Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- Abbreviations -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Purpose of the Book -- 1.2 State of Research -- 1.3 The Representative Puzzle -- 1.4 Outline of the Book -- References -- 2 Theoretical Framework -- 2.1 The 'Standard Account' of Parliamentary Representation and EU Politics -- 2.2 National Parliamentary Representation in the EU: The Concept of This Study -- 2.3 Whom and How to Represent in EU Politics? -- 2.4 Summarizing the Theoretical Approach -- References -- 3 Data and Methodology -- 3.1 Selection of Countries, Topics, Parliamentary Debates and Interview Partners -- 3.1.1 Comparison Across Countries and Topics -- 3.1.2 Parliamentary Debates and Interview Partners -- 3.2 Data Collection: Representative Claims Analysis and Qualitative Interviews -- 3.2.1 Representative Claims Analysis -- 3.2.2 Qualitative Interviews -- 3.3 Data Evaluation: Regression Analyses and Typology of MPs -- 3.4 Dependent Variables and Data Structure -- References -- 4 Focus and Style of Representation in EU Politics -- 4.1 The Purpose of This Chapter -- 4.2 Focus of Representation: Whom to Represent in EU Politics? -- 4.3 Style of Representation: How to Represent in EU Politics? -- 4.4 Focus and Style of Representation: Whom and How to Represent in EU Politics? -- 4.5 Conclusions -- References -- 5 Explaining MPs' Representative Behavior in EU Politics -- 5.1 The Purpose of This Chapter -- 5.2 Institutional and Party Strategic Factors -- 5.2.1 Left-Right and EU Party Positions -- 5.2.2 Governing Responsibility and European Experience -- 5.2.3 Topic and Position in Claims-Making -- 5.2.4 Committee Membership and Governing Responsibility -- 5.2.5 Catch-All Parties vs. Single-Issue Parties -- 5.3 Operationalization -- 5.3.1 Dependent Variables -- 5.3.2 Independent Variables -- Regression of Focus of Representation.

Over the last 20 years national parliaments have increasingly been the focus of the debate on the European Union's (EU) democratic deficit. They have lost core parliamentary competencies ("deparliamentarisation"), yet have simultaneously increased their formal information and participation rights in EU affairs. This paper focuses on the German Bundestag which is characterized by a wide gap between formal right-endowment and de facto right-employment. It argues that the most valid explanatory factor for this lies in the functional logic of the German parliamentary system: Within this so-called logic of 'New Dualism', the governing majority carries its government and has no incentive to discredit it publicly. It is furthermore argued that this system is hit by an external shock, namely the measures taken on the EU level to combat the debt crisis. It is hypothesized that the specific character of the debt crisis measures as the independent variable affects the functional logic of the parliamentary system as the dependent variable, potentially inducing a gradual drift from the prevailing logic of 'New Dualism' (government and its majority vs. the opposition) to 'Old Dualism' (parliament as a whole vs. the government). The empirical analysis focuses on the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and three levels: The system's level, i.e. the entire parliament, the individual-behavioural level, i.e. the behaviour of single parliamentarians, and the role-orientation level, i.e. the parliamentarians' mindset. The study is based on a document analysis as well as 17 semi-structured interviews with members of parliament, their staff, the Bundestag's administration and the executive. The findings indicate some 'holes' in the 'New Dualism' logic on the first two levels of analysis signaling towards 'Old Dualism'. At the same time, the interviewees are still very much caught up in the usual cleavage mindset, thus a shift in role-orientations cannot be seen, (yet). In addition to the external 'shock character' of the crisis, the interviewees do identify an internal stimulus, namely the voter pushing for a higher politicization of the topic, arguably moving it closer to the logic of 'normal domestic politics'. While democratically desirable, the longevity of these drifts remains to be seen.

AbstractAfter a focus on global challenges, in the year 2023, domestic politics took centre stage in Germany. Notably, there was a rise in internal tensions within the 'traffic light coalition', especially regarding fiscal policy issues: The Free Democrats/Freie Demokratische Partei's austerity clashed with the Social Democrats/Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschland's and Greens' willingness to take on more debt for economic challenges. A key event was the Federal Constitutional Court's ruling that prohibited the reallocation of COVID‐19 relief funds to the Climate and Transformation Fund, exposing budgetary constraints and repercussions on economic policy more broadly. The so‐called Heating Act and debates on Child Basic Security were also important. The Alternative for Germany/Alternative für Deutschland achieved notable electoral victories, while the Left Party's future is more uncertain than ever, having lost its parliamentary group status in the Bundestag due to a split. Regional elections were held in Berlin, Bremen, Bavaria and Hesse, contributing to this year's political dynamics.

AbstractAgainst the background of the Russian war on Ukraine, the new traffic light coalition of the Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens, and the Free Democrats (FDP) led by Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) called a new era (Zeitenwende) in German foreign and security policy. The discussions on military support for Ukraine significantly shaped public debate in Germany in 2022. While the Left Party and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) rejected arms deliveries, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU)/Christian Social Union (CSU) criticized the federal government for hesitating. In addition to the German presidential election that saw the re‐election of Frank‐Walter Steinmeier, there were four regional elections in Saarland, Schleswig‐Holstein, North Rhine‐Westphalia, and Lower Saxony.

AbstractAgainst the background of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the federal parliamentary election as well as five regional elections in Baden‐Württemberg, Rhineland‐Palatinate, Saxony‐Anhalt, Mecklenburg‐Western Pomerania and Berlin were held in Germany in 2021. For the first time, Germany is now governed by a so‐called traffic light coalition of the Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens and the Free Democrats (FDP). After 16 years of Angela Merkel's (CDU) chancellorship, Olaf Scholz (SPD) became the new Chancellor. The issue of climate change gained particular traction in the election campaign after devastating floods hit Rhineland‐Palatinate and North Rhine‐Westphalia in July. In April, the Federal Constitutional Court had ruled the Climate Protection Act not to be far‐reaching enough to protect the rights of future generations, calling for a revision that the outgoing governing coalition completed in June.

Always pressured by electoral deadlines, parliaments are often seen as a weak link in the sustainability politics of representative democracies. Scholars reviewing possible democratic reforms for overcoming parliamentary presentism often reference Germany's Parliamentary Advisory Council for Sustainable Development (PBnE). What does this Council's record reveal about the practicality of representing future generations through parliamentary bodies? We combine a philosophical-historical interpretation of Germany's approach to future-generations issues with an empirical analysis of the PBnE's record. We conclude that while the PBnE has brought greater formal attention to sustainability in the parliamentary process, the idea of enhanced future-regarding representation remains problematic. Counterpoising different sustainability-oriented institutions grounded in diverse forms of democratic legitimacy is a more promising path.

This article introduces the notion of 'transnational representation' to refer to claims by national parliamentarians on behalf of citizens of other national constituencies. Thus defined, transnational representation combines insights from the constructivist turn in the theory of democratic representation with a renewed focus on national parliaments as the prime institutional sites of representation. A focus on transnational representation advances the debate on democratic representation in an age of internationalisation in two ways. First, it allows for a systematic and comparative analysis of how representation in parliaments responds to internationalisation. Second, it suggests a new perspective on the possible alignment of political representation with the range of affected interests. We illustrate these two claims with a case study of transnational representation in parliamentary debates on the European Financial Stability Facility and by outlining an agenda for further research.