{"title":"Do Voters Affect Policies? Within-Coalition Competition in the Chilean Electoral System","authors":"Pablo Argote, Patricio D. Navia","doi":"10.1177/1866802X1801000101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been argued that close elections lead to policy convergence, as legislators elected by a small margin are more likely to adopt moderate policy positions (Downs 1957). However, Lee, Moretti, and Butler (2004) find that electoral competition does not affect legislators’ policy preferences in the United States, questioning the median voter paradigm. To help to discern this paradox, we estimate the effect of close elections on legislators’ subsequent policy positions under different electoral rules. With Chile's two-seat open-list proportional representation system, we exploit the dynamics of within-coalition competition to test both hypotheses. Using the margin of victory in 383 races in four different parliamentary elections and 3,741 roll-call votes for the 120-seat Chamber of Deputies from 1998 to 2014, we find that electoral competition did not lead to policy convergence under either the center-left Concertación coalition or the rightist Alianza coalition. We contend that policy convergence responds to electoral incentives but is also conditioned by the nature of the political regime (presidential or parliamentary) and government–opposition dynamics.","PeriodicalId":44885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Politics in Latin America","volume":"10 1","pages":"28 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1866802X1801000101","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Politics in Latin America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802X1801000101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
It has been argued that close elections lead to policy convergence, as legislators elected by a small margin are more likely to adopt moderate policy positions (Downs 1957). However, Lee, Moretti, and Butler (2004) find that electoral competition does not affect legislators’ policy preferences in the United States, questioning the median voter paradigm. To help to discern this paradox, we estimate the effect of close elections on legislators’ subsequent policy positions under different electoral rules. With Chile's two-seat open-list proportional representation system, we exploit the dynamics of within-coalition competition to test both hypotheses. Using the margin of victory in 383 races in four different parliamentary elections and 3,741 roll-call votes for the 120-seat Chamber of Deputies from 1998 to 2014, we find that electoral competition did not lead to policy convergence under either the center-left Concertación coalition or the rightist Alianza coalition. We contend that policy convergence responds to electoral incentives but is also conditioned by the nature of the political regime (presidential or parliamentary) and government–opposition dynamics.
有人认为,接近的选举会导致政策趋同,因为以微弱优势当选的立法者更有可能采取温和的政策立场(Downs 1957)。然而,Lee, Moretti, and Butler(2004)发现选举竞争并不影响美国立法者的政策偏好,对中间选民范式提出了质疑。为了帮助辨别这一悖论,我们估计了在不同的选举规则下,接近的选举对立法者随后的政策立场的影响。以智利的两个席位开放名单比例代表制为例,我们利用联盟内部竞争的动态来检验这两个假设。利用1998年至2014年4次不同议会选举383个席位的胜差和众议院120个席位的3741张唱名票,我们发现无论是在中左翼的Concertación联盟还是右翼的Alianza联盟下,选举竞争都没有导致政策趋同。我们认为,政策趋同对选举激励作出反应,但也受到政治制度(总统或议会)和政府-反对派动态的性质的制约。