IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v32y2020i1p70-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preference vote and intra-party competition in open list PR systems

Author

Listed:
  • José Antonio Cheibub

    (Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA)

  • Gisela Sin

Abstract

Open list proportional representation (PR) systems require that candidates seek personal votes in order to be successful. This feature of the system is considered to lead to intense competition among co-partisans and, ultimately, to weak electoral and legislative parties, narrow public policies, localism, clientelism, and corruption. We examine the distribution of personal votes among candidates from the same party for seven elections to the Brazilian national chamber of deputies (1990–2014). These elections are widely seen as hyper-competitive, particularly among candidates from the same list. Yet, the patterns in the data are not compatible with such a view. We find that the level of overall competition is considerably lower than the absolute number of parties and candidates competing would suggest. More significantly, we find that the number of viable candidates within party lists is limited and that their votes are distributed in such a way that indicates a contained competition among co-partisans during the election. These findings add to recent work that builds a more nuanced view of ballot structure, competition, and personalism.

Suggested Citation

  • José Antonio Cheibub & Gisela Sin, 2020. "Preference vote and intra-party competition in open list PR systems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 70-95, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:32:y:2020:i:1:p:70-95
    DOI: 10.1177/0951629819893024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629819893024
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951629819893024?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Hallerberg & Patrik Marier, 2004. "Executive Authority, the Personal Vote, and Budget Discipline in Latin American and Caribbean Countries," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 571-587, July.
    2. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini & Francesco Trebbi, 2003. "Electoral Rules and Corruption," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 958-989, June.
    3. Nicola Persico & Alessandro Lizzeri, 2001. "The Provision of Public Goods under Alternative Electoral Incentives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 225-239, March.
    4. Allen Hicken & Joel W. Simmons, 2008. "The Personal Vote and the Efficacy of Education Spending," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 109-124, January.
    5. Royce Carroll & Monika Nalepa, 2020. "The personal vote and party cohesion: Modeling the effects of electoral rules on intraparty politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 36-69, January.
    6. Golden, Miriam A., 2003. "Electoral Connections: The Effects of the Personal Vote on Political Patronage, Bureaucracy and Legislation in Postwar Italy," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 189-212, April.
    7. Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti & Roberto Perotti & Massimo Rostagno, 2002. "Electoral Systems and Public Spending," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(2), pages 609-657.
    8. Jong Hee Park & Nathan Jensen, 2007. "Electoral Competition and Agricultural Support in OECD Countries," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 314-329, April.
    9. Kunicová, Jana & Rose-Ackerman, Susan, 2005. "Electoral Rules and Constitutional Structures as Constraints on Corruption," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 573-606, October.
    10. Folke, Olle & Persson, Torsten & Rickne, Johanna, 2016. "The Primary Effect: Preference Votes and Political Promotions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(3), pages 559-578, August.
    11. Matthew Søberg Shugart & Melody Ellis Valdini & Kati Suominen, 2005. "Looking for Locals: Voter Information Demands and Personal Vote‐Earning Attributes of Legislators under Proportional Representation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 437-449, April.
    12. Carol Mershon, 2020. "Challenging the wisdom on preferential proportional representation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 168-182, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fiva, Jon H. & Izzo, Federica & Tukiainen, Janne, 2024. "The gatekeeper’s dilemma: Political selection or team effort," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    2. Thomas Mustillo & John Polga-Hecimovich, 2020. "Party, candidate, and voter incentives under free list proportional representation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 143-167, January.
    3. Olle Folke & Johanna Rickne, 2020. "Who wins preference votes? An analysis of party loyalty, ideology, and accountability to voters," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 11-35, January.
    4. Markus Jokela & Jaakko Meriläinen & Janne Tukiainen & Åsa von Schoultz, 2022. "Personality Traits and Cognitive Ability in Political Selection," Discussion Papers 152, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    5. José Antonio Cheibub & Monika Nalepa, 2020. "Revisiting electoral personalism," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 3-10, January.

    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. José Antonio Cheibub & Monika Nalepa, 2020. "Revisiting electoral personalism," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 3-10, January.
    2. Daniel M Kselman, 2020. "Public goods equilibria under closed- and open-list proportional representation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 112-142, January.
    3. Carol Mershon, 2020. "Challenging the wisdom on preferential proportional representation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 168-182, January.
    4. Stefano Gagliarducci & Tommaso Nannicini & Paolo Naticchioni, 2011. "Electoral Rules and Politicians' Behavior: A Micro Test," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 144-174, August.
    5. Albanese, Giuseppe & Cioffi, Marika & Tommasino, Pietro, 2019. "Legislators' behaviour and electoral rules: Evidence from an Italian reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 423-444.
    6. Simona Piattoni & Matteo Fabio Nels Giglioli, 2020. "Does Changing Electoral Systems Affect (Corrupt) Particularistic Exchanges? Evidence from the Italian Case," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 78-91.
    7. Per Fredriksson & Daniel Millimet, 2007. "Legislative Organization and Pollution Taxation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 217-242, April.
    8. Michael Mitsopoulos & Theodore Pelagidis, 2017. "A model of constitutional design and corruption," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 67-90, August.
    9. Braendle, Thomas, 2013. "Do Institutions Affect Citizens' Selection into Politics?," Working papers 2013/04, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    10. John Carey & Simon Hix, 2013. "District magnitude and representation of the majority’s preferences: a comment and reinterpretation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 139-148, January.
    11. Persson, Torsten & Roland, Gerard & Tabellini, Guido, 2007. "Electoral Rules and Government Spending in Parliamentary Democracies," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 2(2), pages 155-188, May.
    12. Olle Folke & Johanna Rickne, 2020. "Who wins preference votes? An analysis of party loyalty, ideology, and accountability to voters," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 11-35, January.
    13. Picci, Lucio & Golden, Miriam, 2007. "Pork Barrel Politics in Postwar Italy, 1953–1994," MPRA Paper 5626, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Royce Carroll & Monika Nalepa, 2020. "The personal vote and party cohesion: Modeling the effects of electoral rules on intraparty politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 36-69, January.
    15. Born, Andreas & Janssen, Aljoscha, 2020. "Does a District-Vote Matter for the Behavior of Politicians? A Textual Analysis of Parliamentary Speeches," Working Paper Series 1320, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    16. Guillem Riambau & Steven Stillman & Geua Boe-Gibson, 2021. "What determines preferences for an electoral system? Evidence from a binding referendum," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 179-208, January.
    17. Jeroen Klomp, 2020. "Subsidizing power," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 67(3), pages 300-321, July.
    18. Fredriksson, Per G. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2004. "Electoral rules and environmental policy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 237-244, August.
    19. Garance Genicot & Laurent Bouton & Micael Castanheira, 2021. "Electoral Systems and Inequalities in Government Interventions [“Distributive Politics and Electoral Incentives: Evidence from Seven US State Legislatures.”]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(6), pages 3154-3206.
    20. Denis Rey & Joshua Ozymy, 2019. "A political–institutional explanation of environmental performance in Latin America," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 295-311, December.

    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:sae:jothpo:v:32:y:2020:i:1:p:70-95. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.