This article examines the relationship between political veto points, credible commitments, and regulatory compliance costs. Its central purpose is to assess whether different types of political veto points credibly constrain regulatory change and thus lower compliance costs. The authors conceptualize veto points broadly, including legislative oversight, gubernatorial powers, and direct democracy. We analyze state-level environmental compliance costs from 1988 to 1994 as a function of the structure of state political institutions and state political and economic characteristics. The results suggest that a key veto point, the authority for legislators to review bureaucratic behavior, consistently reduces compliance costs.
Arceneaux, Kevin.2002. Direct democracy and the link between public opinion and state abortion policy. State Politics and Policy Quarterly2 (4): 372-87.
2.
Bawn, Kathleen.1999. Money and majorities in the Federal Republic of Germany: Evidence for a veto players model of government spending. American Journal of Political Science43:707-36.
3.
Berk, R.A.1990. A primer on robust regression. In Modern methods of data analysis, ed. J. Fox and J. S. Long.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4.
Berry, William D., Evan J. Ringquist, Richard C. Fording, and Russell L. Hanson .1998. Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states, 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science42:327-48.
5.
Beyle, Thad.1999. The governors. In Politics in the American states, 7th ed., ed. Virginia Gray, Russell L. Hansen, and Herbert Jacob.Washington, DC: CQ Press.
6.
Birchfield, Vicki, and Markus M. L. Crepaz .1998. The impact of constitutional structures and collective and competitive veto points on income inequality in industrialized democracies. European Journal of Political Research34:175-200.
7.
Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan.2004. Measuring the effect of direct democracy on state policy: Not all initiatives are created equal. State Politics and Policy Quarterly4 (3): 345-63.
8.
Brace, Paul, Kevin Arceneaux, Martin Johnson , and Stacy G. Ulbig.2004. Does state political ideology change over time?Political Research Quarterly57 (1): 529-41.
9.
Brown, R. Steven, and Valerie Green.2001. Report to Congress: State agency contributions to enforcement and compliance. Washington, DC: Environmental Council of the States.
10.
Burden, Barry C.2004. Institutional features and policy representation in the states. Presented at the annual State Politics and Policy Conference, April.
11.
Cameron, Charles.2000. Veto bargaining: Presidents and the politics of negative power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
Chubb, John.1985. The political economy of federalism. American Political Science Review79:994-1015.
13.
Crepaz, Markus M. L.2001. Veto players, globalization and the redistributive capacity of the state: A panel study of 15 OECD countries. Journal of Public Policy21:1-22.
14.
Crepaz, Markus M. L., and Ann W. Moser.2004. The impact of collective and competitive veto points on public expenditures in the global age. Comparative Political Studies37 (3): 259-85.
15.
Daniels, Glynis, and Samantha Friedman .1999. Spatial inequality and the distribution of industrial toxic releases: Evidence from the 1990 TRI. Social Science Quarterly80 (2): 244-62.
16.
Dometrius, Nelson C.2002. Gubernatorial approval and administrative influence. State Politics and Policy Quarterly2 (3): 251-67.
17.
Dubnick, Mel, and Alan Gitelson.1981. Nationalizing state policies. In The nationalization of state government, ed. Jerome J. Hanus.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
18.
Ethridge, Marcus E.1981. Legislative-administrative interaction as intrusive access: An empirical analysis. Journal of Politics43 (2): 473-92.
19.
———. 1984. Consequences of legislative review of agency regulations in three U.S. states. Legislative Studies Quarterly9 (1): 161-78.
20.
Gerber, Brian J., Cherie Maestas, and Nelson C. Dometrius .2005. State legislative influence over agency rulemaking: The utility of ex ante review. State Politics and Policy Quarterly5 (1): 24-46.
21.
Gerber, Brian J., and Paul Teske.2000. Regulatory policymaking in the American states: A review of theories and evidence. Political Research Quarterly53:849-86.
22.
Gerber, Elisabeth R.1996a. Legislative response to the threat of popular initiatives . American Journal of Political Science40:99-128.
23.
Gerber, Elisabeth R.1996b. Legislatures, initiatives, and representation: The effects of state legislative institutions on policy. Political Research Quarterly49:263-86.
24.
Grant, Don S., Albert J. Bergesen, and Andrew W. Jones .2002. Organizational size and pollution: The case of the U.S. chemical industry. American Sociological Review67 (3): 389-407.
25.
Greene, William H.1993. Econometric analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall .
26.
Hagen, Michael G., Edward L. Lascher Jr. , and John F. Camobreco.2001. Response to Matsusaka: Estimating the effect of ballot initiatives to policy responsiveness. Journal of Politics63 (4): 1257-63.
27.
Hall, Bob, and Mary Lee Kerr.1991. 1991-1992Green Index: A state-by-state guide to the nation's environmental health. Washington, DC: Island Press.
28.
Hallerberg, Mark, and Scott Basinger.1998. Internationalization and changes in tax policy in OECD countries: The importance of domestic veto players. Comparative Political Studies31 (3): 321-53.
29.
Hart, Stuart L., and Gautam Ahuja.1996. Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between emission reduction and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment5:30-37.
30.
