Making 'Explicit Authority' Explicit: Deciphering Wis. Act 21's Prescriptions for Agency Rulemaking Authority

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Koschnick
Keyword(s):  
Agency Rulemaking

Democratic Rulemaking

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. de Figueiredo ◽  
Edward H. Stiglitz
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Democratic Values ◽  
The Public ◽  
Voter Preferences ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Agency Rulemaking ◽  
Elected Representatives

This chapter examines to what extent agency rulemaking is democratic. It identifies four major theoretical approaches to administrative rulemaking: the unitary executive theory, emphasizing presidential control and accountability; the structure and process school of thought, emphasizing congressional control; the insulation perspective, holding that the public interest and democratic values are often best advanced by limiting political control over administrative agencies; and the deliberative perspective, arguing that rulemaking is the “best hope” for achieving a vision of deliberative democracy. Each theory is evaluated in light of two normative benchmarks: a “democratic” benchmark based on voter preferences, and a “republican” benchmark based on the preferences of elected representatives. It then evaluates how the empirical evidence lines up in light of these two approaches. The chapter concludes with a discussion of avenues for future research.

An Experiment in E-Rulemaking with Natural Language Processing and Democratic Deliberation

2012 ◽  
pp. 23-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Muhlberger ◽  
Jenny Stromer-Galley ◽  
Nick Webb
Keyword(s):  
Natural Language Processing ◽  
Natural Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Attitude Change ◽  
State Agency ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Public Input ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Agency Rulemaking

Public comment processes in federal and state agency rulemakings are among the most substantial potential arenas for public input into government. Unfortunately, these processes have not been much used for thoughtful public input. This research sought to shed light on whether online democratic deliberation, without facilitation, and natural language processing tools could empower participants to provide more informed input into an agency rulemaking. It also sought to determine whether such an approach had other positive effects such as enhancing citizenship and increasing confidence in the pertinent agency. Findings indicate improvements in participant knowledge of the network neutrality rulemaking topic, systematic attitude change, improvements to citizenship measures, and increased confidence in the Federal Communications Commission. Results suggest that public deliberation under conditions needed to involve substantial numbers of people—namely, online deliberation without facilitators—can improve public comments into federal and state agency rulemakings while strengthening the citizenship qualities of participants. They also indicate that many of the desired effects of face-to-face deliberation with trained facilitators can also be obtained online without facilitators.

Stakeholder Participation and Strategy in Rulemaking: A Comparative Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deserai A. Crow ◽  
Elizabeth A. Albright ◽  
Elizabeth A. Koebele
Keyword(s):  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
State Level ◽  
Advocacy Groups ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Environmental Advocacy ◽  
Regulatory Processes ◽  
Final Rule ◽  
Agency Rulemaking ◽  
Regulatory Decisions

Integrating a diversity of stakeholder voices in policymaking processes can lead to more legitimate and widely supported laws and rules. While most attention to stakeholder participation in public decision processes has focused on legislative policymaking or the role of industry stakeholders in regulatory processes, strategic choices about participation by non-industry stakeholders in rulemaking remains largely overlooked, particularly at the state level. Previous research shows that agency rulemaking processes often provide greater procedural access to industry actors, who may significantly influence final rule content by bringing greater technical knowledge to bear on rulemaking processes. Less is understood about the strategies used by non-industry stakeholders, such as environmental advocacy groups, to influence regulatory decisions. This study, which compares environmental rulemaking processes across three issues in five states, finds that industry actors and environmental advocacy groups both use a variety of participation strategies classically thought to be “insider” and “outsider” strategies, and that these choices are motivated by reasons other than the perceived effectiveness of the strategy within the formal rulemaking process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document