Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T06:53:40.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Friends in High Places: Congressional Influence on the Bureaucracy in Chile

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Agustín Ferraro
Agustín Ferraro*
Affiliation:
University of Salamanca. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chile presents a paradox for legislative studies. In most comparative research on the political power of presidents and assemblies in Latin America, the Chilean presidency is considered one of the most powerful in the region. The country's congress is seen, accordingly, as weak and lacking influence over public policy. Such evaluations, however, tend to be based on constitutional and legal faculties (that is, formal powers), and they overlook the substantial influence exerted by the Chilean Congress through informal political channels. This article analyzes literature on informal politics that shows the substantial influence of Chile's Congress on public policy; and, for comparison, presents an empirical study that adds several details to current accounts of congressional influence on the bureaucracy in Chile and describes two mechanisms of congressional influence not contemplated by recent research.

Type
Research
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , Summer 2008 , pp. 101 - 129
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2008

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

Aberbach, Joel 1990. Keeping a Watchful Eye. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Aberbach, Joel, Putnam, Robert, and Rockman, Bert 1981. Bureaucrats and Politicians in Western Democracies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Agor, Weston 1971. The Chilean Senate: Internal Distribution of Influence. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Altman, David 2004. Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Chile (1990–2003): the Executive Branch. Paper presented at the conference “Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Democracy in Latin America,” Wake Forest University, April 2–4.Google Scholar
Angell, Alan 2005. Democratic Governability in Chile. Paper presented at the conference “Democratic Governability in Latin America,” University of Notre Dame, October 7–8.Google Scholar
Angell, Alan 2007. Democracy After Pinochet: Politics, Parties and Elections in Chile. London: Institute for the Study of the Americas.Google Scholar
Baldez, Lisa, and Carey, John 2002. Budget Procedure and Fiscal Restraint in Posttransition Chile. In Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy, ed. Haggard, Stephan and McCubbins, Matthew New York: Cambridge University Press. 105–48.Google Scholar
Carey, John 2000. Review of the President and Congress in Postauthoritarian Chile by Peter Siavelis. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 42, 4 (Winter): 136–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John 2002. Parties, Coalitions, and the Chilean Congress in the 1990s. In Legislative Politics in Latin America, ed. Morgenstern, Scott and Nacif, Benito Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 222–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgie, Robert 2005. From Linz to Tsebelis: Three Waves of Presidential/Parliamentary Studies? Democratization 12, 1: 106–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Peter, and Rauch, James 1999. Bureaucracy and Growth: a Cross-National Analysis of the Effects of “Weberian” State Structures on Economic Growth. American Sociological Review 64, 5: 748–65.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris 1981. Congressional Control of the Bureaucracy: A Mismatch of Incentives and Capabilities. In Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed., ed. Dodd, Lawrence and Oppenheimer, Bruce Washington, DC : Congressional Quarterly Press. 332–48.Google Scholar
Gil, Federico 1966. The Political System of Chile. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Goetz, Klaus 1997. Acquiring Political Craft: Training Grounds for Top Officials in the German Core Executive. Public Administration 75 (Winter): 753–75.Google Scholar
Hanke, Christian 1994. Informale Regeln als Substrat des parlamentarischen Verhandlungssystems. Zeitschriftfür Parlamentsfragen 25, 3: 329–46.Google Scholar
Heclo, Hugh 1977. A Government of Strangers: Executive Politics in Washington. Washington, DC : Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Heinrich, Gudrun 1999. Der kleine Koalitionspartner in den Ländern. In Hinter den Kulissen von Regierungsbündnissen, ed. Sturm, Roland and Kropp, Sabine Baden-Baden: Nomos. 120–45.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen, and Levitsky, Steven 2004. Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: a Research Agenda. Perspectives on Politics 2, 4: 725–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen, and Levitsky, Steven 2006a. Introduction. In Helmke and Levitsky 2006b. 1–30.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen, and Levitsky, Steven, eds. 2006b. Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Huber, George, and Van De Ven, Andrew, eds. 1995. Longitudinal Field Research Methods: Studying Processes of Organizational Change. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Huneeus, Carlos, and Berrios, Fabiola 2004. El Congreso Nacional chileno. Manuscript. <http://www.cerc.cl/Publicaciones/El%20Congreso%20Nacional%20chileno.pdf> Accessed April 1, 2007.+Accessed+April+1,+2007.>Google Scholar
Kaufman, Herbert 1981. The Administrative Behavior of Federal Bureau Chiefs. Washington, DC : Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Kumar, Nirmalaya, Stern, Louis, and Anderson, James 1993. Conducting Interorganizational Research Using Key Informants. Academy of Management Journal 36, 6: 1633–51.Google Scholar
Landsberger, Henry, and McDaniel, Tim 1976. Hypermobilization in Chile, 1970–1973. World Politics 28, 4: 502–41.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, and Shepsle, Kenneth 1990. Coalitions and Cabinet Government. American Political Science Review 84, 3: 873–90.Google Scholar
Londregan, John 2000. Legislative Institutions and Ideology in Chile. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Matthew, Noll, Roger, and Weingast, Barry 1987. Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3, 2: 243–77.Google Scholar
McNabb, David 2002. Research Methods in Public Administration and Nonprofit Management: Quantitative and Qualitative. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Lee 2000. Measuring Presidential Power. Comparative Political Studies 33, 5: 661–85.Google Scholar
