Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T08:00:15.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can Politicians Control Bureaucrats? Applying Theories of Political Control to Argentina's Democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Kent Eaton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the United States, an important literature shows that legislators use interest groups, courts, and budgets to assert political control over bureaucrats. Similar theories can be applied to study the scores of new democracies that have emerged in recent decades. In Argentina, politicians in the first administration of Carlos Menem (1989-95) rewrote administrative procedures and relied on both “police patrol” and “fire alarm” oversight to realign the behavior of tax bureaucrats in conformance with their own policy preferences. Whereas U.S. legislators generally prefer complex administrative procedures, different electoral incentives led their Argentine counterparts to support reforms that significantly streamlined those procedures. This finding challenges theories that attribute legislators' bureaucratic preferences to the separation or fusion of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

Type
Research
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , Winter 2003 , pp. 33 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alegría, Amado. 1996. DGI Administrative Judge, First Region. Author interview. Buenos Aires, August 2.Google Scholar
Allison, Graham. 1971. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry. 1987. Political Survival: Politicians and Public Policy in Latin America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry. 1995. Electoral Strategy under Open-List Proportional Representation. American Journal of Political Science 39 (2): 406–33.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter, and Morton, Baratz. 1970. Power and Poverty: Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, Robert, and Anne, Krueger, eds. 1993. Political and Economic Interactions in Economic Policy Reform. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Berman, Marcelo. 1999. Tax consultant to the Dgi. Author interview. Buenos Aires, August 12.Google Scholar
Cámara de Diputados de la Nación. 1991. Diario de Sesiones. February 14–15.Google Scholar
Cámara de Senadores de la Nación. 1991. Diario de Sesiones. February 16.Google Scholar
Cámara de Senadores de la Nación. 1992. April 1, 2.Google Scholar
Centeno, Miguel. 1994. Democracy Within Reason: Technocratic Revolution in Mexico. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 1996a. La nueva imagen de la Dgi apela al poder tecnológico. February 5: 15.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 1996b. Segun Cavallo, un ex-diputado habría robado su declaración de impuestos. February 20: 2–3.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 1996c. Proponen nombrar “sabuesos” privados para ayudar a la Dgi. June 19: 15.Google Scholar
Cleaves, Peter. 1974. Bureaucratic Politics and Administration in Chile. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berrins, and David, Collier. 1977. Inducements versus Constraints: Disaggregating Corporatism. American Political Science Review 73: 967–86.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary, and Mathew, McCubbins. 2001. The Institutional Determinants of Economic Policy Outcomes. In Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy, ed. Stephan, Haggard and McCubbins, . New York: Cambridge University Press. 21–63.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary, and Scott, Morgenstern. 2002. Epilogue: Latin America's Reactive Assemblies and Proactive Presidents. in Morgenstern and Nacif 2002. 446–68.Google Scholar
Crisp, Brian. 1998. Presidential Decree Authority in Venezuela. In Executive Decree Authority, ed. John, Carey and Mathew, Shugart. New York: Cambridge University Press. 142–71.Google Scholar
Cuello, Raúl. 1996a. Cinco años de convertibilidad. Unpublished mss.Google Scholar
Cuello, Raúl. 1996b. Former Secretary of Public Revenues and Director of the Dirección General Impositiva. Author interview. Buenos Aires, August 15.Google Scholar
Dirección General Impositiva (DGI). 1996. DGI: 1984–1995. Buenos Aires: DGI.Google Scholar
Eaton, Kent. 2000. Parliamentarism vs. Presidentialism in the Policy Arena. Comparative Politics 32: 355–75.Google Scholar
Feigenbaum, Harvey, Richard, Samuels, and Kent Weaver, R.. 1993. Innovation, Coordination, and Implementation in Energy Policy. In Do Institutions Matter? ed. Bert, Rockman and Weaver, . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 42–109.Google Scholar
Ferreira, Delia, and Matteo, Goretti. 1998. When the President Governs Alone. In Executive Decree Authority, ed. John, Carey and Matthew, Shugart. New York: Cambridge University Press. 33–61.Google Scholar
Fundación de Investigaciones Económicas Latinoamericanas. (FIEL). 1991. El sistema impositivo argentino. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Manantial.Google Scholar
Geddes, Barbara. 1994. Politicians' Dilemma: Building State Capacity in Latin America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
González, Darío. 1996. Head, Department of Legal Tax Advising, Dgi. Author interview. Buenos Aires, July 30.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan. 1990. Pathways from the Periphery. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan, and Robert, Kaufman, eds. 1992. The Politics of Economic Adjustment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Wendy. 1997. Eroding Military Influence in Brazil: Politicians Against Soldiers. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark. 1997. Evaluating Argentina's Presidential Democracy: 1983–1995. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Scott, Mainwaring and Matthew Soberg, Shugart. New York: Cambridge University Press. 259–99.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark. 2001. Political Institutions and Public Policy. In Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy, ed. Stephan, Haggard and Mathew, McCubbins. New York: Cambridge University Press. 149–82.Google Scholar
