Interações entre o Legislativo e o Executivo federal do Brasil na definição de políticas de interesse amplo : uma abordagem sistêmica, com aplicação na saúde

• Ano de defesa: 2011
• Autor(a) principal: Gomes, Fabio de Barros Correia
• Orientador(a): Santos, Fabiano Guilherme Mendes
• Banca de defesa: Nicolau, Jairo Marconi , Ribeiro, Carlos Antonio Costa , Rennó Junior, Lucio Remuzat , Rodrigues, Ricardo José Pereira
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Política
• Departamento: Centro de Ciências Sociais::Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Políticos
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: Legislativo; Executivo; Interação; Poderes; Saúde
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Legislative; Executive; Interactions; Powers; Health
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS
• Link de acesso: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/12395

This study addresses the relationship between the Legislative and the Executive on the production of policies. It identifies elements of the Brazilian policymaking system (structuring rules, actors, resources, places of decision and policies) and proposes a model for the Brazilian context of coalition presidentialism, based on studies about the relations between the United States Congress and the president, and also on the extensive literature about the Brazilian case. The system is structured by the normative framework of higher hierarchy, the Constitution, historically determined; which privileges governability with accountability and also directs policies according to principles of equity and budgetary responsibility. The model considers that the actors´ strategic agendas receive many influences, including the status quo and the demands from normative and electoral connections. The first creates path dependencies and limit options for policies, stressing issues related to the capacity to govern. The second aggregate preferences according to the belonging to the coalition government or to the opposition. The legislative proposals derived from actors´ agendas are processed on predetermined places of decision at Congress, according to subject and relevance of the bills, where actors interact by selecting legislative pathways and other strategic resources. The systemic framework is integrated to strategic interactions that occur while the proposals follow the legislative phases of initiation, consideration and conclusion (on three distinct pathways: constitutional, complementary to the Constitution and ordinary. This structure is reinforced by rules that centralize the decision process at the Congress. The system products are the laws with impact on public policies. Based on this model, the study analyses its elements and their relations through its application on a large set of proposals (around 21 thousand on all themes, presented at Brazilian Congress between 1999 and 2006, on the three pathways). Signs of four types of interactions are observed, according to variation on patterns of conflict and actor´s leadership: coalition leadership, Legislative leadership, cooperation and deadlock. The data oppose the demarcation of Powers agenda and indicate that the Executive success was inversely proportional to the hierarchy of the pathway and that the Legislative´s performance was greater than that of the Executive at the constitutional pathway, with prominence for the Senate activity, and at the ordinary one (only on the case of the ordinary bill of law, since the Executive´s privilege to initiate budgetary laws and to issue provisional measures, with immediate force of law, warranted a higher overall quantitative performance for this Power at this pathway). However, the coalition largely prevailed on all pathways. Qualitative analysis with focus on health policies and their financing reinforce these results and suggest that, besides the many regularities observed on the system (rejecting thesis like the decision paralysis or the complete predominance of the Executive), fragmentations on the society and the Brazilian State persist as limiting factors to the production of more equitable policies