Montecinos, Veronica 2003. Economic Policy Making and Parliamentary Accountability in Chile. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). <http://www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/document.nsf/d2a23ad2d50cb2a280256eb300385855/afa3585f2764bf98c1256f010023b686/$FILE/montecin.pdf> Accessed April 1, 2007.Google Scholar
Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand, ed. 1989. New Politics in Western Europe. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Nef, Jorge, and Galleguillos, Nibaldo 1995. Legislatures and Democratic Transitions in Latin America: The Chilean Case. In Legislatures and the New Democracies in Latin America, ed. Close, David Boulder: Lynne Rienner. 113–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolte, Detlef 2003. El congreso chileno y su aporte a la consolidación democrática en perspectiva comparada. Revista de Ciencia Política 23 (2): 43–67.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1996. Another Institutionalization: Latin America and Elsewhere. Kellogg Institute Working Paper 222. Notre Dame: Kellogg Institute.Google Scholar
Partido por la Democracia (PPD) 2006. Nuestra historia. <http://www.ppd.cl/nues-tra.html#5> Accessed April 1, 2006.+Accessed+April+1,+2006.>Google Scholar
Pintor, Rafael 1972. Development Administration in Chile: Structural, Normative, and Behavioral Constraints to Performance. Ph.D. diss., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Poguntke, Thomas 1987. New Politics and Party Systems: the Emergence of a New Type of Party? West European Politics 10, 1: 76–88.Google Scholar
Poguntke, Thomas 1993. Der Stand der Forschung zu den Grünen. Zwischen Ideologie und Empirie. In Stand und Perspektiven der Parteienforschung in Deutschland, ed. Niedermayer, Oskar and Stöss, Richard Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. 187–210.Google Scholar
Rehren, Alfredo 1992. Liderazgo presidencial y democratización en el Cono Sur de América Latina. Revista de Ciencia Política 14, 1: 63–87.Google Scholar
Rosenbloom, David 2000. Building a Legislative-Centered Public Administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, David, and Shugart, Matthew 2003. Presidentialism, Elections and Representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics 15, 1: 33–60.Google Scholar
Schulze-Fielitz, Helmuth 1984. Der informale Verfassungsstaat. Aktuelle Beobachtungen des Verfassungslebens der Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Lichte der Verfassungstheorie. Berlin: Duncker & Humbolt.Google Scholar
Schwarzmeier, Manfred 2001. Parlamentarische Mitsteuerung. Strukturen und Prozesse informalen Einflusses im Deutschen Bundestag. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and Carey, John 1992. Presidents and Assemblies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and Mainwaring, Scott 1997. Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Debate. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, and Shugart, New York: Cambridge University Press. 12–54.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and Haggard, Stephan 2001. Institutions and Public Policy in Presidential Systems. In Presidents, Parliaments and Policy, ed. Haggard, and McCubbins, Mathew D. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 64–104.Google Scholar
Siavelis, Peter 1997. Executive-Legislative Relations in Post-Pinochet Chile: A Preliminary Assessment. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, Scott and Shugart, Matthew S. New York: Cambridge University Press. 321–62.Google Scholar
Siavelis, Peter 2000a. The President and Congress in Post-Authoritarian Chile: Institutional Constraints to Democratic Consolidation. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Siavelis, Peter 2000b. 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
Siavelis, Peter 2002. Exaggerated Presidentialism and Moderate Presidents: Executive/Legislative Relations in Chile. In Legislative Politics in Latin America, ed. Morgenstern, Scott and Nacif, Benito Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 79–113.Google Scholar
Siavelis, Peter 2006. Accommodating Informal Institutions and Chilean Democracy. In Helmke and Levitsky 2006b. 33–55.Google Scholar
Tapia-Videla, Jorge 1977. The Chilean Presidency in a Developmental Perspective. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 19, 4 (Winter): 451–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, Marc-Adelard. 1957. The Key Informant Technique: a Nonethnographic Application. American Anthropologist 59, 4: 688–701.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George, and Alemán, Eduardo 2005. Presidential Conditional Agenda Setting in Latin America. World Politics 57 (April): 396–420.Google Scholar
Valdés, Santiago. 2003. Reforma del estado: ¿qué hacer ahora? Puntos de Referencia 271: 1–11.<http://www.cepchile.cl/dms/archivo_3221_1566/pder271_valdes.pdf> Accessed June 27, 2006.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Arturo 1977. Political Brokers in Chile. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Arturo 1984. Parties, Politics, and the State in Chile: The Higher Civil Service. In Bureaucrats and Policy Making: A Comparative Overview, ed. Suleiman, Ezra N. New York: Holmes and Meier. 242–79.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Arturo, and Wilde, Alexander 1979. Presidential Politics and the Decline of the Chilean Congress. In Legislatures in Development: Dynamics of Change in New and Old States, ed. Smith, Joel and Musolf, Lloyd Durham : Duke University Press. 189–215.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Arturo, and Dammert, Lucia 2006. Problems of Success in Chile. Journal of Democracy 17, 4: 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, Barry 1981. Regulation, Reregulation, and Deregulation: the Political Foundations of Agency Clientele Relations. Law and Contemporary Problems 44, 1: 147–77.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry, and Moran, Mark 1982. The Myth of the Runaway Bureaucracy: the Case of the Ftc. Regulation 6, 3: 33–38.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt 2002. Limitations of Rational-Choice Institutionalism for the Study of Latin American Politics. Studies in Comparative International Development 37, 1: 57–85.Google Scholar
Willoughby, William F. 1913. The Correlation of the Organization of Congress with That of the Executive. Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 10: 155–67.Google Scholar
Willoughby, William F. 1934. Principles of Legislative Organization and Administration. Washington, DC : Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Yeager, Samuel 2006. Classic Methods in Public Administration Research. In Handbook of Public Administration, 3rd ed., ed. Rabin, Jack, Bartley Hil-dreth, W., and Miller, Gerald J. New York: Marcel Dekker. 851–980.Google Scholar