Utility Commissioners Behave More Politically than Appointed Ones?

Author

Listed:
  • Troy Quast

    (Department of Economics and International Business, Sam Houston State University)

Abstract

This paper investigates whether the means by which public utility commissioners are selected affects the influence of political affiliation on policy choices. This question is asked in the context of telecommunications network lease prices and retail prices. While political affiliation appears to have limited influence on lease prices set by appointed commissioners, it has a significant impact when these prices are set by elected commissioners. Conversely, the political affiliation of appointed regulators appears to affect retail prices, whereas the political affiliation of elected commissioners does not.

Suggested Citation

  • Troy Quast, 2006. "Do Elected Public Utility Commissioners Behave More Politically than Appointed Ones?," Working Papers 0603, Sam Houston State University, Department of Economics and International Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:shs:wpaper:0603
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.shsu.edu/academics/economics-and-international-business/documents/wp_series/wp06-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smart, Susan R, 1994. "The Consequences of Appointment Methods and Party Control for Telecommunications Pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 301-323, Summer.
    2. Walter J. Primeaux, Jr. & Patrick C. Mann, 1986. "Regulator Selection Methods and Electricity Prices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(1), pages 1-13.
    3. Fields, Joseph A & Klein, Linda S & Sfiridis, James M, 1997. "A Market Based Evaluation of the Election versus Appointment of Regulatory Commissioners," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 92(3-4), pages 337-351, September.
    4. Timothy Besley & Stephen Coate, 2003. "Elected Versus Appointed Regulators: Theory and Evidence," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1176-1206, September.
    5. David P. Baron, 1988. "Regulation and Legislative Choice," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 467-477, Autumn.
    6. Susan R. Smart, 1994. "The Consequences of Appointment Methods and Party Control for Telecommunications Pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 301-323, June.
    7. David E. M Sappington, 2005. "On the Irrelevance of Input Prices for Make-or-Buy Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1631-1638, December.
    8. Peter Navarro, 1982. "Public Utility Commission Regulation: Performance, Determinants, and Energy Policy Impacts," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 119-140.
    9. Robert L. Hagerman & Brian T. Ratchford, 1978. "Some Determinants of Allowed Rates of Return on Equity to Electric Utilities," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(1), pages 46-55, Spring.
    10. Dale Lehman & Dennis Weisman, 2000. "The Political Economy of Price Cap Regulation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 16(4), pages 343-356, June.
    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. Flavio M. Menezes & Christian Roessler, 2010. "Good and Bad Consistency in Regulatory Decisions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(275), pages 504-516, December.
    2. Marc T. Law & Cheryl X. Long, 2011. "Revolving door laws and state public utility commissioners," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 405-424, December.

    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. Leverty, J. Tyler & Grace, Martin F., 2018. "Do elections delay regulatory action?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 409-427.
    2. Timothy Besley & Anne Case, 2003. "Political Institutions and Policy Choices: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(1), pages 7-73, March.
    3. Parinandi, Srinivas & Hitt, Matthew P., 2018. "How Politics Influences the Energy Pricing Decisions of Elected Public Utilities Commissioners," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 77-87.
    4. Galina Zudenkova, 2015. "Political cronyism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 473-492, March.
    5. Adam Fremeth & Guy Holburn & Pablo Spiller, 2014. "The impact of consumer advocates on regulatory policy in the electric utility sector," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 157-181, October.
    6. Flavio M. Menezes & Christian Roessler, 2010. "Good and Bad Consistency in Regulatory Decisions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(275), pages 504-516, December.
    7. Rode, David C. & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2019. "Regulated equity returns: A puzzle," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    8. Marc T. Law & Cheryl X. Long, 2011. "Revolving door laws and state public utility commissioners," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 405-424, December.
    9. Grace, Martin F. & Phillips, Richard D., 2008. "Regulator performance, regulatory environment and outcomes: An examination of insurance regulator career incentives on state insurance markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 116-133, January.
    10. Timothy Besley & Stephen Coate, 2003. "Elected Versus Appointed Regulators: Theory and Evidence," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1176-1206, September.
    11. Guthrie, Graeme, 2006. "Regulating Infrastructure: The Impact on Risk and Investment," Working Paper Series 18946, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    12. Abel, Jaison R, 2002. "Entry into Regulated Monopoly Markets: The Development of a Competitive Fringe in the Local Telephone Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 289-316, October.
    13. Antonio Estache & Liam Wren-Lewis, 2010. "What Anti-Corruption Policy Can Learn from Theories of Sector Regulation," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2010-033, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    14. Antonio Estache & Liam Wren-Lewis, 2011. "Anti-Corruption Policy in Theories of Sector Regulation," Chapters, in: Susan Rose-Ackerman & Tina Søreide (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption, Volume Two, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18946 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Enikolopov, Ruben, 2014. "Politicians, bureaucrats and targeted redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 74-83.
    17. Graeme Guthrie, 2006. "Regulating Infrastructure: The Impact on Risk and Investment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 925-972, December.
    18. Catherine Hausman, 2019. "Shock Value: Bill Smoothing and Energy Price Pass‐Through," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 242-278, June.
    19. Armstrong, Mark & Sappington, David E.M., 2007. "Recent Developments in the Theory of Regulation," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1557-1700, Elsevier.
    20. Mark Partridge & Tim Sass, 2011. "The productivity of elected and appointed officials: the case of school superintendents," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 133-149, October.
    21. Susan R. Smart, 1994. "The Consequences of Appointment Methods and Party Control for Telecommunications Pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 301-323, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    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:shs:wpaper:0603. 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: Christian Raschke (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deshsus.html .

    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.