The Industrial Organization of Congress; or, Why Legislatures, Like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets
Abstract
This paper provides a theory of legislative institutions that parallels the theory of the firm and the theory of contractual institutions. Like market institutions, legislative institutions reflect two key components: the goals or preferences of individuals (here, representatives seeking reelection) and the relevant transactions costs. We present three conclusions. First, we show how the legislative institutions enforce bargains among legislators. Second, we explain why, given the peculiar form of bargaining problems found in legislatures, specific forms of nonmarket exchange prove superior to market exchange. Third, our approach shows how the committee system limits the types of coalitions that may form on a particular issue.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Functionalist arguments are prevalent among political scientists, including among those who emphasize the rational choices of individual actors underlying political activity and the reasonably efficient nature of collective responses to social needs.
“Although not always explicitly stated, functionalist arguments are prevalent among political scientists.They are common, for instance, among those who emphasize the rational choices of individual actors that underlie political activity, and the reasonably efficient nature of collective responses to social needs (Keohane 1984;Shepsle 1986;Weingast and Marshall 1988).”
From Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics (2000) · cites this paper as Weingast and Marshall 1988
Cites
Coase, R. H. (1937) · Economica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x · Cited by 23,972 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics
Pierson, P. (2000) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2586011 · Cited by 8,094 · see citing works
The Tinpot and the Totalitarian: An Economic Theory of Dictatorship
Wintrobe, R. (1990) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1962769 · Cited by 430 · see citing works
Measuring the complexity of the law: the United States Code
Katz, D. M., & Bommarito, M. J. (2014) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/s10506-014-9160-8 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Ecosystem Graphs: The Social Footprint of Foundation Models
Bommasani, R., Soylu, D., Liao, T., Creel, K., & Liang, P. (2023) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2961271/v1 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
EL COSTO DE COORDINAR: NÚMERO DE CANDIDATOS PRESIDENCIALES EN AMÉRICA LATINA 1993-2010
LUJÁN, D. (2017) · Revista de ciencia política (Santiago) · doi:10.4067/s0718-090x2017000100002 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Weingast, B. R., & Marshall, W. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Political Economy
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1988-02
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 132-163
- ISSN
- 0022-3808 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-534X
- OpenAlex
- W1981719767
- Cited by
- 1,527
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 41 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 68
- FWCI
- 63.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Political Economy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Theory and Institutions
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Legal and Constitutional Studies
- Keywords
- legislatures, theory of the firm, transaction costs, market exchange, committee system, coalition formation, reelection incentives, legislative organization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review