Who Blinks First? Legislative Patience and Bargaining with Governors
نویسندگان
چکیده
When legislators and governors clash over the size of American state government, what strategic factors determine who wins? Efforts to address this question have traditionally relied upon setter models borrowed from the congressional literature and have predicted legislative dominance. We offer an alternative simplification of state budget negotiations that follows the “staring match” logic captured by dividethe-dollar games. Our model predicts that governors will often be powerful but that professional legislatures can stand up to the executives when long legislative sessions give them the patience to endure a protracted battle over the size of the budget. In this article, we present our analysis of an original dataset comprising gubernatorial budget proposals and legislative enactments in the states from 1989 through 2004. The results indicate strong empirical support for our predictions.
منابع مشابه
A Test of Bargaining Theory in the Auto Retailing Industry∗
This paper tests predictions from bargaining theory about how private information, patience, and bargaining disutility affect the division of surplus between negotiating parties. We do so using the responses to a novel survey of 1,500 new car buyers in California that asks buyers detailed questions about their bargaining behavior, their search for information, and their individual characteristi...
متن کاملA General Bargaining Model of Legislative Policy-making
We present a general model of legislative bargaining in which the status quo is an arbitrary point in a multidimensional policy space. In contrast to other bargaining models, the status quo is not assumed to be bad for all legislators, and delay may be Pareto efficient. We prove existence of stationary equilibria. We show that if all legislators are risk averse or if even limited transfers are ...
متن کاملLegislative Bargaining and Coalition Formation
1 This is a revised version of the first chapter of my dissertation and I stand in great debt to my dissertation supervisor Andrew Postlewaite, Stephen Coate, and Stephen Morris for comments, suggestions, encouragement, and patience. Two referees and an associate editor provided detailed comments and criticism that led to significant improvements of the paper. I also thank George Mailath, Andre...
متن کاملReference Point Effects in Legislative Bargaining: Experimental Evidence
Recent interest in reducing budget deficits raises questions regarding the impact on legislative bargaining of cuts versus increases in government spending. Using an experimental design where the outcomes are theoretically isomorphic results in significant differences in bargaining outcomes: There are longer delays in reaching agreement with cuts than with increases, along with which legislativ...
متن کاملRhetoric in Legislative Bargaining with Asymmetric Information
We analyze a three-player legislative bargaining game over an ideological and a distributive decision. Legislators are privately informed about their ideological intensities, i.e., the weight placed on the ideological decision relative to the weight placed on the distributive decision. Communication takes place before a proposal is offered and majority rule voting determines the outcome. We sho...
متن کامل