Search results

Legislatures are the core representative institutions in modern democracies. Citizens want legislatures to be decisive, and they want accountability, but they are frequently disillusioned with the representation legislators deliver. Political parties can provide decisiveness in legislatures, and they may provide collective accountability, but citizens and political reformers frequently demand another type of accountability from legislators - at the individual level. Can legislatures provide both kinds of accountability? This book considers what collective and individual accountability require and provides the most extensive cross-national analysis of legislative voting undertaken to date. It illustrates the balance between individualistic and collective representation in democracies, and how party unity in legislative voting shapes that balance. In addition to quantitative analysis of voting patterns, the book draws on extensive field and archival research to provide an extensive assessment of legislative transparency throughout the Americas

AbstractThe directly elected representatives to Hong Kong's Legislative Council are chosen by list proportional representation (PR) using the Hare Quota and Largest Remainders (HQLR) formula. This formula rewards political alliances of small to moderate size and discourages broader unions. Hong Kong's political leaders have responded to those incentives by fragmenting their electoral alliances rather than expanding them. The level of list fragmentation observed in Hong Kong is not inherent to PR elections. Alternative PR formulas would generate incentives to form broader, more encompassing alliances. Indeed, most countries that use PR employ such formulas, and the most commonly used PR formula would generate incentives opposite to HQLR's, rewarding broader electoral alliances rather than divisions.

AbstractIn 2015, Chile fundamentally reformed the electoral system it had used since 1989. The old system was characterized by high levels of malapportionment, or differences across districts in the ratios of voters to representatives. In the first elections after redemocratization, malapportionment favored the ideological right, but elections since 2000 have yielded no evidence that malapportionment produced ideological bias. The new, postreform electoral system reduces malapportionment in the lower chamber, although it remains pronounced in both chambers. Nevertheless, analysis of results from previous elections, coupled with information about the new districts, suggests that, consistent with recent experience, malapportionment will not produce ideological bias in elections to either chamber.

[ES] ¿Se comportan de manera diferente nuestros representantes cuando sus acciones pueden ser observadas por los ciudadanos de cuando éstas no lo son? La intuición surgiere que sí, pero la falta de transparencia que se detecta en los procesos legislativos de muchos países entorpece la investigación empírica convencional. Este trabajo presenta los resultados preliminares de un experimento diseñado para estimar precisamente cuánto importa la transparencia. El experimento reúne a cuatro personas, de los cuales tres actúan como legisladores y una como ciudadano. Los primeros formulan y votan un presupuesto y, luego, el segundo decide si reelegir a cada legislador para un siguiente mandato. El nivel de transparencia varía según los procedimientos desarrollados, pero se advierte que la transparencia fomenta presupuestos al servicio del público, coaliciones legislativas universalistas y altos niveles de reelección. ; [EN] Do representatives behave differently when their actions are observed by citizens versus when they are not observed? Intuition suggests the answer is yes, but non-transparent legislative processes in many countries present obstacles to conventional empirical research. This paper presents preliminary results from an experiment designed test what difference transparency makes. The experiment involves Legislators proposing and voting on a budget that can be divided among the Legislators and the Public, followed by the Public deciding whether to reelect each Legislator for the next period. The degree of transparency varies across different treatments. Transparency encourages public-serving budgets, universalistic legislative coalitions, and high rates of reelection.

The Bolivian presidency is a precarious position, not only because so many presidents have left office under duress, but because former presidents are subject to legal jeopardy. The case of Eduardo Rodríguez Veltzé illustrates the weakness of the rule of law in Bolivia and the political motivations that sustain it. Rodríguez was a respected Chief Justice of Bolivia's Supreme Court. He reluctantly assumed the presidency during a political crisis and shepherded the country through peaceful elections in 2005 that brought Evo Morales to the presidency. He was subsequently charged with treason in a case that involved the transfer from the Bolivian military to the United States of some obsolete surface-to-air missiles. The Rodríguez case was politically important enough to be useful for the Morales Government, but only briefly, and the moment passed. Now, the case's obscurity and the fecklessness of the Bolivian courts have left Rodríguez in legal and professional limbo. Full disclosure from the U.S. government regarding its involvement in the missiles case might clear Rodríguez's name.