总统交接与利益集团参与通知和评论程序

Michael Livermore, Vladimir Eidelman, Anastassia Kornilova, Onyi Lam
{"title":"总统交接与利益集团参与通知和评论程序","authors":"Michael Livermore, Vladimir Eidelman, Anastassia Kornilova, Onyi Lam","doi":"10.1177/02750740241245362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Federal administrative agencies are one of the primary policymaking venues in the United States. One of the core features of U.S. administrative practice is the notice-and-comment process in which agencies solicit, collect, and respond to comments from the public before issuing new regulations. In this paper, we develop a model of commenting based on three motivations—litigation preservation; agency persuasion; and expression—and analyze public comments to determine how features of the political environment, and specifically the president in power, affect the pool of commenters. We focus on the 2017 presidential transition, when there was both a change in Presidents and the party in control of the White House. We find that there were greater differences in the pool of commenters between administrations than within administrations and that interest groups tended to participate more when they were more closely associated with the party in power. Our findings support the view that many commenters use the public comment process for persuasive purposes, and not only to preserve litigation opportunities or for purely expressive reasons.","PeriodicalId":22370,"journal":{"name":"The American Review of Public Administration","volume":"7 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Presidential Transitions and Interests Group Participation in the Notice and Comment Process\",\"authors\":\"Michael Livermore, Vladimir Eidelman, Anastassia Kornilova, Onyi Lam\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02750740241245362\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Federal administrative agencies are one of the primary policymaking venues in the United States. One of the core features of U.S. administrative practice is the notice-and-comment process in which agencies solicit, collect, and respond to comments from the public before issuing new regulations. In this paper, we develop a model of commenting based on three motivations—litigation preservation; agency persuasion; and expression—and analyze public comments to determine how features of the political environment, and specifically the president in power, affect the pool of commenters. We focus on the 2017 presidential transition, when there was both a change in Presidents and the party in control of the White House. We find that there were greater differences in the pool of commenters between administrations than within administrations and that interest groups tended to participate more when they were more closely associated with the party in power. Our findings support the view that many commenters use the public comment process for persuasive purposes, and not only to preserve litigation opportunities or for purely expressive reasons.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Review of Public Administration\",\"volume\":\"7 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Review of Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740241245362\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Review of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740241245362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

联邦行政机构是美国主要的决策场所之一。美国行政实践的核心特征之一是 "通知-评论 "程序,即机构在发布新法规之前征求、收集和回应公众意见。在本文中,我们基于三种动机--诉讼保全、机构说服和表达--建立了一个评论模型,并对公众评论进行了分析,以确定政治环境的特征,特别是当权总统,如何影响评论者群体。我们重点关注了 2017 年的总统过渡时期,当时总统和控制白宫的政党都发生了更迭。我们发现,政府间评论者群体的差异比政府内评论者群体的差异更大,而且当利益集团与执政党关系更密切时,他们往往参与得更多。我们的研究结果支持这样一种观点,即许多评论者利用公众评论程序来达到说服的目的,而不仅仅是为了维护诉讼机会或纯粹的表达原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Presidential Transitions and Interests Group Participation in the Notice and Comment Process
Federal administrative agencies are one of the primary policymaking venues in the United States. One of the core features of U.S. administrative practice is the notice-and-comment process in which agencies solicit, collect, and respond to comments from the public before issuing new regulations. In this paper, we develop a model of commenting based on three motivations—litigation preservation; agency persuasion; and expression—and analyze public comments to determine how features of the political environment, and specifically the president in power, affect the pool of commenters. We focus on the 2017 presidential transition, when there was both a change in Presidents and the party in control of the White House. We find that there were greater differences in the pool of commenters between administrations than within administrations and that interest groups tended to participate more when they were more closely associated with the party in power. Our findings support the view that many commenters use the public comment process for persuasive purposes, and not only to preserve litigation opportunities or for purely expressive reasons.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信