A second limitation of this study is that, while the contracts indicate that they are considered a political instrument, they do not speak directly of the relative importance of the various assumptions for greater contract sustainability. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain this sustainability, ranging from signal theory to the stability of senators` preferences, to the possibility that the consultation and approval process will reveal more credible information to negotiating partners. Of course, none of these statements exclude each other; Indeed, it may be naïve to think that a single theory can explain the choice between the engagement mechanisms for each agreement. However, since all the mechanisms in this analysis yield identical results, the results are not indicative for those who are interested in evaluating and comparing the relative importance of each of the proposed explanations. The President may enter into an international agreement on the basis of existing legislation or subject to legislation to be adopted by Congress; and 79 The Cases Act stipulates that these agreements must only be forwarded “to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives, under an appropriate confidentiality order, which must be rescinded only after the President`s formal announcement.” 1 U.S.C. 112b (a) (1979). Table 1 presents summary statistics. As can be seen, 5% of all agreements were concluded between 1982 and 2012 in the form of a treaty, which characterizes the use of the treaty. 20% of all agreements were cancelled during the observation period. The average agreement was valid for 15.26 years.
Of the agreements that are no longer in force, the average shelf life is 7.3 years. The LPPC values are between 17 and 17, with an average value of 0.10 euros. On average, 50 per cent of Senate seats were held by the presidential party at the time the agreement was signed. In 71 percent of the agreements, the government was divided, with the White House held by one party, the Senate, the House of Representatives or both by the other. Taken together, these figures indicate that the average agreement could not have been adopted in the form of a treaty without multi-party support, making the treaty a potentially costly instrument. 96 See Yoo, above in Note 33, 812 (arguing that extradition is not clearly within one of the listed powers that have been conferred on Congress); See also Hathaway, supra note 1, at 1346-48. 75 This decision is based on the argument that the President-in-Office has the most influence on its content at the time the agreement was signed. However, the content of all results is the same when a categorical variable is used for the president under whom the agreement came into force. Relevant regressions are included in the online schedule. 9 id. to 1312; See also Curtis A. Bradley, International Law in the U.S.
Legal System 76 (2015) (considering that one of the reasons for the popularity of executive agreements is that it is “much easier to conclude the growing number of international agreements without submitting them to two-thirds of the Senate for approval”). 61 Hathaway, supra note 1, at 1258 (presentation of a table of absolute use of the contract). 80 Hathaway combines multiple sources, resulting in a total of 3,119 agreements over the 1980-2000 period. See Hathaway, supra note 1, at 1258-60. In contrast, the data set used here contains 6,148 agreements over the same period. is a complementary log-log conversion interval of the base risk rate, h 0 (t j). This means that the base hazard rate can vary at each interval, requiring only light parametric assumptions.