More on the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter: Response to Moser
- 1 December 1996
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Political Science Review
- Vol. 90 (4) , 839-844
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2945847
Abstract
Moser analyzes the cooperation procedure using a model that assumes (1) one dimension and (2) complete information. I show that because of these two restrictive assumptions and his misunderstanding of the strategic implications of Article 189a(1) of the Maastricht Treaty (an article also present in the Single European Act and the Treaty of Rome), Moser's conclusions are mistaken. In particular, his predicted outcomes are incorrect, and his major institutional prediction (that the European Parliament plays no role in decision making except in the second round of the cooperation procedure) is contradicted by thousands of parliamentary amendments, the major part of which are accepted in the first round.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- The European ParliamentPublished by Taylor & Francis ,2019
- Legislative Procedures in the European CommunityBritish Journal of Political Science, 1996
- An institutional critique of intergovernmentalismInternational Organization, 1996
- Conditional agenda‐setting and decision‐makinginsidethe European parliamentThe Journal of Legislative Studies, 1995
- The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda SetterAmerican Political Science Review, 1994
- ‘Predestined to save the earth’: The environment committee of the European parliamentEnvironmental Politics, 1992
- A Course in Microeconomic TheoryPublished by Walter de Gruyter GmbH ,1990
- Bargaining in LegislaturesAmerican Political Science Review, 1989
- Sequential EquilibriaEconometrica, 1982
- Reexamination of the perfectness concept for equilibrium points in extensive gamesInternational Journal of Game Theory, 1975