Collaborative Research: Legislative Tactics and the Durability of Legislation

合作研究：立法策略和立法的持久性

• 批准号: 0961303
• 负责人: Forrest Maltzman
• 金额: $ 8.3万
• 依托单位: George Washington University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2010
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2010-03-01 至 2013-02-28
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0961303&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Legislative; Tactics; Durability

Scholars, lawmakers, and the general public have little understanding as to why some laws last a long period of time without the substantial amendment while others are either killed or substantially amended in a relative short period of time. What accounts for this difference? Are there certain tactics that Congress uses that increase the likelihood that a law will continue in its original form, unchanged by future Congresses? Are there conditions at the time of enactment that affect whether a law will live a long life? And what effect do subsequent conditions have? Do they influence the likelihood that a law will be amended in a significant way? In this project we build on and extend our earlier work (Maltzman and Shipan 2006; forthcoming) to examine why some laws are amended soon after passage while others remain untouched by future Congresses.The importance of understanding how a law can be designed to have a long lasting impact cannot be overstated. First, the longer a law lasts before it is amended, the greater the potential to shape the nation's economic, social, and political welfare. Second, much of the value of legislation--to legislators, to interest groups, to the general public, and so on--comes from the assumption that the law itself will have longevity. When this original agreement is revised through future amendments, such changes affect the value of that law to the original participants. Third, compliance with the law depends in large part upon a calculation regarding its longevity. If one believes a law is likely to be either rescinded or revised, rational actors will abstain from investing in compliance. Finally, we live in a period when the general public, pundits, and even lawmakers recognize that Congress's capacity to address all of society's problems is limited. Part of this limit reflects two issues that are beyond the scope of our project--the extent of the nation's problems and normative issues regarding the proper role of government. At the same time, however, this limit may reflect the fact that our lawmaking institutions repeatedly are called upon to address issues that had been confronted earlier, by previous Congresses. Our project has the potential to limit the need for consistently revisiting the issues that confront the nation.

学者、立法者和普通民众对为什么有些法律在没有实质性修改的情况下持续了很长时间，而另一些法律在相对较短的时间内要么被废除，要么被大幅修改的原因知之甚少。是什么造成了这种差异？国会是否使用某些策略来增加法律继续保持其原始形式的可能性，而不受未来国会的影响？一项法律在制定时是否存在影响其长期效力的条件？后续条件有什么影响？它们会对法律被重大修改的可能性产生影响吗？在这个项目中，我们建立并扩展了我们早期的工作（Maltzman and Shipan 2006；即将出版），以研究为什么一些法律在通过后很快就被修改，而另一些法律在未来的国会中仍然没有受到影响。理解如何设计一项法律才能产生持久影响的重要性怎么强调都不为过。首先，法律在修订前持续的时间越长，对国家经济、社会和政治福利的影响就越大。其次，立法的大部分价值——对立法者、对利益集团、对公众等等——来自于这样一个假设，即法律本身将会长期存在。当这个原始协议通过未来的修订而被修改时，这种变化会影响该法律对原始参与者的价值。第三，遵守法律在很大程度上取决于对其寿命的计算。如果一个人认为一项法律可能会被废除或修改，理性的行为者将避免投资于合规。最后，我们生活在这样一个时代：普通公众、专家、甚至立法者都认识到，国会解决所有社会问题的能力是有限的。这一限制部分反映了超出我们项目范围的两个问题——国家问题的程度和关于政府适当角色的规范性问题。然而，与此同时，这一限制可能反映了这样一个事实，即我们的立法机构一再被要求解决以前国会遇到过的问题。我们的项目有可能限制不断重新审视国家面临的问题的需要。