Search results

Legislative action was historically the means by which U.S. states abolished capital punishment, but such action ceased for decades following the Supreme Court's 1976 Gregg decision that reaffirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty. Despite the fact that several legislatures have considered abolition bills in the modern era, only three states successfully enacted such legislation. It is my purpose in this study to analyze why states are currently struggling to pass abolition legislation and to determine which factors contribute to success. I conduct a comparative, qualitative case study of New Jersey, the first state to legislatively abolish since 1976, and Maryland, a similar state whose abolition effort recently failed. I analyze the content of legislators’ debates about the abolition bills in committee and on the legislature floor, as well as news coverage of the abolition efforts in each state's largest newspapers. I reach two primary conclusions. First, an abolition bill is more likely to be passed by Democrats than Republicans, but unified Democratic control of the government is not a sufficient condition for abolition. Second, arguments about the risk of wrongful executions and the deleterious collateral consequences of the death penalty process on the family members of murder victims are powerful sources of political support for abolition, especially where doubts about the deterrent effect of the death penalty are widespread. This study reaffirms the central importance of the innocence frame in the modern death penalty debate, and it presents the first scholarly analysis of the collateral consequences frame. These findings may help activists in the abolition movement more effectively frame their arguments to appeal to legislators.

We examine the influences of African-American and female legislators on the supportiveness of states toward elders. Previous research shows complementary supportiveness among women and minority legislators on education policy and a range of social policies affecting families. Women legislators extend this support to various dimensions of “state age friendliness.” We examine here whether African-American legislators extend their support similarly. We draw on a cross-sectional data set for the 50 American states around the year 2000 in conjunction with regression. We find that, controlling for the most prominent alternative factors generally shaping state orientations and policies, women legislators are selectively supportive of dimensions of state elderly friendliness, but African-American legislators do not share this support. We attribute the discrepancy in the support of this area of social policy to women and minority legislators having specific divergent priorities with regard to elders as well as to how these priorities are conditioned by women and black legislators being concentrated in different states having distinctive cultures.

This chapter examines the range of possible effects of ethics laws enacted by state legislatures. One objective of ethics law, to reduce corruption, cannot be demonstrated. Other objectives, to placate the media, defend against partisan attack, and permit the legislature to move on, have mixed results, while a final objective, to restore public confidence, is not achieved. Nevertheless, ethics law does affect the process, by somewhat discouraging legislator recruitment and retention, by raising the consciousness of legislators, and by changing the cultures of state capitals.

Researchers of legislative behavior have attempted to explain the decisions of legislators for some time. Public choice scholars have argued that legislators will “sell” political favors in exchange for some from of interest group payment that is thought to benefit the legislator's electoral ambitions. Yet, legislators do not appear to receive the full value of their political favor in these exchanges. That is, the value of the policies offered appears to exceed the price paid by interest groups in the form of campaign contributions, speaking honoraria and other material payments. This imbalance has led some scholars to discount theories that explain legislative behavior motivated by material gain. However, to the extent that legislators value post‐elective employment opportunities, interest groups have an incentive to use the offer of future employment as a payment for present legislative influence. In this sense, perhaps a large portion of the difference in payments can be accounted for in the post‐elective employment careers of elected politicians. In this paper, I explore and explain this theory using a political market model and attempt to identify several attributes that I believe will be common among “prospect‐legislators” whose behavior is principally motivated by concerns with post‐elective life.

The purpose of the paper is to discuss the factors that would increase or decrease the prospects to use research evidence in legislation in a developing country.

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were used to identify the gaps in ability to utilise research evidence among policymakers. A combination of expert analysis of five policy brief formats, 13 self-administered semi-structured interviews with policymakers, focus group discussion and literature analysis informed data collection.

The incentives and motivations for research-based legislation are classified into three categories: those that concern legislators and researchers, those that concern legislators only and those that concern researchers only.

The work discusses the need for policymakers to make decisions based on facts. The findings are a reflection of a long interaction the author had with policymakers and researchers in Uganda.

We show that, in the US telecommunications industry, market participants have a sophisticated understanding of the political process, and behave strategically in their allocation of contributions to state legislators as if seeking to purchase influence over regulatory policy. We find that interests respond defensively to contributions from rivals, take into account the configuration of support available to them in both the legislature and the regulatory commission, and vary their contributions according to variations in relative costs for influence by different legislatures. This strategic behavior supports a theory that commercially motivated interests contribute campaign resources in order to mobilize legislators to influence the decisions of regulatory agencies. We also report evidence that restrictions on campaign finance do not affect all interests equally. The paper therefore provides positive evidence on the nature and effects of campaign contributions in regulated industries where interest group competition may be sharp.

