Agency Responsiveness To The Legislative Oversight Of Admin

Students of public administration have long maintained that, for bureaucratic power to be in balance with constitutional democracy, it must be exercised by a responsible bureaucracy. Legislative oversight is one way by which to secure the responsible exercise of this power. The issue of agency responsiveness to legislative oversight is explored by presenting a case study of bureacratic responsiveness to a highly specialized and routine approach to oversight found in state legislatures - the legislative review of administrative rule making or "rules review." Agency responsiveness to the rules-review process in the Illinois General Assembly is analyzed. Five factors that appear to explain agency responsiveness are: 1. the lack of relevance that oversight may have for many legislators, 2. the availability of sanctions that can be applied against nonresponsive agencies, 3. the working relationship between an oversight committee and the agencies, 4. the agency costs associated with responsiveness, and 5. the oversight committee's faithfulness to the legislature's original intent.