Congressional modification of benefit-cost analysis as a vehicle for particularized benefits and a limitation on agency discretion: the case of the federal contract tower program

References

Aberbach, J. D. (1990). Keeping a watchful eye: The politics of congressional oversight. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Suche in Google Scholar

Alston, L. (2005). The case for case studies in political economy. The Political Economist. APSA Newsletter.Suche in Google Scholar

Arnold, D. (1979). Congress and the bureaucracy: A theory of influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Bertelli, A., & Grose, C. (2009). Secretaries of pork? a new theory of distributive public policy. The Journal of Politics, 71(3), 926–945.10.1017/S002238160909080XSuche in Google Scholar

Bickers, K. N., & Stein, R. M. (1994a). Universalism and the electoral connection: A test and some doubts. Political Research Quarterly, 47, 295.10.2307/449011Suche in Google Scholar

Bickers, K. N., & Stein, R. M. (1996). The electoral dynamics of the federal pork barrel. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1300–1326.10.2307/2111752Suche in Google Scholar

Carpenter, D., & Krause, G. (2011). Reputation and public administration. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 26–32.10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02506.xSuche in Google Scholar

Copp, D. (1987). The justice and rationale of cost-benefit analysis. Theory and Decision, 23, 65–87.10.1007/BF00127337Suche in Google Scholar

Cunningham, L., & Eckard, E. W. (1987). US small community air service subsidies: Essential or superfluous?. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 21(3), 255–277.Suche in Google Scholar

DelRossi, A., & Inman, R. (1999). Changing the price of pork: The impact of local cost sharing on legislators’ demands for distributive public goods. Journal of Public Economics, 71, 247–273.10.1016/S0047-2727(98)00071-1Suche in Google Scholar

Ellig, J., McLaughlin, P. A., & Morrall III, J. F. (2012). Continuity, change, and priorities: The quality and use of regulatory analysis across US administrations. Regulation and Govermance, 7(2), 153–173.10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01149.xSuche in Google Scholar

Epstein, D., & O’Halloran, S. (1999). Delegating powers: A transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511609312Suche in Google Scholar

Fiorina, M. (1989). Congress: The keystone of the washington establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Flyvbjerg, B. (2009). Survival of the unfittest: Why the worst infrastructure gets built-and what we can do about it. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25 (3), 344–367.10.1093/oxrep/grp024Suche in Google Scholar

Huber, J. D., & Shipan, C. R. (2002). Deliberate discretion: The institutional foundations of bureaucratic autonomy. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804915Suche in Google Scholar

Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In M. Martin & L. C. McIntyre (Eds.), Readings in the philosophy of social science (pp. 213–231). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. London: Sage Publications.10.4135/9781849208574Suche in Google Scholar

Goldberg, M. (1998). Discount rates for government investment projects: The economic logic of OMB circular A-94. The Engineering Economist, 43(4), 290–307.10.1080/00137919808903201Suche in Google Scholar

Heinzerling, L. (1998). Regulatory costs of mythic proportions, 107 Yale Law Journal.10.2307/797416Suche in Google Scholar

Jensen, J., & Rodgers, R. (2001). Cumulating the intellectual gold of case study research. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 235–246.10.1111/0033-3352.00025Suche in Google Scholar

Johnson, B. (1989). OMB budget examiner and the congressional budget process. Public Budgeting and Finance, 9(1), 5–14.10.1111/1540-5850.00805Suche in Google Scholar

Kelman, S. (1981). Regulating america, regulating sweden: A comparative study of occupational safety and health policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kerwin, C., & Furlong, S. (2011). Rulemaking: How government agencies write law and make policy. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kiewiet, D. R., & McCubbins, M. D. (1991). The logic of delegation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kochtcheeva, L. V. (2009). Administrative discretion and environmental regulation: Agency substantive rules and court decisions in US air and water quality policies. Review of Policy Research, 26(3), 241–265.10.1111/j.1541-1338.2009.00381.xSuche in Google Scholar

Krause, G. (2010). Legislative delegation of authority to bureaucratic agencies. In R. F. Durant (Ed.), The oxford handbook of american bureaucracy. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199238958.003.0022Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, S., & Weisbrod, G. (2009). Practices for Preparing Airport Improvement Program 4 Benefit-Cost Analyses, ACRP Synthesis of Airport Practice, S03-05, Airport Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board.Suche in Google Scholar

Lee, D. B. (2005). Methods for evaluation of transportation projects in the USA. Transport Policy, 7, 41–50.10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00011-1Suche in Google Scholar

Lowi, T. (1964). American business, public policy, case studies, and political theory. World Politics, 16(4), 677–715.10.2307/2009452Suche in Google Scholar

MacDonald, J. A. (2010). Limitation riders and congressional influence over bureaucratic policy decisions. American Political Science Review, 104 (November), 766–782.10.1017/S0003055410000432Suche in Google Scholar

Mayhew, D. (1974). Congress: the electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

McCubbins, M. (1999). Abdication or Delegation? congress, the bureaucracy, and the delegation dilemma. Regulation, 22(2), 30–37.Suche in Google Scholar

