Seniority and Incumbency in Legislatures
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this article, we elaborate on a strategic view of institutional features. Our focus is on seniority, though we note that this general approach may also be deployed to understand other aspects of institutional arrangements. We have taken the initial game-theoretic model of seniority of McKelvey and Riezman (1992), simplified it in order to characterize its fundamental implications, generalized these results in several ways, and extended the model by deriving additional implications. The broad messages of our article, articulated by McKelvey and Riezman as well, are two. First, the endogenous choice of institutional features like seniority by self-governing groups is strategic. While the fine-grained ways of doing things in an institutional context surely serve internal functional objectives, these are not the only objectives. Agents making choices on how to govern themselves have private motivations – in the case of elected politicians they often revolve around re-election. This leads to our second broad message. The institutions through which self-governing groups conduct their business do not exist in a vacuum. They are embedded in a broader context. Those offering functional explanations for various institutional features overlook this. Particular institutional arrangements have effects outside the governance institution itself. These effects, in principle, could be accidental by-products. Our strategic approach, however, argues that they may well be the primary reasons for a practice being instituted.
منابع مشابه
Endogenous agendas and seniority advantage∗
We study a legislative assembly that chooses its agenda protocol endogenously. We generalize McKelvey and Riezman’s (1992) seminal theory on seniority in legislatures, by allowing for a large class of ordinal agenda rules that assign different recognition probability to each legislator. We consider two stages — the selection of agenda rules, and the decision making that transpires under them. W...
متن کاملIncumbency, Parties, and Legislatures: Theory and Evidence from India
Incumbent legislators in developing countries are often found to not possess an electoral advantage relative to challengers. This paper traces this effect to the balance of power between legislators and party leaders, and formal and informal constraints on legislators’ ability to influence policy and stake positions. This theory is tested on a dataset of Indian national elections since 1977, us...
متن کاملChallenger Quality and the Incumbency Advantage
Most estimates of the incumbency advantage and the electoral benefits of previous officeholding experience do not account for strategic entry by high-quality challengers. We address this issue by using term limits as an instrument for challenger quality. Studying U.S. state legislatures, we find strong evidence of strategic behavior by experienced challengers (consistent with previous studies)....
متن کاملThe Informational Value of Incumbency
This paper proposes an argument that explains incumbency advantage without recurring to the collective irresponsibility of legislatures. For that purpose, we exploit the informational value of incumbency: incumbency confers voters information about governing politicians not available from challengers. Because there are many reasons for high reelection rates di¤erent from incumbency status, we p...
متن کاملIncumbency preservation through electoral legislation: The case of the secret ballot
The secret ballot was designed to eliminate the incentive for candidates to purchase votes through direct vote buying. When voters have private information on their candidate preferences, incumbent candidates will generally be less efficient in purchasing votes than their challengers. Incumbent candidates may therefore benefit from the elimination of direct vote purchasing. Viewed in this vein,...
متن کامل