Executive Decree Authority in Brazil: How Reactive Legislators Influence Policy

Abstract At first glance, wide‐ranging presidential decree authority suggests executive branch domination of legislatures. However, decree power may also be a rational delegation of authority by legislators, in accord with their political objectives. Seen in this light, the key issue for legislators is not halting decree authority but reducing the agency losses that result from delegation. This paper shows how decree authority, as practiced in Brazil, constitutes an example of rational delegation by a legislature in which seniority and policy specialization are relatively undervalued. Brazilian legislators prefer to endow presidents with broad decree power and then monitor presidents on an issue‐by‐issue basis by amending executive decrees. This method of “oversight after delegation” lowers the transaction costs of delegation and speaks to the influence of Brazilian legislators over what is typically seen as an important source of presidential power.     

Ideological cohesion between congress and the president: Does the road to the white house matter?

This study examines the impact of US presidential nomination politics on congressional‐executive relations. In particular, we pose the critical question of whether nomination reforms have had any systematic effect on the inter‐branch ideological gap. Using an indicator of liberal voting in Congress and a derived liberalism score for presidents, we analyse the ideological disparity between the branches over a 40‐year period from 1949 to 1993. Results do not support the view offered by Polsby and others that a shift toward more open and participatory decision making in the post‐reform nomination process has increased the probability that presidents will be ideologically distant from their fellow partisans in Congress. Indeed, the situation is quite the opposite, with post‐reform presidents being closer to the ideological centre of gravity of their parties in Congress than are presidents who reached the White House in the pre‐reform era.     

Crime in the 2016 Presidential Election: a new era?

Issues pertaining to crime and criminal justice have long been part of presidential campaigns. Voters want to know how candidates plan to solve the problem of crime and keep them safe. In turn, candidates respond to voters’ concerns and describe their crime control ideas in hopes of increasing voter support. In doing so, they often rely on symbolic statements that provide little detail but make people “feel good”. This study analyzes the criminal justice rhetoric used by the three major presidential candidates in the 2016 election cycle to determine what issues they discussed and how often. The analysis also examines if candidates relied on symbolic statements, and how the issues were debated between the candidates. The findings show that the issues discussed were somewhat different than in previous years, and that the candidates relied on symbolic statements about crime – a change from the previous election cycle. Additionally, the candidates used crime control as a way to reach out to voters in their own political party, suggesting an interesting shift in how issues of criminal justice are being approached within elections.     

POLICY PREFERENCES OF JUSTICES AND PRESIDENTS

Focusing on the issue of civil rights, this study examines the relationship between policy preferences of presidents and the votes of the Supreme Court justices they appointed. Through content analysis of presidential statements, relatively systematic measures of civil rights policy views for five recent presidents were obtained and compared with the voting records on civil rights of justices they appointed to the Supreme Court. The findings suggest that although a correspondence exists between presidential preferences and judicial votes, presidents have been only moderately successful in appointing justices whose votes reflect presidential preferences.     

Legislating Crime Policy from the White House: Presidential Success with Congress in the Passage of Federal Crime Control Policy

Previous research has found that presidents, in general, have the power to influence congress in the passage of federal crime control policy. What has not been fully explored is whether presidential supported bills are more likely to influence congress to pass federal crime control bills. Therefore, this study draws upon the theory that presidents influence congress to test the hypothesis that president supported legislation on crime will achieve greater success in congress than non-supported bills. Analysis of legislative, presidential and congressional data from 1946 through 1996 suggests support for the theory that presidential supported bills are 2.8 times more likely (or 185% more likely) to become law.     

Presidential influence on parliamentary election timing and the electoral fate of prime ministers

Most presidential heads of state in parliamentary and semi-presidential democracies have constitutional powers to influence early election calling, which enable them to influence the conditions under which prime ministers are held accountable by the electorate. We examine whether presidents use theses powers to shape the timing of early elections for partisan advantage and to influence the electoral performance of prime ministers. Drawing on data from 193 elections in 18 European democracies (1945–2013), we find that presidents with significant dissolution powers enable incumbents in governments that include the president’s party to realise a significant electoral bonus compared with governments that exclude the party of the president.     

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978: The Role of Symbolic Politics

Since 1978, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) has governed United States intelligence gathering for national security purposes. Enacted in response to the Watergate–era civil rights violations and revelations of a Senate investigation headed by Senator Frank Church that other presidential administrations had authorized similar warrantless surveillance, FISA established a statutory framework for national security surveillance. Understanding FISA contributes to the study of criminal justice policymaking because law enforcement and intelligence communities view it as an important tool for combatting espionage and terrorism. This article examines the enactment of FISA from the perspective of symbolic politics.     