McCubbins, M., & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols vs. fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 21(1), 165–179.10.2307/2110792Suche in Google Scholar

McCubbins, M., Noll, R., & Weingast, B. (1987). Administrative procedures as instruments of political control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 3, 243–277.Suche in Google Scholar

McGarity, T. O. (1991). reinventing regulation: The role of regulatory analysis in the federal bureaucracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.10.1017/CBO9780511528279Suche in Google Scholar

Moe, T. (1989). The politics of bureaucratic structure. In J. E. Chubb & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), Can the Government Govern? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Suche in Google Scholar

National Air Traffic Controllers Association vs. U.S. Department of Transportation, Jane Garvey. 2011. United States Court of Appeals, 6^th Circuit. 16 August.Suche in Google Scholar

Porter, T. (1996). The rise of cost-benefit rationality as solution to a political problem of distrust. presented at the Benefit-Cost Analysis Conference May 18.Suche in Google Scholar

Posner, E. A. (2001). Controlling agencies with cost-benefit analysis: A positive political theory perspective. University of Chicago Law Review, 68, 1–51.10.2307/1600478Suche in Google Scholar

Pryor, S. M. (2011). Press release. Retrieved from: http://www.pryor.senate.gov/public/index.cfmSuche in Google Scholar

Revesz, R., & Livermore, M.A. (2008). Retaking Rationality: How cost-benefit analysis can better protect the environment and our health. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Sen, A. K. (2000). The discipline of cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Legal Studies, 29(S2), 931–952.10.1086/468100Suche in Google Scholar

Shapiro, S., & Morrall III, J. F. (2012). The triumph of regulatory politics. Benefit-cost analysis and political salience. Regulation and Governance, 6(2), 189–206.Suche in Google Scholar

Shepsle, K., & Weingast B. R. (1981). Political preferences for the pork barrel: A generalization. Journal of Political Science, 25(1), 96–111.10.2307/2110914Suche in Google Scholar

Sunstein, C. (2011). Empirically formed regulation. University of Chicago Law Review,78(4), 1349–1429.Suche in Google Scholar

Tomkin, S. L. (1998). Inside OMB: Politics and process in the president’s budget office. M.E. sharpe.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 2012. A Review of the FAA’s Contract Tower Program. 112th Congress. 2nd Session. 18 July.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Congress. House of Representatives. Appropriations Committee. 2013. Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill Conference Report.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Congressional Research Service. Federal Rulemaking: The Role of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. 7–5700. June 9, 2009.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Congressional Research Service. Proposed Cuts to Air Traffic Control Towers Under Budget Sequestration: Background and Considerations for Congress. R43021. 2013.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 1997. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 1999. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 2000. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 2003. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 2007. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 2009. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Contract Tower Association. Annual report 2011. Retrieved from http://www.contracttower.org/annual.html.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Department of transportation. Memorandum: FAA’s Contract Tower Program. 1986.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Department of Transportation. Economic Analysis Primer:Annual report 2003. Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/primer00.cfm.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Department of Transportation Inspector General. Contract Towers: Observations on FAA’s Study of Expanding the Program. Report No. AV-2000-079. April 11, 2000.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Department of Transportation Inspector General. Federal Contract Tower Program. Report No. AV-1998-147. May 18, 1998.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Federal Aviation Administration. Benefit-Cost Method for Selecting and Ranking Airport Traffic Control Tower Candidates. FAA Order ASP-75-4. 1975.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Federal Aviation Administration. Establishment and Discontinuance Criteria for Airport Traffic Control Towers. FAA Report APO-83-2, August 1983.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Federal Aviation Administration. Establishment and Discontinuance Criteria for Airport Traffic Control Towers. FAA Report APO-90-7, August 1990.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Federal Aviation Administration. Memorandum: FAA Contract Tower Benefit-Cost Analysis. April 23, 1992.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Federal Contract Tower Program Stakeholder Briefing. May 18, 2012.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Government Accountability Office. Status of FAA’s Plans to Close and Contract Our Low-Activity Towers. GAO 94-265. September 12, 1994.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Government Accountability Office. Highlights of an Expert Panel: The Benefits and Costs of Highway and Transit Investments. GAO 05-423SP. May 2005.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Office of Management and Budget. Regulatory analysis. Circular A-4. 2003.Suche in Google Scholar

United States Office of Management and Budget. Guidelines and discount rates for benefit-cost analysis of federal programs circular A-94. 1992.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Wee, B. (2012). How suitable is cba for the ex-ante evaluation of transport projects and policies? A discussion from the perspective of ethics. Transport Policy, 19, 1–7.10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.07.001Suche in Google Scholar

Weidenbaum, M. (1997). Regulatory process reform from ford to clinton. Regulation, 20(1), 1–12.Suche in Google Scholar

Yackee, J. W., & Yackee S. W. (2010). Administrative procedures and bureaucratic performance: Is federal rule-making ossified? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 261–282.10.1093/jopart/mup011Suche in Google Scholar

Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage: London.Suche in Google Scholar

Zerbe, R. (2007). An ethical benefit-cost analysis. Working Paper. Northwestern University School of Law.Suche in Google Scholar