IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/98221.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Executive Absolutism: A Model

Author

Listed:
  • Howell, William
  • Shepsle, Kenneth
  • Wolton, Stephane

Abstract

Separated powers cannot permanently constrain individual ambitions. Concerns about a government's ability to respond to contemporary and future crises, we show, invariably compromise the principled commitments one branch of government has in limiting the authority of another. We study a dynamic model in which a politician (most commonly an executive) makes authority claims that are subject to a hard constraint (administered, typically, by a court). At any period, the court is free to rule against the executive and thereby permanently halt her efforts to acquire more power. Because it appropriately cares about the executive's ability to address real-world disruptions, however, the court is always willing to affirm more authority. Neither robust electoral competition nor alternative characterizations of judicial rule fundamentally alters this state of affairs. The result, we show, is a persistent accumulation of executive authority.

Suggested Citation

  • Howell, William & Shepsle, Kenneth & Wolton, Stephane, 2020. "Executive Absolutism: A Model," MPRA Paper 98221, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:98221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/98221/1/MPRA_paper_98221.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nunnari, Salvatore, 2021. "Dynamic legislative bargaining with veto power: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 186-230.
    2. T. Renee Bowen & Ying Chen & H?lya Eraslan, 2014. "Mandatory versus Discretionary Spending: The Status Quo Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 2941-2974, October.
    3. Gian Maria Milesi‐Ferretti, 1995. "Do Good Or Do Well? Public Debt Management In A Two‐Party Economy," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 59-78, March.
    4. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2008. "Judicial Fact Discretion," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 1-35, January.
    5. Milan W. Svolik, 2009. "Power Sharing and Leadership Dynamics in Authoritarian Regimes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 477-494, April.
    6. Tom S Clark, 2016. "Scope and precedent: judicial rule-making under uncertainty," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(3), pages 353-384, July.
    7. Justin Fox & Matthew C Stephenson, 2015. "The welfare effects of minority-protective judicial review," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(4), pages 499-521, October.
    8. Navin Kartik & Richard Van Weelden & Stephane Wolton, 2017. "Electoral Ambiguity and Political Representation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(4), pages 958-970, October.
    9. Wioletta Dziuda & Antoine Loeper, 2016. "Dynamic Collective Choice with Endogenous Status Quo," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(4), pages 1148-1186.
    10. Susan Athey & Andrew Atkeson & Patrick J. Kehoe, 2005. "The Optimal Degree of Discretion in Monetary Policy," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1431-1475, September.
    11. Roger Lagunoff, 2001. "A Theory of Constitutional Standards and Civil Liberty," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(1), pages 109-132.
    12. Fowler, Anthony, 2016. "What Explains Incumbent Success? Disentangling Selection on Party, Selection on Candidate Characteristics, and Office-Holding Benefits," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 11(3), pages 313-338, October.
    13. Kalandrakis, Anastassios, 2004. "A three-player dynamic majoritarian bargaining game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 294-322, June.
    14. Bendor, Jonathan & Meirowitz, Adam, 2004. "Spatial Models of Delegation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 293-310, May.
    15. Scott Baker & Claudio Mezzetti, 2012. "A Theory of Rational Jurisprudence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 120(3), pages 513-551.
    16. Manuel Amador & Kyle Bagwell, 2013. "The Theory of Optimal Delegation With an Application to Tariff Caps," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(4), pages 1541-1599, July.
    17. Gailmard, Sean & Patty, John W., 2017. "Participation, process and policy: the informational value of politicised judicial review," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 233-260, September.
    18. Alberto Alesina & Guido Tabellini, 1990. "A Positive Theory of Fiscal Deficits and Government Debt," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 57(3), pages 403-414.
    19. Deborah Beim & Alexander V. Hirsch & Jonathan P. Kastellec, 2014. "Whistleblowing and Compliance in the Judicial Hierarchy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 904-918, October.
    20. Baron, David P. & Bowen, T. Renee, 2013. "Dynamic Coalitions," Research Papers 2128, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    21. Fox, Justin & Stephenson, Matthew C., 2011. "Judicial Review as a Response to Political Posturing," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 397-414, May.
    22. William G. Howell & Faisal Z. Ahmed, 2014. "Voting For The President: The Supreme Court During War," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 39-71.
    23. Justin Fox & Georg Vanberg, 2014. "Narrow versus broad judicial decisions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(3), pages 355-383, July.
    24. Timothy Besley & Torsten Persson, 2019. "Democratic Values and Institutions," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 59-76, June.
