z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Does Separation of Powers Promote Stability and Moderation?
Author(s) -
Matthew C. Stephenson
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
the journal of legal studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.251
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1537-5366
pISSN - 0047-2530
DOI - 10.1086/671055
Subject(s) - repeal , legislation , legislature , veto , moderation , separation of powers , power (physics) , law and economics , law , political science , business , economics , psychology , politics , social psychology , physics , quantum mechanics
It is often asserted that separation of legislative powers tends to make legislation both more moderate (because concessions to all veto players are needed to secure enactment) and less frequent (because sufficient concessions are sometimes infeasible). The formal analysis in this article shows this claim to be incomplete and sometimes incorrect. Although greater separation of powers makes legislation more difficult to enact, it also makes legislation, once enacted, more difficult to repeal. Attenuating the threat of repeal means that when one faction has sufficient power to push through extreme policies, it is more likely to do so than would be the case if legislative power were more concentrated. These two effects cut in opposite directions, and it is difficult to say, as a general matter, which will predominate. Indeed, increasing the fragmentation of legislative power may sometimes increase both the expected frequency and the expected extremism of legislative enactments.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom