Article

Executive-Legislative Conflict and Regulation Outcomes: The Case of the U.S. FCC

Jongkon Lee 1
Author Information & Copyright
1Jongkon Lee is an assistant professor of political science and international relations at the Ewha Womans University in South Korea. E-mail: jongkonlee@ewha.ac.kr. This work was supported by an Ewha Womans University 2014 research grant.

© Copyright 2016 Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Sep 21, 2016; Revised: Oct 13, 2016; Revised: Dec 07, 2016; Accepted: Dec 10, 2016

Published Online: Dec 31, 2016

Abstract

In the context of regulatory decisions, the political conflict between executive and legislative branches has been significant. The relative ideological stances and power resources of federal agencies and Congress determines regulation outcomes. In particular, when agencies earn sufficient political support from policy stakeholders by relying on procedural justice, they are able to secure the regulatory outcomes they desire without congressional intervention. Because legislators are highly concerned about their reelection prospects, policy stakeholders’ political support is an important power resource for agencies. Legislators are likely to embrace regulatory decisions made by agencies supported by policy stakeholders even if they disregard congressional preferences. This article provides evidence for this proposition by reviewing media concentration regulation policies of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.

Keywords: executive-legislative conflict; policy stakeholder support; procedural justice; media concentration regulation; U.S. Federal Communications Commission