• Korean Journal of Legislative Studies
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.67-99
• /
• 2018

This study analyzes the revision bills of the National Assembly Law in the 19th National Assembly in which the National Assembly Advancement Act was enacted, with the question "who are involved in the revision of the procedural rules, and what motivates them?" The cosponsor network analysis focusing on primary sponsors of the revision bills shows that the network was constructed by party affiliations. A small number of members with high degree centrality attempted to cooperate with each other at the cosponsoring stage, but the legislation did not pass through the related committee. In addition, this study tests the four competitive hypotheses (the committee hypothesis, the distributive politics hypothesis, the ideological distance hypothesis, and the partisan affiliation hypothesis) about the motivation to propose amendments by using the regression models which include newly measured variables. Only the committee hypothesis and the partisan affiliation hypothesis are empirically supported. This implies that partisan consideration is still significant in amending the National Assembly Law even after the National Assembly Advancement Act, and thus party leaders' willingness to seek bipartisan compromises is at the heart of problem-solving.