Huber, John D., and Charles R. Shipan .2002. Deliberate discretion? The institutional foundations of bureaucratic autonomy. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
31.
Jaffe, Adam B., Steven R. Peterson, Paul R. Portney, and Robert Stavins.1995. Environmental regulation and the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing: What does the evidence tell us?Journal of Economic Literature33:132-63.
32.
Keefer, Philip, and David Stasavage.2003. The limits of delegation: Veto players, central bank independence, and the credibility of monetary policy. American Political Science Review97 (3): 407-23.
33.
Keller, Wolfgang, and Arik Levinson.2002. Pollution abatement costs and foreign direct investment inflows to U.S. states. Review of Economics and Statistics84 (4): 691-703.
34.
Kmenta, Jan. 1986. Elements of econometrics. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.
35.
Korn, Jessica.1994-1995. The legislative veto and the limits of public choice analysis. Political Science Quarterly109 (5): 873-94.
36.
Kreppel, Amie.1997. The impact of parties in government on legislative output in Italy. European Journal of Political Research31:327-50.
37.
Landy, Marc, and Loren Cass.1997. U.S. environmental regulation in a competitive world. In Comparative disadvantages? Social regulations and the global economy , ed. Pietro S. Nivola.Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
38.
Lascher, Edward L., Jr., Michael G. Hagen, and Steven A. Rochlin.1996. Gun behind the door? Ballot initiatives, state policies, and public opinion . Journal of Politics58:760-75.
39.
Laumann, Julie, and Paul Teske.2003. Principals, agents, and the impact of regulatory federalism on the savings-and-loans crisis of the 1980s. State Politics and Policy Quarterly3 (2): 139-58.
40.
Levinson, Arik.2001. An industry-adjusted index of state environmental compliance costs. In Behavioral and distributional e fects of environmental policy, ed. Gilbert E. Metcalf and Carlo Carrero, 131-58. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41.
Liang, Kung-Yee, and Scott L. Zeger, 1986. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models . Biometrika73 (1): 13-22.
42.
Lowry, William.1992. The dimensions of federalism: State governments and pollution control policies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
43.
Matsusaka, John G.2001. Problems with a methodology used to evaluate the voter initiative. Journal of Politics63 (4): 1250-56.
44.
Moe, Terry M.1990. Political institutions: The neglected side of the story . Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization6:213-54.
45.
Morgenstern, Richard D., William A. Pizer, and Jhih-Shyang.1998. The cost of environmental compliance. Discussion Paper 98-36, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
46.
North, Douglass.1990. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47.
North, Douglass, and Barry Weingast.1989. Constitutions and commitment: The evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. Journal of Economic History49:803-32.
48.
Peterson, Paul E., Barry G. Rabe, and Kenneth K. Wong .1986. When federalism works. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
49.
Porter, Michael E., and Claas van der Linde .1995. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives9 (4): 97-118.
50.
Qian, Yingyi, and Barry R. Weingast .1997. Federalism as a commitment to preserving market incentives. Journal of Economic Perspectives11 (4): 83-92.
51.
Ringquist, Evan J.1993. Environmental protection at the state level. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
52.
Robinson, James C.1995. The impact of environmental and occupational health regulation on productivity growth in U.S. manufacturing. Yale Journal on Regulation12:387-434.
53.
Rosenbaum, Walter A.2002. Environmental politics and policy. Washington DC: CQ Press.
54.
Rosenthal, Alan.1998. The decline of representative democracy: Process, participation, and power in American state legislatures. Washington, DC : CQ Press.
55.
Ross, Martin T., Michael P. Gallaher, Brian C. Murray, Wanda W. Throneburg, and Arik Levinson.2004. PACE Survey: Background, applications, and data quality issues. Working Paper 04-09, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
56.
Scheberle, Denise.2004. Devolution. In Environmental governance reconsidered: Challenges, choices, and opportunities, ed. Robert F. Durant, Daniel J. Fiorino, and Rosemary O'Leary, 361-92. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57.
Stasavage, David.2002. Private investment and political institutions. Economics and Politics14 (1): 41-63.
58.
———. 2003. Public debt and the birth of the democratic state: France and Great Britain, 1688-1789. New York: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Teske, Paul Eric.2004. Regulation in the states. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
60.
Tsebelis, George.1995. Decision-making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism, and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science25:289-325.
61.
———. 1999. Veto players and law production in parliamentary democracies: An empirical analysis. American Political Science Review93:591-608.
62.
———. 2002. Veto players: How political institutions work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
63.
Tsebelis, George, and Jeannette Money.1997. Bicameralism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
Weingast, Barry R.1995. The economic role of political institutions: Market-preserving federalism and economic growth. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization11:1-31.
65.
Wilson, James Q.1989. Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. New York: Basic Books.
66.
Woolley, John T.1993. Conflict among regulators and the hypothesis of congressional dominance. Journal of Politics55 (1): 92-114.
67.
Zeger, Scott, and Kung-Yee Liang.1986. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics42 (1): 121-30.
68.
Zorn, Christopher.2001. Generalized estimating equation models for correlated data: A review with applications. American Journal of Political Science45 (2): 470-90.
