Skip to main content
Log in

The political economy of deregulation: The case of intrastate long distance

  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Observed variation in the decisions of state regulators to deregulate AT&T in the provision of intrastate interLATA telecommunications services provides useful data with which to test the economic theory of regulation against its principal alternative—the public interest theory. An empirical model of the decision to deregulate is specified and estimated. Our results lend empirical support to the economic theory of regulation and fail to support the public interest theory. The results also help to explain the lethargic pace of deregulation of this industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Crandall, Robert W. 1988. “Surprises from Telephone Deregulation and the Divestiture.”American Economic Review (May): 323–327.

  • Crew, Michael, and Charles K. Rowley. 1988. “Toward a Public Choice Theory of Monopoly Regulation.”Public Choice 57:49–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, Ross D.1981. “The Life Cycle of Regulatory Commissioners.”Journal of Law and Economics (April): 113–120.

  • Evans, Lewis, and Steven Garber. 1988. “Public-Utility Regulators are Only Human: A Positive Theory of Rational Constraints.”American Economic Review (June): 444–462.

  • Evans, Lewis, and Steven Garber. 1989. “The Rational Regulator's Pricing Response to Enhanced Opportunities to “Bypass” the Public Switched Network.”Journal of Regulatory Economics (September): 271–292.

  • Frentrup, C. 1988. “The Effect of Competition and Regulation on AT&T's Intrastate Toll Prices.” Federal Communications Commission: Common Carrier Bureau, June.

  • Greene, William H. 1990.Econometric Analysis. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haring, John, and H. M. Shooshan, III. 1991.Competition and Consumer Welfare in Long-Distance Telecommunications. National Economic Regulatory Associates, Inc.

  • Hauser, John R. 1978. “Testing the Accuracy, Usefulness and Significance of Probabilistic Choice Models: An Information Theoretic Approach.”Operations Research (4): 406–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Im, Bae G., David L. Kaserman, and Francois Melese. 1989. “Endogenous Regulation and the Firm's Regulatory Expenses.”Applied Economics (21): 375–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, Alfred E. 1988. “Surprises of Airline Deregulation.”American Economic Review (78): 316–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, Alfred E. 1984. “The Road to More Intelligent Telephone Pricing.”Yale Journal on Regulation (2): 139–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaserman, David L., and John W. Mayo. 1988a. “Long Distance Telecommunications Policy: Rationality on Hold.”Public Utilities Fortnightly (122): 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaserman, David L., and John W. Mayo. 1988b. “The Economics of Regulation: Theory and Policy in the Post-Divestiture Telecommunications Industry.” InPublic Policy Toward Corporations, edited by Arnold A. Heggestad. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaserman, David L., and John W. Mayo. 1990. “Deregulation and Market Power Criteria: An Evaluation of State Level Telecommunications Policy.” InTelecommunications Deregulation: Market Power and Cost Allocation Issues, edited by John R. Allison and Dennis L. Thomas. New York: Quorum Books, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaserman, David L., John W. Mayo, and Joseph E. Flynn. 1990. “Cross-Subsidization in Telecommunications: Beyond the Universal Service Fairy Tale.”Journal of Regulatory Economics (2): 231–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, Michael L., and Robert D. Willig. 1983. “The Case for Freeing AT&T. ”Regulation (July/August): 43–49.

  • Laffont, Jean-Jacques, and Jean Tirole. 1991. “The Politics of Government Decision-Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture.”Quarterly Journal of Economics (November): 1089–1127.

  • Landes, William M., and Richard A. Posner. 1981. “Market Power in Antitrust Cases.”Harvard Law Review (94): 937–996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddala, G. S. 1983.Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, Daniel. 1974. “Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior.” InFrontiers in Econometrics, edited by P. Zarembka. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. 1987.1986 Annual Report Utility and Carrier Regulation, November.

  • Peltzman, Sam. 1976. “Toward a More General Theory of Regulation.”Journal of Law and Economics (19): 211–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, Richard A. 1974. “Theories of Economic Regulation.”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, (4): 335–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saving, Thomas R. 1970. “Concentration Ratios and the Degree of Monopoly.”International Economic Review (11): 139–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiller, Pablo. 1990.“Politicians, Interest Groups, and Regulators: A Multiple Principals Agency Theory of Regulation, or ‘Let Them be Bribed.’”Journal of Law and Economics (33): 65–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, George S. 1971. “The Theory of Economic Regulation.”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science (2): 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temin, Peter. 1987.The Fall of the Bell System. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temin, Peter. 1990. “Cross Subsidies in the Telephone Network after Divestiture.”Journal of Regulatory Economics (2): 349–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Congressional Budget Office. 1984.Local Telephone Rates: Issues and Alternatives. Washington: Staff Working Paper, January.

  • Weingast, Barry R., and Mark J. Moran. 1983. “Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policy Making by the Federal Trade Commission.”Journal of Political Economy, (91): 765–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingast, Barry R. 1984. “The Congressional-Bureaucratic System: A Principal-Agent Perspective.”Public Choice (44): 147–192.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaserman, D.L., Mayo, J.W. & Pacey, P.L. The political economy of deregulation: The case of intrastate long distance. J Regul Econ 5, 49–63 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066313

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01066313

Keywords

Navigation