Lisicki, Elías. 1996. El miedo y los impuestos. La Nación (Buenos Aires), May 7.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and Mathew, McCubbins. 1994. Designing Bureaucratic Accountability. Journal of Law and Contemporary Problems 57: 91–110.Google Scholar
Malloy, James. 1977. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Manin, Bernard, Adam, Przeworski, and Susan, Stokes. 1999. Elections and Representation. In Democracy, Accountability and Representation, ed. Przeworksi, Manin, and Stokes, . New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew. 1985. The Legislative Design of Regulatory Structure. American Journal of Political Science 29: 721–48.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew, and Thomas, Schwartz. 1984. Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Policy Patrols versus Fire Alarms. American Journal of Political Science 28: 165–79.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew, Roger, Noll, and Barry, Weingast. 1987. Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3: 243–77.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry, and Michael, Caldwell. 1994. The Institutional Foundations of Democratic Government: a Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 150: 171–95.Google Scholar
Molinelli, N. Guillermo, Valeria Palanza, M., and Gisela, Sin. 1999. Congreso, presidencia y justicia en la argentina: materias para su studio. Buenos Aires: Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo Internacional.Google Scholar
Montoya, Santiago. 1996. Economic Ministry official. Author interview. Buenos Aires, March 26.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, Scott. 2002. Explaining Legislative Politics in Latin America. in Morgenstern and Nacif 2002. 413–45.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, Scott, and Benito, Nacif, eds. 2002. Legislative Politics in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Niskanen, William. 1975. Bureaucrats and Politicians. Journal of Law and Economics 18: 617–43.Google Scholar
Noll, Roger, and Frances, Rosenbluth. 1997. Telecommunications Policy: Structure, Process, Outcomes. In Structure and Policy in Japan and the United States, ed. Peter, Cowhey and Mathew, McCubbins. New York: Cambridge University Press. 119–76.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1973. Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism. Berkeley: Institute of International Studies.Google Scholar
República Argentina. 1996. DGI: 1984–1995. Buenos Aires: Dirección General Impositiva.Google Scholar
Rinne, Jeffrey. 2001. Redesigning the State in Latin America: Pundits, Policymakers, and Organized Labor in Argentina and Brazil. Ph.D. diss., Princeton University.Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 2002. Progressive Ambition, Federalism, and Pork-Barreling in Brazil. In Morgenstern and Nacif 2002. New York: Cambridge University Press. 315–40.Google Scholar
Santoro, Daniel. 1996. Los intocables. Buenos Aires: Planeta.Google Scholar
Schedler, Andreas, Larry, Diamond, and Marc, Plattner, eds. 1999. The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
Schick, Allen. 1976. Congress and the “Details” of Administration. Public Administration Review 36: 516.Google Scholar
Schneider, Ben Ross. 1991. Politics Within the State: Elite Bureaucrats and Industrial Policy in Authoritarian Brazil. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth, and Barry, Weingast. 1994. Positive Theories of Congressional Institutions. Legislative Studies Quarterly 19: 149–79.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and John, Carey. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Siavelis, Peter. 2000. Disconnected Fire Alarms and Ineffective Police Patrols: Legislative Oversight in Postauthoritarian Chile. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 42, 1 (Spring): 71–98.Google Scholar
Spiller, Pablo, and Santiago, Urbiztondo. 1994. Political Appointees vs. Career Civil Servants: a Multiple Principals Theory of Political Bureaucracies. European Journal of Political Economy 10: 465–97.Google Scholar
Sundquist, James L. 1981. The Decline and Resurgence of Congress. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Taachi, Carlos. 1995. Revolución tributaria en la Argentina. Boletin de la DGI 500 (August): 878–90.Google Scholar
Tommasi, Mariano, and Pablo, Spiller. 2000. Las fuentes institucionales del desarrollo argentino. Buenos Aires: Editorial Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Verbitsky, Horacio. 1993. Hacer la corte: la construcción de un poder absoluto sin justicia ni control. Buenos Aires: Planeta.Google Scholar
Vidal, Armando. 1995. El congreso en la trampa: entretelones y escàndolos de la vida parlamentaria. Buenos Aires: Planeta.Google Scholar
Vogel, David. 1986. National Styles of Regulation. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry, and Mark, Moran. 1983. Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Political Economy 91: 765–800.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry, and William, Marshall. 1988. The Industrial Organization of Congress; or, Why Legislatures, like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets. Journal of Political Economy 96: 132–63.Google Scholar
World Bank. 1990. Argentina: Tax Policy for Stabilization and Economic Recovery. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
World Bank. 1993. Argentina: From Insolvency to Growth. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar