问责制还是大破坏?措施二下行政法规制定的立法审查

2区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
Susan L. Smith
{"title":"问责制还是大破坏?措施二下行政法规制定的立法审查","authors":"Susan L. Smith","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3392120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines legislative review of administrative rule-making in Oregon. It analyzes a 2000 proposed amendment to the Oregon Constitution, defeated by the voters after publication of this analysis, that called for enhanced legislative review of administrative rules. It also analyzes the probable impact on the Oregon land use system had the proposed amendment passed. The paper argues that Oregon's current system provides adequate legislative oversight of administrative rule-making.","PeriodicalId":51730,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Law Review","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creating Accountability or Wreaking Havoc? Legislative Review of Administrative Rulemaking Under Measure 2\",\"authors\":\"Susan L. Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3392120\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines legislative review of administrative rule-making in Oregon. It analyzes a 2000 proposed amendment to the Oregon Constitution, defeated by the voters after publication of this analysis, that called for enhanced legislative review of administrative rules. It also analyzes the probable impact on the Oregon land use system had the proposed amendment passed. The paper argues that Oregon's current system provides adequate legislative oversight of administrative rule-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Law Review\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3392120\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"法学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3392120","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了俄勒冈州行政法规制定的立法审查。它分析了2000年提出的俄勒冈州宪法修正案,该修正案呼吁加强对行政规则的立法审查,在该分析发表后被选民否决。它还分析了拟议修正案通过后对俄勒冈州土地使用系统可能产生的影响。论文认为,俄勒冈州目前的制度为行政法规的制定提供了充分的立法监督。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Creating Accountability or Wreaking Havoc? Legislative Review of Administrative Rulemaking Under Measure 2
This paper examines legislative review of administrative rule-making in Oregon. It analyzes a 2000 proposed amendment to the Oregon Constitution, defeated by the voters after publication of this analysis, that called for enhanced legislative review of administrative rules. It also analyzes the probable impact on the Oregon land use system had the proposed amendment passed. The paper argues that Oregon's current system provides adequate legislative oversight of administrative rule-making.
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
CiteScore
0.50
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