IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erp/eiopxx/p0075.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Do MEPs Defect? An Analysis of Party Group Cohesion in the 5 th European Parliament

Author

Listed:
  • Faas, Thorsten

Abstract

This study analyses party group cohesion and patterns of defections of national party delegations from party group lines in the present European Parliament, using a total of 1,370 roll call votes. The study confirms previous findings according to which party groups in the EP show (surprisingly) high levels of cohesion. In addition and notwithstanding that, it reveals the circumstances under which MEPs and their national delegations are more likely to defect. Among other factors, it was analysed how the nature of the candidate selection process, the electoral system, and the relationships between MEPs and their home parties influence these defections. Assuming that MEPs have three different goals (re-election, office, and policy) and want to first of all secure re-election, one can theoretically expect that those MEPs whose chances of re-election are more dependent on national parties than others (due to their specific candidate selection process or their relationship to their home party) are more willing to vote against the party group line, if a conflict between party group and national party emerges. Empirically, this is confirmed. In other words, MEPs in general are very well aware of their specific situation. They know who deserves their primary attention and they act accordingly.

Suggested Citation

  • Faas, Thorsten, 2002. "Why Do MEPs Defect? An Analysis of Party Group Cohesion in the 5 th European Parliament," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 6, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:erp:eiopxx:p0075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2002-002a.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2002-002.htm
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2002-002.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James M. Snyder, 1991. "On Buying Legislatures," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 93-109, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthias Dahm & Nicolás Porteiro, 2008. "Informational lobbying under the shadow of political pressure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(4), pages 531-559, May.
    2. Ernesto Dal Bo, 2000. "Bribing Voters," Economics Series Working Papers 39, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    3. Stuart Kasdin & Luona Lin, 2015. "Strategic behavior by federal agencies in the allocation of public resources," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 309-329, September.
    4. Bennedsen, Morten & Feldmann, Sven E., 2006. "Informational lobbying and political contributions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(4-5), pages 631-656, May.
    5. P. Buonanno & G. Prarolo & P. Vanin, 2014. "Organized Crime and Electoral Outcomes in Sicily," Working Papers wp965, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    6. Giorgio Bellettini & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2005. "Special Interests and Technological Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 43-56.
    7. Didier Laussel & Michel Le Breton, 2005. ""Favors" for Sale: Strategic Analysis of a Simple Menu Auction with Adverse Selection," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 6(1), pages 53-73, May.
    8. DAHM, Matthias & PORTEIRO, Nicolas, 2003. "The political economy of interest groups: pressure and information," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2003057, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    9. Jessica Leight & Rohini Pande & Laura Ralston, 2016. "Value for Money? Vote-Buying and Politician Accountability in the Laboratory," Department of Economics Working Papers 2016-15, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    10. Richard Ball, 1995. "Interest Groups, Influence And Welfare," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 119-146, July.
    11. John M. de Figueiredo, 2011. "Committee Jurisdiction, Congressional Behavior and Policy Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 17171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Robinson, James A. & Baland, Jean-Marie, 2003. "Land and Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 3800, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Sanford C. Gordon & Dimitri Landa, 2018. "Polarized preferences versus polarizing policies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 193-210, July.
    14. Silvia Console-Battilana & Kenneth A. Shepsle, 2009. "Nominations for Sale," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 413-449, October.
    15. Krehbiel, Keith, 2000. "The Coefficient of Party Influence," Research Papers 1646, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    16. Diermeier, Daniel & Merlo, Antonio, 2000. "Government Turnover in Parliamentary Democracies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 46-79, September.
    17. Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Bayesian Explanations for Persuasion," OSF Preprints ygw8e, Center for Open Science.
    18. Julián D. Gómez, 2018. "¿Qué determina la adopción de tecnologías para la generación de energías renovables entre países?," Documentos CEDE 17132, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    19. Mayer, Wolfgang & Mujumdar, Sudesh, 2012. "Lobbying: Buying and utilizing access," Economics Discussion Papers 2012-15, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Randolph Sloof & Frans van Winden, 2000. "Show Them Your Teeth First!," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 81-120, July.

    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:erp:eiopxx:p0075. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Editorial Assistant (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsaaea.html .

    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.