Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Repeated adjustment of delegated powers and the history of eminent domain

Contents:

Author Info

  • Fleck, Robert K.
  • Hanssen, F. Andrew

Abstract

In representative democracies, citizens delegate powers. Not surprisingly, citizens react angrily when the delegated powers are misused (i.e., used so as to decrease social welfare). Perhaps more puzzlingly, citizens sometimes repeatedly delegate the same power (e.g., surveillance of citizens, conscription), and then repeatedly react with anger to its misuse. To study this phenomenon, we model a stylized public that repeatedly adjusts the set of powers it delegates to politicians. The public obtains new information each period, forecasts rationally (but not perfectly) the benefits and costs of delegation, and infers the likelihood with which a court will correct politicians' misuses of delegated powers. We use the model to explore the history of eminent domain in the United States--a history characterized by periodic public backlash. The model and historical discussion illuminate the nature of public responses to judicial rulings--explaining why the public may react by adjusting the scope of delegated powers, even if a ruling merely upholds a well-established precedent.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V7M-4XHVH2M-1/2/a97f82021c0eacab731f805e4eaa8503
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Review of Law and Economics.

Volume (Year): 30 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
Pages: 99-112

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:30:y:2010:i:2:p:99-112

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle

Related research

Keywords: D78; H1; K11; N4; P16 Eminent domain Delegated powers;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Matsusaka, John G, 1992. "Economics of Direct Legislation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(2), pages 541-71, May.
  2. Munch, Patricia, 1976. "An Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(3), pages 473-97, June.
  3. Stephen Coate & Timothy Besley, 2000. "Elected versus Appointed Regulators: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 7579, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Hart, John F, 1998. "Property Rights, Costs, and Welfare: Delaware Water Mill Legislation, 1719-1859," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 455-71, June.
  5. F. Andrew Hanssen, 2004. "Is There a Politically Optimal Level of Judicial Independence?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 712-729, June.
  6. repec:reg:rpubli:218 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Andrew Hanssen, . "Learning About Judicial Independence: Institutional Change In The State Courts," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1009, American Law & Economics Association.
  8. Alan J. Auerbach, 2004. "Budget Windows, Sunsets, and Fiscal Control," NBER Working Papers 10694, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 2004. "The Politician and the Judge: Accountability in Government," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
  10. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-77, Fall.
  11. John G. Matsusaka, 2005. "Direct Democracy Works," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 185-206, Spring.
  12. Hahn, Robert W, 2000. "State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 873-912, June.
  13. Macey, Jonathan R, 1992. "Organizational Design and Political Control of Administrative Agencies," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 93-110, March.
  14. Hanssen F. Andrew, 1999. "Appointed Courts, Elected Courts, and Public Utility Regulation: Judicial Independence and the Energy Crisis," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 179-252, August.
  15. Ramseyer, J Mark, 1994. "The Puzzling (In)dependence of Courts: A Comparative Approach," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 721-47, June.
  16. Wright, Gavin, 1999. "The Civil Rights Revolution as Economic History," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(02), pages 267-289, June.
  17. Fleck, Robert K, 2000. "When Should Market-Supporting Institutions Be Established?," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 129-54, April.
  18. Scheiber, Harry N., 1973. "Property Law, Expropriation, and Resource Allocation by Government: the United States, 1789–1910," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(01), pages 232-251, March.
  19. Hermalin, Benjamin E, 1995. "An Economic Analysis of Takings," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 64-86, April.
  20. Barro, Robert J, 1986. "Recent Developments in the Theory of Rules versus Discretion," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(380a), pages 23-37, Supplemen.
  21. Hanssen, F Andrew, 2000. "Independent Courts and Administrative Agencies: An Empirical Analysis of the States," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 534-71, October.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Hoehn, John P. & Adanu, Kwami, 2014. "What motivates voters’ support for eminent domain reform: Ownership, vulnerability, or ideology?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 90-99.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:30:y:2010:i:2:p:99-112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.