The Aversion to Direct Cost Imposition: Selecting Climate Policy Tools in the United States

Numerous policy tools could be employed in attempting to mitigate climate change through reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Direct cost imposition through the taxation of carbon content of fossil fuels has long enjoyed support from diverse policy analysts but has proven highly difficult to advance politically in the United States and many other nations. This article considers the evolving American experience in climate policy tool selection, including extended engagement by many states over the past decade and growing federal involvement in recent Congresses. It demonstrates the enduring aversion to direct cost imposition as opposed to other policy options. This includes a brief period in late 2008 and early 2009 when prospects for direct cost imposition heightened markedly at the federal level but collapsed quickly in favor of a mélange of other approaches that are likely to be less efficient but also less direct in their imposition of costs. The article concludes with considerations of other methods to advance direct cost imposition in the American case.     

Dueling Revenue Caps and Municipal Bond Yields: The Case of Houston,Texas

Two competing revenue cap proposals, one from a citizen's group and the other proposed by the mayor, were on the November 2004, election ballot of the City of Houston, Texas. Both propositions passed, yet the citizen's group had to sue to have their initiative enforced. This study examines the effect on Houston bond yields of the series of events (from June 2004 through March 2006) surrounding these dueling revenue cap propositions. The empirical findings suggest that the budget‐related events can have a significant effect on yields demanded by investors in the secondary market for outstanding uninsured tax‐exempt general obligation debt.     

Is There a Modern Legal Culture?

Abstract . This essay argues that there are certain traits which, taken together, characterize modern legal systems, and are reflexes of modern legal culture. Modern law is rapidly changing; it is dense and ubiquitous; the basis of its legitimacy is instrumental; it stresses fundamental human rights and is strongly individualistic; lastly, the globalization of law leads to a process of convergence among legal systems. These traits also produce structural changes in legal systems, for example, an increase in the power and activism of courts.     

Agenda Control in Congress: Evidence from Cutpoint Estimates and Ideal Point Uncertainty

This article develops two new tests of partisan and nonpartisan theories of lawmaking based on cutpoint estimates and measures of uncertainty about ideal point estimates. Theories of congressional organization make explicit predictions about the absence of cutpoints in certain intervals of the policy space. We test these theories with new cutpoint estimates and exploit the fact that the ideal points of members located far from the density of cutpoints are necessarily estimated with less precision. We validate our empirical approach through simulations, and we test three models of congressional organization using House roll call data from the 86th through the 110th Congresses (1959–2008). We find strong evidence of partisan agenda control. Our findings exhibit modest differences from the results predicted by Cox and McCubbins's party cartel theory: negative agenda control increases over time and is negatively correlated with the size of the blockout region.     

On The Interpretation Of Laws

Abstract. The essay is an attempt to examine aspects of legal interpretation from an external, sociological point of view. "Interpretation", in its normal juristic sense, is primarily a process in which decision-makers with secondary legitimacy link their decisions to authority of primary legitimacy. The type of legitimacy which is dominant within the legal system greatly influences the style of interpretation - in "closed" systems, where the stock of premises is fixed, "legalism" will abound. Legal interpretation is not concerned with what a text really means, in any literal sense; and standards for judging legal interpretation are different from the standards of judging other forms of communication, for example, literature. Indeed, a judge can be considered great precisely because of his creative acts of mis interpretation.     

Delinquent Careers and Criminal Policy

This article critically examines the prevailing judicial waiver statutes that require juvenile court judges to make individualized determinations as to a youth amenability to treatment and danger to society. It concludes that such decisions cannot be made with an acceptable degree of accuracy using current methods of clinical diagnosis or prediction, and that the broad discretion given judges in making transfer decisions results in inconsistent and discriminatory applications that undermine the fairness and predictability of the process. In light of the expanding research on the development of delinquent careers, it contends that a legislative redefinition of juvenile court jurisdiction that automatically excludes certain youths from the juvenile court on the basis of their present offenses and past records not only identifies more accurately those youth who should be prosecuted as adults, but also increases the fairness, rationality, and predictability of the adulthood determination. It suggests that an application of "just deserts" principles to the juvenile court waiver decision could have salutary consequences for youths, the juvenile and criminal justice systems, and social control.