IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v26y1996i02p165-198_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legislative Politics and the Paradox of Voting: Electoral Reform in Fourth Republic France

Author

Listed:
  • Browne, Eric C.
  • Hamm, Keith E.

Abstract

This article explores the properties of paradoxical voting situations in legislatures as illustrated by the decision-making process attending passage of the 1951 Electoral Reform Act in Fourth Republic France. First, conditions for demonstrating existence of a voting paradox for the case are developed and applied to data describing the voting behaviour of individual deputies. There follows an exploration of how a voting cycle over reform alternatives was overcome, focusing on the ways institutional rules and procedures structured the behaviour of parties and individual members and on the strategic manœuvring of political leaders. We conclude by relating characteristics of the case to general propositions found in the theoretical literature on the paradox of voting.

Suggested Citation

  • Browne, Eric C. & Hamm, Keith E., 1996. "Legislative Politics and the Paradox of Voting: Electoral Reform in Fourth Republic France," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 165-198, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:26:y:1996:i:02:p:165-198_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123400000417/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.
    2. Jan Sauermann, 2020. "On the instability of majority decision-making: testing the implications of the ‘chaos theorems’ in a laboratory experiment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 505-526, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:26:y:1996:i:02:p:165-198_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.