Presidential Influence on Police Practices: The U.S. President’s Indirect Impact on Fourth Amendment Case Outcome Through Supreme Court Appointments

Utilizing presidential influence theory as a conceptual framework, this study examines the extent to which U.S. presidents effect police practice case outcome through the Supreme Court justices they nominate. Through their confirmed nominees, presidents can have an enduring political impact long after they have left office. Results from a sample of 253 Fourth Amendment police practice cases from 1953–1997 demonstrate that presidents do have an indirect influence on police search and seizure practices. While presidents do not vote in Supreme Court cases, they still have an effect on case outcome because their appointees generally vote along similar ideological lines. Specific results, study limitations, and policy implications for law enforcement agencies are discussed.     

Crime Control in the 2008 Presidential Election: Symbolic Politics or Tangible Policies?

Presidential candidates regularly use crime issues to help win electoral support. Contrary to conventional wisdom, crime control became an issue in the 2008 presidential campaign. Despite decreasing crime rates and public opinion focused only temporarily on illegal immigration, the three major presidential candidates (Obama, Clinton, & McCain) discussed many anticrime initiatives during the campaign. Unlike past research which has found presidential candidates use primarily symbolic rhetoric in their anticrime rhetoric, all three presidential candidates in the 2008 presidential election were found to have employed tangible statements. The article discusses the different findings, making recommendations for future research.     

All the President's Senators: Presidential Copartisans and the Allocation of Federal Grants

Previous scholarship argues that House members' partisan relationship to the president is among the most important determinants of the share of federal dollars they bring home to their constituents. Do presidential politics also shape distributive outcomes in the Senate? Analyzing the allocation of more than $8.5 trillion of federal grants across the states from 1984 to 2008, we show that presidential copartisan senators are more successful than opposition party members in securing federal dollars for their home states. Moreover, presidents appear to target grants ex post to states that gain presidential copartisans in recent elections.     

Assessing the President's Role as Party Agent in Congressional Elections: The Case of Bill Clinton in 2000

Presidents have become their parties' chief fund‐raisers and thus have the capacity to further their parties' collective fortunes by imposing a more efficient distribution of campaign resources than might otherwise prevail. In order to succeed, presidents must, first, accurately target their efforts where they will best improve candidates' prospects for winning seats, and second, either directly or indirectly (through signaling to other donors) generate sufficient new resources to affect the election outcome. Analyses of Bill Clinton's extensive fund‐raising efforts during the 1999–2000 election cycle confirm that presidents can indeed use their unmatched fund‐raising ability to help their parties win congressional contests they might otherwise lose. But analysis of the Clinton record also shows that presidential fund‐raising activities may be shaped by other purposes that lead to a distribution of effort that is suboptimal for the party.     

Crime control in the 2000 presidential election: A symbolic issue

Presidential candidates regularly use crime issues to help win electoral support. Contrary to conventional wisdom, crime control also became an issue in the 2000 presidential campaign. Despite decreasing crime rates, the debate was driven by public opinion. Because the crime debate was fueled by perception rather than reality, it is argued that the symbolic nature of the debate became important in providing reassurance to the American public. This finding points to the importance of symbolic rhetoric by presidential candidates in appealing to voters and increasing public support.     

Agenda Power,Executive Decree Authority,and the Mixed Results of Reform in the Brazilian Congress

This article examines how institutional change in the use of extraordinary legislation affects delegation of power and unilateral action in new democracies. From 1988 to 2001, Brazilian presidents were able to reissue decrees indefinitely and thus had substantial legislative power. In 2001, Congress amended the constitution so as to restrict the president to a single reissue of each lapsed decree. This reform has had mixed results: although it ended the practice of infinite reissues, it induced Presidents Cardoso and Lula to use more decrees than previous executives had. Presidential agenda power, rather than being reduced, has been sharpened. By analyzing patterns of presidential initiatives from 1995 to 2005, we demonstrate the mixed results of this constitutional reform.     

Presidential rhetoric on cybercrime: links to terrorism?

Abstract

Presidents often give speeches about crime issues as a way to convince the public that there are significant problems for which an easy solution can be found. Studies have shown that presidential rhetoric on crime not only influences the public’s perception of the problem, but also the perception of the best solution. More recent research has demonstrated that presidents sometimes draw on the public’s fear of crime as a way to further affect the public’s perception of crime. In other words, presidents link crime with the public’s anxiety about other fearful events as a way to further impact the public’s perception of a problem (and thus further their agenda). This study examines presidential rhetoric on cybercrime to determine if executives link cybercrime with other issues such as national security. The findings provide credibility to both Cavelty’s threat frames approach as well as assertions made regarding the politics of fear.     