    25. Ryan Hübert, 2019. "Getting Their Way: Bias and Deference to Trial Courts," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(3), pages 706-718, July.
    26. Steven Callander & Patrick Hummel, 2014. "Preemptive Policy Experimentation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1509-1528, July.
    27. Tom S. Clark, 2006. "Judicial Decision Making During Wartime," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3), pages 397-419, November.
    28. Milesi-Ferretti, Gian Maria, 1995. "The Disadvantage of Tying Their Hands: On the Political Economy of Policy Commitments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(433), pages 1381-1402, November.
    29. Wolitzky, Alexander, 2013. "Endogenous institutions and political extremism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 86-100.
    30. Almendares, Nicholas & Le Bihan, Patrick, 2015. "Increasing Leverage: Judicial Review as a Democracy-Enhancing Institution," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(3), pages 357-390, September.
    31. Christenson, Dino P. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2019. "Does Public Opinion Constrain Presidential Unilateralism?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1071-1077, November.
    32. Howell, William G. & Wolton, Stephane, 2018. "The Politician’s Province," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 13(2), pages 119-146, May.
    33. Carrubba, Clifford J. & Clark, Tom S., 2012. "Rule Creation in a Political Hierarchy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 622-643, August.
    34. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:04:p:1071-1077_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hülya Eraslan & Kirill S. Evdokimov & Jan Zápal, 2022. "Dynamic Legislative Bargaining," Springer Books, in: Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman (ed.), Bargaining, chapter 0, pages 151-175, Springer.
    2. Marina Azzimonti & Gabriel P. Mihalache & Laura Karpuska, 2020. "Bargaining over Taxes and Entitlements," NBER Working Papers 27595, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Bowen, T. Renee & Chen, Ying & Eraslan, Hülya & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Efficiency of flexible budgetary institutions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 148-176.
    4. Andina-Díaz, Ascensión & Feri, Francesco & Meléndez-Jiménez, Miguel A., 2021. "Institutional flexibility, political alternation, and middle-of-the-road policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    5. Marina Azzimonti & Laura Karpuska & Gabriel Mihalache, 2020. "Bargaining over Mandatory Spending and Entitlements," Department of Economics Working Papers 20-02, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    6. Nunnari, Salvatore, 2021. "Dynamic legislative bargaining with veto power: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 186-230.
    7. T. Renee Bowen & Ying Chen & H?lya Eraslan, 2014. "Mandatory versus Discretionary Spending: The Status Quo Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 2941-2974, October.
    8. Marina Azzimonti & Laura Karpuska & Gabriel Mihalache, 2023. "Bargaining Over Taxes And Entitlements In The Era Of Unequal Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 893-941, August.
    9. Jeon, Jee Seon & Hwang, Ilwoo, 2022. "The emergence and persistence of oligarchy: A dynamic model of endogenous political power," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    10. Zapal, Jan, 2020. "Simple Markovian equilibria in dynamic spatial legislative bargaining," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    11. Karakas, Leyla D., 2017. "Institutional constraints and the inefficiency in public investments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 93-101.
    12. Nunnari, Salvatore & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Dynamic Elections and Ideological Polarization," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 505-534, October.
    13. Vincent Anesi & T Renee Bowen, 2018. "Policy Experimentation, Redistribution and Voting Rules," Discussion Papers 2018-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    14. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2016. "Pareto efficiency in the dynamic one-dimensional bargaining model," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(4), pages 525-536, October.
    15. Vincent Anesi, 2018. "Dynamic Legislative Policy Making under Adverse Selection," Discussion Papers 2018-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Anesi, Vincent & Duggan, John, 2018. "Existence and indeterminacy of markovian equilibria in dynamic bargaining games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    17. Gersbach, Hans & Jackson, Matthew O. & Muller, Philippe & Tejada, Oriol, 2023. "Electoral competition with costly policy changes: A dynamic perspective," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    18. Yanlei Ma, 2014. "Income Inequality, Political Polarization and Fiscal Policy Gridlock," 2014 Meeting Papers 547, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Marina Halac & Pierre Yared, 2017. "Fiscal Rules and Discretion under Self-Enforcement," NBER Working Papers 23919, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Agranov, Marina & Cotton, Christopher & Tergiman, Chloe, 2020. "Persistence of power: Repeated multilateral bargaining with endogenous agenda setting authority," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Authority; Executive Growh; Judicial Decision; Separation of Power; Federalist;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • K39 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Other

    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:pra:mprapa:98221. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.