The purpose of this study is to explore legislative kleptocracy, specifically, budget padding, in Nigeria’s budding democracy, using systems thinking approach for a positive social change. Nigeria’s legislature is not free from the problem of kleptocracy inasmuch as some legislators have been charged with kleptocratic activities. The multifariousness of kleptocracy rooted in its differential coefficient in the Nigeria’s legislature does not underplay its sophistication.

In this qualitative analysis, the author generated data through a systematic analysis of documents.

The findings show that unexplored organismic factors or forces within the living being such as the inability of legislators to control their mind, low self-control, cheating propensity, identity crisis, etc., play vital roles in contributing to legislative kleptocracy.

The main limitation of the study is that it is not generalizable.

The practical implication of the study is that implementation of the study recommendations is pragmatic, cost-effective and time-effective, and it would ensure legislative transformation and mitigate kleptocracy.

The social implication of the study is if the Nigerian legislature implements the recommendation(s) of the study, there will be a legislative positive social change because financial crimes would have been mitigated.

This study filled the lacuna in the financial crime literature because it is the first of its kind in the discipline, and hence its originality cannot be disputed.

Public Finance

Masters level graduate studies for public and private sector managers.

The protagonist in this case is Mrs Maribeth Ocampo a manager of a reputable non-governmental organization (NGO) that plans to devise a position on the Philippines' Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) (or more pejoratively called “pork barrel”). This NGO manager intends to tap the assistance of their local legislator to fund some of their projects. Her NGO has been working with farmers in provinces in the Bicol region and one of the recent projects of the group involves skills training for the female farmers, which aims to provide the latter with a greater variety of income source which they can tap during the lean season. Expenses associated with the project include costs of the training sessions (e.g. cost of session kits and honorarium of resource people) and assistance that will be provided to the female farmers to start their venture.

However, recent reports have surfaced which cast doubts on the accountability and transparency associated with the PDAF of the legislators. Some reports indicate the presence of commissions that NGOs must allegedly pay to the legislators in exchange for their access to the said funds, while a recent scam involves the creation of bogus NGOs that allegedly serve as conduits through which legislators can take advantage of their allocation. The NGO manager needs to decide on whether and to what extent to engage with legislators on tapping the pork barrel funds. She also needs to address the question: “What is the position of my NGO (and possibly all reputable NGOs more broadly) on pork barrel funds moving forward?”

This case aims to familiarize the manager with key public finance concepts such as discretion and accountability; and to develop her/his appreciation of the politics surrounding the public sector budget and, in particular, discretionary funds. The case is focused on Philippine legislators' discretionary funds, the PDAF. However, it can be used to discuss issues surrounding public finance concepts of transparency, accountability and citizens' engagement in the budget process in a much broader context within developing democracies.

The case revolves around the scandal surrounding the pork barrel funds of some legislators that were exposed for apparent abuse in early 2013. The scandal and its repercussions are still ongoing at the time of writing this case, so the authors expect to update this case moving forward. It aims to highlight an example of the role of public institutions and its respective challenges when it comes to critical decisions of keeping public financial a credible undertaking. It is also expected that this case will help develop an understanding of the pros and cons in the use of discretionary funds and help the student identify potential risks for abuse in public finance management with respect to these funds.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

This is a paper of methodological orientation. An attempt has been made to delineate the basic elements of a Qur'anic view of social reality as an integral part of the worldview of the Qur'an. The theoretical frame thus derived from the Qur'an is then shown to lay the foundation for a universal theory of social science. A theory of action based on the concept of the righteous actor is contrasted with a theory of action based on the concept of the rational actor, the former representing Homo‐Islamicus, the second representing Homo‐economicus. The theory of action suggested rests on the work of Imam al Shatibi on the purposes (magasid) of Shari'ah, which is shown to emanate logically from the Qur'anic view of social reality suggested by the author.

The imposition of term limits in bicameral (two‐chamber) state legislatures could produce unforeseen consequences in the policymaking process. Supporters of term limit rules have not considered that their imposition could fundamentally shift the sequence of policymaking in legislatures. This is important given that research on sequential bicameral policymaking suggests qualities of the lower chamber allow it to cultivate policy expertise such that the upper chamber will defer to the lower chamber in policymaking. This project aims to explore whether this proposed policymaking sequence exists in term‐limited states.

A comparison of policy adoptions in states with and without term limits is performed using an original data set on bill adoptions for all US bicameral legislatures that had a regular session between the years 2000 and 2006. Least‐squares regression models evaluate whether basic characteristics of legislatures are as relevant as term limit characteristics in explaining the level of outputs from the lower chamber in term‐limited states.

In states with term limits, the level of policy adoptions initiated by the lower chamber is lower than levels seen in states without term limits. This finding holds when controlling for other relevant variables that can potentially explain lower chamber productivity.

The study analyzes aggregate state‐level data and does not interview individual legislators in states with and without term limits on whether term limits can alter future legislative behavior.

This study is the first to examine whether the policymaking sequence differs between states that possess and do not possess term limit rules.