Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:01:27.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptive Signal Processing, Hierarchy, and Budgetary Control in Federal Regulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Daniel P. Carpenter
Daniel P. Carpenter*
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Control over agency budgets is a critical tool of political influence in regulatory decision making, yet the causal mechanism of budgetary control is unclear. Do budgetary manipulations influence agencies by imposing resource constraints or by transmitting powerful signals to the agency? I advance and test a stochastic process model of adaptive signal processing by a hierarchical agency to address this question. The principal findings of the paper are two. First, presidents and congressional committees achieve budgetary control over agencies not by manipulating aggregate resource constraints but by transmitting powerful signals through budget shifts. Second, bureaucratic hierarchy increases the agency's response time in processing budgetary signals, limiting the efficacy of the budget as a device of political control. I also show that the magnitude of agency response to budgetary signals increased for executive-branch agencies after 1970 due to executive oversight reforms. I conclude by discussing the limits of budgetary manipulations as a device of political control and the response of elected authorities to adaptive signal processing by agencies.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 90 , Issue 2 , June 1996 , pp. 283 - 302
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Banks, Jeffrey. 1989. “Agency Budgets, Cost Information, and Auditing.” American Journal of Political Science 33 (August):670–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendor, Jonathan, and Moe, Terry. 1985. “An Adaptive Model of Bureaucratic Politics.” American Political Science Review 79 (September):755–74.Google Scholar
Berger, James O. 1985. Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis. 2d ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Marver H. 1955. Regulating Business by Independent Commission. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Calvert, Randall L., with McCubbins, Mathew D. and Weingast, Barry. 1989. “A Theory of Political Control and Agency Discretion.” American Journal of Political Science 33 (August):588–611.Google Scholar
Claunts, Frank. 1991. “Budgeting in the Food and Drug Administration.” FDA Budget Office, January 25, 1991. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Dodd, Lawrence C., and Schott, Richard L.. 1986. Congress and the Administrative State. 2d ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1967. A Theory of Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Feller, William. 1971. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications. Vol. 2. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr., 1966. The Power of the Purse: Appropriations Politics in Congress. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, John, and Shipan, Charles. 1990. “Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 6 (1):1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1957. A Theory of the Consumption Function. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granato, Jim. 1991. “An Agenda for Econometric Model Building.” Political Analysis 3:123–54.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. C. 1990. The Econometric Analysis of Time Series. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hatanaka, M. 1974. “An Efficient Two-Step Estimator for the Dynamic Adjustment Model with Autoregressive Errors.” Journal of Econometrics 2 (September):199–220.Google Scholar
Heimann, C. F. Larry. 1993. “Understanding the Challenger Disaster: Organizational Structure and the Design of Reliable Systems.” American Political Science Review 87 (June):421–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarque, Carlos M., and Bera, Anil. 1980. “Efficient Tests for Normality, Homoscedasticity, and Serial Independence of Regression Residuals.” Economics Letters 6 (3):255–59.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D. Roderick, and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1991. The Logic of Delegation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Krasnow, Erwin G., and Longley, Lawrence. 1978. The Politics of Broadcast Regulation. 2d ed. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Lee, Lung-Fei. 1986. “Specification Test for Poisson Regression Models.” International Economic Review 27 (October):689–706.Google Scholar
Light, Paul C. 1994. Thickening Government. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew D. 1985. “The Legislative Design of Regulatory Structure.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (November): 721–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew D., Noll, Roger, and Weingast, Barry. 1990. “Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 3 (2):243–77.Google Scholar
Meier, Kenneth J. 1985. Regulation: Politics, Bureaucracy and Economics. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Mishkin, Frederic S. 1983. A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconometrics: Testing Policy Ineffectiveness and Efficient-Markets Models. Chicago: NBER.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1985. “Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: The Case of the NLRB.” American Political Science Review 79 (December):1094–1116.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1984. “The New Economics of Organization.” American Journal of Political Science 28 (November):739–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1982. “Regulatory Performance and Presidential Administration.” American Journal of Political Science 26 (May): 197–224.Google Scholar
Morgan, Dan. 1995. “Pressure on NLRB Turns into a Doubled Budget Cut.” Washington Post, July 20, p. A8.Google Scholar
Muth, J. F. 1961. “Rational Expectations and the Theory of Price Movements.” Econometrica 29 (July):315–35.Google Scholar
Nathan, Richard P. 1983. The Administrative Presidency. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Olson, Mary. 1994. “Substitution in Federal Regulation: FDA Enforcement Alternatives.” Presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, Alan V., and Schafer, Ronald W.. 1989. Discrete-Time Signal Processing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Padgett, John. 1981. “Hierarchy and Ecological Control in Federal Budgetary Decision Making.” American Journal of Sociology 87 (July):75–129.Google Scholar
Padgett, John. 1980a. “Bounded Rationality in Budgetary Research.” American Political Science Review 74 (June):354–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padgett, John. 1980b. “Managing Garbage Can Hierarchies.” Administrative Science Quarterly 25 (November):583–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Paul. 1980. “The Food and Drug Administration.” In The Politics of Regulation, ed. Wilson, James Q.. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Radner, Roy. 1992. “Hierarchy: The Economics of Managing.” Journal of Economic Literature 30 (September):1382–1415.Google Scholar
Redford, Emmette S. 1969. Democracy in the Administrative State. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rockman, Bert A. 1993. “Tightening the Reins: The Federal Executive and the Management Philosophy of the Reagan Presidency.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 23 (Winter):103–14.Google Scholar
Roe, Robert S. 1952. “The Evolution of the Field Organization.” Food Drug Cosmetic Law Journal 7 (12):773–82.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Peter. 1974. “An Argument for the Usefulness of the Gamma Distributed Lag Model.” International Economic Review 15 (February):246–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. 1947. Administrative Behavior. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Townsend, James T., and Ashby, F. Gregory. 1983. The Stochastic Modelling of Elementary Psychological Processes. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
U.S. House, Committee on Energy and Commerce. 1990. Radio Broadcasting Issues, 101st Cong., 2d sess., October 1989 hearings, Committee Serial No. 101-93.Google Scholar
U.S. House, Committee on Energy and Commerce. 1989. Hard to Swallow: FDA Enforcement Program for Imported Food, 101st Cong., 1st sess., July 1989 hearings, Committee Print No. 101-L.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry, and Moran, Mark. 1983. “Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission.” Journal of Political Economy 91 (October): 756–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1988. The New Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Wilson, James Q. 1989. Bureaucracy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan. 1990. “Does Politics Make a Difference at the EEOC?” American Journal of Political Science 34 (May):503–30.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan. 1988. “Principals, Bureaucrats and Responsiveness in Clean Air Enforcements.” American Political Science Review 82 (March):213–34.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan, and Anderson, James E.. 1993. “The Politics of U.S. Antitrust Regulation.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (February): 1–39.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan, and Waterman, Richard W.. 1991. “The Dynamics of Political Control of the Bureaucracy.” American Political Science Review 85 (September):801–28.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan, and Waterman, Richard W.. 1993. “The Dynamics of Political-Bureaucratic Adaptation.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (May):497–528.Google Scholar
Yandle, Bruce. 1988. “Antitrust Actions and the Budgeting Process.” Public Choice 59 (December): 263–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.