Discretion And Bureaucracy: Unintended Consequences

Words: 468
Pages: 2

According to Huber and Shipan, ex ante oversight is used by the legislature to anticipate an action or sets of actions as a result of the potential implications of the enforcement of a law. Ex post oversight is used by the legislature after an action or sets of actions have occurred as a result of a conflict between the legislature and bureaucracy. These two are important because it illustrates the decision making process of the legislature at a certain period of time and whether their actions constrain or increase discretion to the bureaucracy. In other words, whether the legislature or divided may influence compliance or noncompliance by the bureaucracy. In addition, it may also influence the way legislation is drafted in terms of imposing …show more content…
In this case, providing too much discretion to the bureaucracy may have unintended consequences with the legislature being helpless to conduct appropriate oversight due to the lack of knowledge to confirm if the desired policy outcome is being implemented. This is also true in the oppose sense. If the legislature does not fully comprehend the technicalities of a certain policy area, they may affect the bureaucracy’s ability to enforce the law appropriately due to unintended discretion limits imposed by the legislature. Huber and Shipan also argue that the bureaucracy is rational and therefore will strategically choose whether to comply with legislative constraints. For example, if the legislature imposes constraints that fall inside the bureaucracy‘s ideal point, then they will be compliant. Furthermore, Huber and Shipan argue that bureaucrats should rarely be punished because either (1) they are rational actors or their discretion includes their ideal point or (2) the legislature have mistakenly imposed a strict limit on their discretion which may affect their ability to enforce the law