Provisional Court Protection in Administrative Disputes in Europe: The Constitutional Status of Interim Measures Deriving from the Right to Effective Court Protection. A Comparative Approach

Abstract: Interim protection in remedies against the public administration has proved to be one of the key issues in today's justice. In effect, the slowness of judicial proceedings means that final judicial decisions cannot guarantee the rights and interests of the litigants any more, because those decisions arrive too late. Thus, effective judicial protection is at stake. On the other hand, public administrations have traditionally disposed of privileges, one of the most important of them being the so‐called executive character of administrative acts. The national debate on the equilibrium between both principles—effective judicial protection and the executive character of administrative acts—needs to be exported to the Community law context. Community law should therefore learn from national experiences, as other legal orders, such as the Spanish one, have done, turning to comparative law in order to improve their own model of interim protection.     

Dispersal Powers and the Symbolic Role of Anti-Social Behaviour Legislation

This article considers the development and use of dispersal powers, introduced by the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, and situates these within the context of wider legislation and policy initiatives. It explores the ways in which the powers have been interpreted by the courts and implemented by police and local authorities. The article critically analyses the manner in which the powers: introduce 'public perceptions' as a justification for police encroachments on civil liberties; conform to a hybrid-type prohibition; constitute a form of preventive exclusion that seeks to govern future behaviour; are part of a wider trend towards discretionary and summary justice; and potentially criminalise young people on the basis of the anxieties that groups congregating in public places may generate amongst others. It is argued that the significance of dispersal orders derives as much from the symbolic messages and communicative properties they express, as from their instrumental capacity to regulate behaviour.     

The Opportunistic President: How US Presidents Determine Their Legislative Programs

The president is the most influential policy actor in US politics, and his legislative program greatly influences Congress's agenda. Yet little research has focused on what factors affect the president's choices when constructing his agenda. We develop a theory that determines when a president will include an issue in his program. We hypothesize that presidents structure their agendas around the congressional calendar for consideration of expiring laws and salient issues. Using data over 28 years and across 12 policy areas, we find presidents build their programs around these policymaking opportunities. We assert that presidential agendas are less driven by individual priorities than previous accounts have concluded.     

Legislative‐Executive Conflict and Private Statutory Litigation in the United States: Evidence from Labor,Civil Rights,and Environmental Law

Examining qualitative historical evidence from cases of federal regulation in the areas of labor, civil rights, and environmental policy, this article provides support for the hypothesis that divergence between legislative and executive preferences—a core and distinctive feature of the American constitutional order—creates an incentive for Congress to rely upon private lawsuits, as an alternative to administrative power, to achieve its regulatory goals. It also shows that this mechanism encouraging statutory mobilization of private litigants had been operative long before its powerful growth started in the late 1960s, that it operated in similar fashion with Republican legislators facing Democratic presidents and Democratic legislators facing Republican presidents, and that it remained a source of controversy and an active influence on congressional decision making throughout the half century covering the 1940s through the 1980s.     

Retributive and Restorative Justice

The emergence of restorative justice as an alternative model to Western, court-based criminal justice may have important implications for the psychology of justice. It is proposed that two different notions of justice affect responses to rule-breaking: restorative and retributive justice. Retributive justice essentially refers to the repair of justice through unilateral imposition of punishment, whereas restorative justice means the repair of justice through reaffirming a shared value-consensus in a bilateral process. Among the symbolic implications of transgressions, concerns about status and power are primarily related to retributive justice and concerns about shared values are primarily related to restorative justice. At the core of these processes, however, lies the parties’ construal of their identity relation, specifically whether or not respondents perceive to share an identity with the offender. The specific case of intergroup transgressions is discussed, as are implications for future research on restoring a sense of justice after rule-breaking.     

Strategic Position Taking and Presidential Influence in Congress

The rise and fall of presidential success in Congress remains a central puzzle in the literature. We model success as two interrelated processes: presidential position taking and Congress's decision to support or oppose the president. The analysis emphasizes the importance of strategic position taking in determining presidential success. We show that presidential approval significantly influences success, not only because it affects congressional behavior, but also because it shapes presidential decisions to take positions. Moreover, we explain that legislative success during the honeymoon period is driven by presidential position taking. Our findings highlight the role of a president's strategic decisions for theories explaining congressional‐executive relations.