IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/indrel/qt1651m00t.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

After Dodd-Frank: The Post-Enactment Politics of Financial Reform in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Ziegler, J. Nicholas
  • Woolley, John T.

Abstract

[first revision] The financial crisis of 2008 raised the politics of regulation to a new level of practical as well as scholarly attention. This paper argues that the post - enactment politics of implementation matter as much to the success of regulatory reform as the politics of passing legislation. In contrast to the prevailing concepts of regulatory capture and business power, we find that recent reform s in U.S. financial markets hinge on intellectual resources and new organizational actors that are missing from existing theories of regulatory change. In particular, small advocacy groups have proven significantly more successful in opposing the financial - services industry than the existing literature predicts. By maintaining the salience of reform goals, elaboratiung new analytic frameworks, and deploying specialized expertise in post - enactment debates, these small organizations have contributed to a diffuse but often decisive network of pro - reform actors. Using empirical material from the rule - writing process for macroprudential supervision and for derivatives trading, we show that these small organizations coalesce with other groups to form a new stability alliance that has prevented industry groups from dominating financial regulation to the degree that occurred in earlier cases of regulatory reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziegler, J. Nicholas & Woolley, John T., 2015. "After Dodd-Frank: The Post-Enactment Politics of Financial Reform in the United States," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt1651m00t, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:indrel:qt1651m00t
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1651m00t.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:indrel:qt1651m00t. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irucbus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.