Temporary versus Permanent Legislation
Chapter 6: Passage probability
While Part I provides a theory of the selection of temporary and permanent timing rules in various strategic contexts, Part II provides empirical evidence. Chapters 6 and 7 test for the existence of short- to medium-term normative effects and long-term normative effects respectively, and whether or not they vary with the selection of a timing rule. This chapter takes up the first question related to short- to medium-term effects. Proposition 3 shows that the selection of temporary legislation minimizes transactions cost when residual effects such as legal expression cause compliance to increase over time. When compliance is increasing, a temporary timing rule allows legislators to save on total legislation costs since increases in compliance lead to decreases in extension costs of temporary legislation. These cost savings are unavailable with permanent timing rules since permanent enactment costs are allocated to the initial period. In order to test this theory, we measure the level of transactions cost of legislation, and look for variance in those costs over multiple policy domains. Short of developing a full theory of what makes a policy domain more expressive than another, we assume that some policy domains, e.g. judiciary, leave more beneficial residual effects that drive legislation costs down than others, e.g. agriculture.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.