Until the 1970s, legislative oversight of the bureaucracy occurred on an irregular basis. The bureaucracy did not come under intense scrutiny unless something went noticeably wrong. One well-known analysis of legislative oversight compares two approaches to oversight, referred to as "police patrols" versus "fire alarms." [4] In essence, the article argues that legislators (members of Congress, in the article) are too busy to be constantly patrolling the bureaucracy like a police unit. To address this weakness in the oversight system, legislators set up mechanisms by which constituents of the bureaucracy may sound fire alarms when things go wrong.
Alarms are sounded, for instance, when new textbooks fail to appear in classrooms, or when regulatory agencies seem too zealous for the businesses they regulate. As the textbooks age, parents, teachers, and publishers complain about outdated learning materials. When businesses receive lots of stiff fines from a state agency, owners can be expected to sound the alarm with their legislators and in the press.
While this approach to oversight was all quite economical and at least somewhat effective, legislators and reformers sought a more systematic approach that was less dependent on the irregular sounding of fire alarms. Such efforts gained momentum in the wake of scandals in the 1970s on both the national and state levels (Watergate and the Sharpstown scandal, respectively). These efforts were also informed by a growing awareness that government had expanded at both levels (though certainly more at the national level than in Texas). A new tool was developed that more formally institutionalized legislative "police patrols." Sunset review provisions in the authorizing legislation for a particular agency or program require the automatic termination of agencies and programs after a specific date unless reauthorized. Nowadays, a large majority of states have some sort of sunset review process.
The sunset review process in Texas, established by the Sunset Act of 1977, is considered one of the most extensive within the United States. According to the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission:
Sunset is the regular assessment of the need for a state agency to exist. While standard legislative oversight is concerned with agency compliance with legislative policies, Sunset asks a more basic question: Do the agency's functions continue to be needed?
The sunset process is directed by a ten-member body appointed by the Lieutenant Governor and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Assisting the Commission is a staff whose reports provide an assessment of an agency's programs, giving the legislature information needed to draw conclusions about program necessity and workability.
The Sunset Advisory Commission has a busy schedule. It is responsible for the regular review of approximately 150 departments, agencies, boards, and commissions in the state government of Texas. During the 80th legislative session alone, it reviewed and made recommendations to the legislature on twenty such organizations, and in the 81st legislative session it will do the same for 27 state government organizations.
The sunset review process in Texas is considered effective, a result of several factors, including strong legislative support and the fact that all state agencies are subject to this type of review. The 80th Legislature (2006-2007) adopted the majority of changes recommended by the Sunset Advisory Commission. Representatives passed legislation that affected 19 state agencies and boards, resulting in approximately $56 million in projected savings and revenue gains over the subsequent two years. [5]
--------------
4 Mathew D. McCubbins and Thomas Schwartz, "Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms," American Journal of Political Science 28 (1984): 165-179.
5 Sunset Advisory Commission, link: "http://www.sunset.state.tx.us/80.htm"
