Collaborative Research: Legislative Tactics and the Durability of Legislation

学者、立法者和公众对为什么有些法律在没有实质性修改的情况下持续很长一段时间，而另一些法律在相对较短的时间内要么被扼杀，要么被大幅修改，知之甚少。造成这种差异的原因是什么？国会是否使用了某些策略，以增加法律以其原始形式继续存在的可能性，而未来的国会将保持不变？在制定时，是否有一些条件会影响一项法律能否长久存在？而随后的条件又有什么影响呢？它们是否会影响一项法律被大幅修改的可能性？在这个项目中，我们在先前工作(Maltzman和Shipan2006；即将完成)的基础上继续和扩展，以研究为什么一些法律在通过后不久就被修改，而另一些法律在未来的国会中保持不变。理解一项法律如何设计才能产生长期影响的重要性怎么强调都不为过。首先，一项法律在修改之前持续的时间越长，塑造国家经济、社会和政治福利的潜力就越大。其次，立法的大部分价值--对于立法者、利益集团、公众等等--来自于法律本身将长盛不衰的假设。当这一原始协议通过未来的修正案被修改时，这些变化将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。如果有人认为一项法律可能会被废除或修改，理性的行为者就会放弃投资于合规。最后，我们生活在一个普通公众、权威人士甚至立法者认识到国会解决所有社会问题的能力有限的时代。这一限制的一部分反映了两个超出我们项目范围的问题--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前几届国会早些时候面临的问题。我们的项目有可能限制持续不断地重新审视国家面临的问题的需要。

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 If one believes a law is likely to be either rescinded or revised, rational actors will abstain from investing in compliance.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.