The Multiple Streams Approach theorizes that agenda (and policy) change is more likely to occur when policies are presented as solutions to existing problems during open policy window (consequential coupling). Although the approach is open to strategic behavior of policy entrepreneurs that frame their pet policy as solution to a problem, it usually expects a thematic linkage between the interpretation of a problem and the (framed) policy solution. In this paper, we follow Herweg et al. (2015) and argue that it is important to include a second coupling process in a decision-window, where political entrepreneurs have the opportunity to couple rather different policies into one package, policies that may be quite different from the initial problem that had been opened the agenda window. We empirically illustrate this second coupling mechanism and the role of political entrepreneurs using the case of the introduction of pretrial service act in the Virginia Parole Abolition reform - two legislative pieces that are characterized by a rather different programmatic idea (the "tough on crime"-idea behind abolish parole vs. the rehabilitative idea to support those defendants awaiting trial with specific programs). With this empirical case study, the paper adds to the existing literature which has mainly focussed on the dynamics during the first coupling process and the related actors such as policy entrepreneurs by emphasizing the role of political entrepreneurs during the decision-making phase. Consequently, the study gives strong empirical support for the analytical value to distinguish between the agenda and the decision coupling.
