part j got cut off here is rest of question : "...keep the court from striking down its policy in the first place? Will this be the final policy outcome? Explain your answers."

Now imagine that we add a fourth actor. a court. Assume that the court has the ability to review Agency actions and can strike them down if it wants to. If this happens, policy reverts to some status quo policy that we will label SQ. Ferejohn and Shipan (199)) refer to this as the "Statutory Review Model". After the court has decided whether to strike down the Agency's policy, the Committee can choose to initiate new legislation if it wants to. If it does so, legislation is sent to the floor of the Legislature where it can be amended freely as in the Agency Policy-Making Model that we just examined. In Figure 4 we show the status quo reversion point (SQ) and the ideal points of the median member of the legislature (L), the median member of the legislative committee (LC), the regulatory agency (A), and the median judge on the court (C). e) Imagine for some reason that the Court decides to strike down the Agency's policy (wherever it might be). If this happens, policy will revert to the status quo point shown in Figure 4. How do you think the Legislative Committee would react? Will it initiate legislation to change the status quo policy? If the Legislative Committee does initiate legislation to change the status quo policy, what would the Legislature do? What would the final policy position be in this situation where the Court decides to strike down the Agency's policy? (2 points) Figure 4: Statutory Review Model, Scenario 1 5Q LC L + + Left 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Right Note: A is the regulatory agency, LC is the median voter in the legislative committee, Lis the median voter in the legislature, C is the median judge on the court, and SQ is the reversion status quo. f) In the previous question, we did not specify where the Agency would implement policy. Let's suppose that the Agency chooses to implement its policy at 3.1 on the left-right issue dimension. Would the Court prefer to have policy at 3.1 or at the final policy position you found in the previous question (e)? In other words, if the Agency chooses to implement policy at 3.1, will the Court want to strike it down? Explain your answer. (2 points) g) If the Agency chooses to implement its policy at 3.1, the Legislative Committee will not bother to initiate legislation to change the Agency's policy. Explain, in your own words, why this is the case. (2 points) h) Given your answers to questions (e) through (g), what will the final policy outcome be if the Agency initially sets policy at 3.1? Explain your answer. (2 points) Imagine now that we change the ideal point of the median judge on the Court. The new scenario is shown in Figure 5. Figure 5: Statutory Review Model, Scenario 2 SQ A LC C L EN + EN Left 1 M 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Right w Note: A is the regulatory agency, LC is the median voter in the legislative committee, Lis the median voter in the legislature, C is the median judge on the court, and SQ is the reversion status quo. 1) What is the range of policies that the Court prefers to the ideal point of the median voter in the Legislature? (2 points) ) If the Court strikes down the Agency's policy (wherever it might be), it is easy to see that the Legislative Committee will initiate legislation to try to change the status quo policy (check that you understand why). We also know that policy will end up at the ideal point of the median voter in the Legislature if the Legislative Committee initiates legislation to change the status quo. Given this, where should the Agency implement policy in order to keep the Court Now imagine that we add a fourth actor. a court. Assume that the court has the ability to review Agency actions and can strike them down if it wants to. If this happens, policy reverts to some status quo policy that we will label SQ. Ferejohn and Shipan (199)) refer to this as the "Statutory Review Model". After the court has decided whether to strike down the Agency's policy, the Committee can choose to initiate new legislation if it wants to. If it does so, legislation is sent to the floor of the Legislature where it can be amended freely as in the Agency Policy-Making Model that we just examined. In Figure 4 we show the status quo reversion point (SQ) and the ideal points of the median member of the legislature (L), the median member of the legislative committee (LC), the regulatory agency (A), and the median judge on the court (C). e) Imagine for some reason that the Court decides to strike down the Agency's policy (wherever it might be). If this happens, policy will revert to the status quo point shown in Figure 4. How do you think the Legislative Committee would react? Will it initiate legislation to change the status quo policy? If the Legislative Committee does initiate legislation to change the status quo policy, what would the Legislature do? What would the final policy position be in this situation where the Court decides to strike down the Agency's policy? (2 points) Figure 4: Statutory Review Model, Scenario 1 5Q LC L + + Left 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Right Note: A is the regulatory agency, LC is the median voter in the legislative committee, Lis the median voter in the legislature, C is the median judge on the court, and SQ is the reversion status quo. f) In the previous question, we did not specify where the Agency would implement policy. Let's suppose that the Agency chooses to implement its policy at 3.1 on the left-right issue dimension. Would the Court prefer to have policy at 3.1 or at the final policy position you found in the previous question (e)? In other words, if the Agency chooses to implement policy at 3.1, will the Court want to strike it down? Explain your answer. (2 points) g) If the Agency chooses to implement its policy at 3.1, the Legislative Committee will not bother to initiate legislation to change the Agency's policy. Explain, in your own words, why this is the case. (2 points) h) Given your answers to questions (e) through (g), what will the final policy outcome be if the Agency initially sets policy at 3.1? Explain your answer. (2 points) Imagine now that we change the ideal point of the median judge on the Court. The new scenario is shown in Figure 5. Figure 5: Statutory Review Model, Scenario 2 SQ A LC C L EN + EN Left 1 M 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Right w Note: A is the regulatory agency, LC is the median voter in the legislative committee, Lis the median voter in the legislature, C is the median judge on the court, and SQ is the reversion status quo. 1) What is the range of policies that the Court prefers to the ideal point of the median voter in the Legislature? (2 points) ) If the Court strikes down the Agency's policy (wherever it might be), it is easy to see that the Legislative Committee will initiate legislation to try to change the status quo policy (check that you understand why). We also know that policy will end up at the ideal point of the median voter in the Legislature if the Legislative Committee initiates legislation to change the status quo. Given this, where should the Agency implement policy in order to keep the Court