Functional entrenchment can be legitimate when it insulates sound policies against short-term reversal

Evidence

The social science literature on functional entrenchment takes a more balanced normative perspective. While social scientists certainly have not missed the fact that self-serving political actors can use various entrenchment techniques to lock in their political gains at the expense of opponents and the public at large, the literature on functional entrenchment recognizes that, in at least some contexts, “entrenchment is a legitimate goal in a democratic polity.” After all, the risk of locking in ill-motivated or mistaken policies must be weighed against the possibility of insulating good policies against illmotivated or mistaken reversals. If, for instance, preventing global warming will improve social welfare in the long run, then society might well benefit by insulating these policies against short-term or partial interests as Lazarus contends. Delegation to central banks, international organizations, and independent judiciaries can be a vehicle for entrenching sound monetary policies, free trade, and human rights. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 393

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s broader question about durable ideological structures - central banks and courts as entrenched vehicles parallel prior material on institutions and path dependence. — connects to: Entrenched rules bind even without continuing functional justification — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 470; Scholars have documented many functional strategies to insulate policies — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 190; Formal-versus-functional entrenchment does not split cleanly into bad and good — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 443 (+3 more)
• QUESTION: The asymmetry between this balanced view of functional entrenchment and the condemnation of formal entrenchment is exactly what the reader’s theory needs to explain.

Broader Connections

• Formal-versus-functional entrenchment does not split cleanly into bad and good #qualifies (0.85) — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 443
• Formal and functional entrenchment do not differ in harm or benefit #contradicts (0.80)
• Functional entrenchment is hard to police because policy and entrenchment motives overlap inextricably #complicates (0.75) — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 427