egislative cohesiveness in the most important chamber: The case of the Senate in Chile, 1990-2018
Abstract In bicameral systems, it is wrong to apply findings from one chamber to the other. After discussing the determinants of legislative cohesion, we postulate 6 hypotheses that we test with the 4741 roll call votes in the Chilean Senate between 1990 and 2018. Ruling coalitions are more cohesive than opposition coalitions. More important, more advanced bills and those introduced by the executive do not induce to more cohesion among coalitions. There is less cohesion in the last year, but not more cohesion in the first year of a term.
- Referencias
- Cómo citar
- Del mismo autor
- Métricas
Agor, W. H. (1973). El senado chileno. Distribución interna de la influencia. Santiago: Andrés Bello.
Alemán, E. (2008). Policy positions in the Chilean senate: An analysis of coauthorship and roll call data. Brazilian Political Science Review, 3, 74-93.
Alemán, E. y Calvo, E. (2008). Analyzing Legislative Success in Latin America: The Case of Democratic Argentina. En G. O’Donnell, J. H. Tulchin y A. Varas (Eds.), New Voices in the Study of Democracy in Latin America. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Alemán, E. y Navia, P. (2016). Presidential Power, Legislative Rules and Law Making in Chile. En E. Alemán y G. Tsebelis (Eds.), Legislative Institutions and Lawmaking in Latin America (pp. 92-121). New York: Oxford University Press.
Alemán, E. y Pachón, M. (2008). Las comisiones de conciliación en los procesos legislativos de Chile y Colombia. Politica y Gobierno, 15(1), 03-34.
Aleman, E. y Saiegh S. M. (2007). Legislative preferences, political parties, and coalition unity in Chile. Comparative Politics, 39(3): 253-272.
Alemán, E. y Tsebelis, G. (2016). Legislative Institutions and Lawmaking in Latin America. Oxford University Press.
Aninat, C. (2006). Balance de poderes legislativos en Chile. ¿Presidencialismo exagerado o base de un sistema político cooperativo? Política, 47(Primavera), 127-148.
Barrett, A. W. y Eshbaugh-Soha, M. (2007). Presidential success on the substance of legislation. Political Research Quarterly, 60(1), 100-112.
Calvo, E. (2014). Legislator success in fragmented congresses in Argentina: Plurality cartels, minority presidents, and lawmaking. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Campos-Parra, H. y Navia, P. (2017). Disciplina legislativa en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2010-2014. Política y Gobierno, 24(1), 81-123.
Campos-Parra, H. y Navia, P. (2020). Ni hoy por ti ni mañana por mí. Cohesión en votaciones de roll call en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2006-2014. Colombia Internacional, 103, 171-197.
Carey, J. M. (2007). Competing principals, political institutions, and party unity in legislative voting. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 92-107.
Carey, J. M. (2009). Legislative Voting and Accountability. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carroll, R. y Nalepa, M. (2020). The personal vote and party cohesion: Modeling the effects of electoral rules on intraparty politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 32(1), 36-69.
Cheibub, J. A., Przeworski, A. y Saiegh, S. (2004). Government Coalitions and Legislative Success Under Presidentialism and Parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science, 34(4)(October), 656-587.
Cox, G. W. (1997). Making votes count. Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y McCubbins, M. D. (2005). Setting the agenda: Responsible party government in the US House of Representatives. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y McCubbins, M. D. (2007). Legislative leviathan: Party government in the House. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y Morgenstern, S. (2001). Latin America’s reactive assemblies and proactive presidents. Comparative Politics, 33(2): 171-189.
Cutrone, M. y McCarty, N. (2006). Does bicameralism matter? In En B.R. Weingast y D. A. Wittman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy (pp. 180-195), New York: Oxford University Press.
Desposato, S. W. (2005). Correcting for small group inflation of roll-call cohesion scores. British Journal of Political Science, 35(4), 731-744.
Desposato, S. W. (2006). The impact of electoral rules on legislative parties: Lessons from the Brazilian Senate and Chamber of Deputies. The Journal of Politics, 68(4), 1018-1030.
Dockendorff, A. (2019a). When do Legislators Respond to their Constituencies in Party Controlled Assemblies? Evidence from Chile. Parliamentary Affairs, 73(2): 408-428.
Dockendorff, A. (2019b). Who is ready to climb the hill? The effect of legislative activity on promotion to higher offices in Chile. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 25(2), 169-187.
Figueiredo, A. C. y Limongi, F. (2000). Presidential Power, Legislative Organization, and Party Behavior in Brazil. Comparative Politics, 32(2), 151.
Fleisher, R., Bond, J. R. y Wood, B. D. (2008). Which Presidents Are Uncommonly Successful in Congress? En B. A. Rockman y R. W. Waterman (Eds.), Presidential Leadership: The Vortex of Power, pp. 191-214, Oxford University Press New York.
Hagopian, F., Gervasoni, C. y Moraes, J. A. (2009). From patronage to program: The emergence of party-oriented legislators in Brazil. Comparative Political Studies, 42(3), 360-391.
Hiroi, T. (2008). The dynamics of lawmaking in a bicameral legislature: The case of Brazil. Comparative Political Studies, 41(12), 1583-1606.
Jones, M. P. (1995). Electoral Laws and the Survival of Presidential Democracies. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.
Jones, M. P., Spiller, P., Saiegh, S. y Tommasi, M. (2002). Amateur Legislators-Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 656-669.
Kikuchi, H. y Lodola, G. (2014). The effects of gubernatorial influence and political careerism on senatorial voting behavior: The Argentine case. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 6(2), 73-105.
Langston, J. (2006). The changing party of the institutional revolution: Electoral competition and decentralized candidate selection. Party Politics, 12(3), 395-413.
Le Foulon Moran, C. (2020). Cooperation and polarization in a Presidential Congress: Policy networks in the Chilean Lower House 2006-2017. Politics, 40(2), 227-244.
Lemos, L. B. (2006). El sistema de comisiones en el Senado brasileño: jerarquía y concentración de poderes en la década de 1990. América Latina Hoy, 43, 155-182.
Levita, G. (2015). La política como profesión: perfiles y tipos de trayectorias de los senadores argentinos. Telos, 17(1), 38-57.
Lijphart, A. (1990). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Llanos, M. y Nolte, D. (2003). Bicameralism in the Americas: around the extremes of symmetry and incongruence. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 9(3), 54-86.
Llanos, M. y Sánchez, F. (2006). Council of Elders? The Senate and its members in the Southern Cone. Latin American Research Review, 41(1), 133-152.
Londregan, J. B. (2000). Legislative Institutions and Ideology in Chile. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martínez, D. y Navia, P. (2019). Determinantes de la cohesión en la votación del legislativo en las coaliciones oficialistas y de oposición en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2006-2014. Revista de Estudios Políticos, 225-258
Micozzi, J. P. (2013). Does electoral accountability make a difference? Direct elections, career ambition, and legislative performance in the Argentine Senate. The Journal of Politics, 75(1), 137-149.
Morgenstern, S. (2004). Patterns of Legislative Politics. Roll-Call Voting in Latin America and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Morgenstern, S. y Nacif, B. (Eds.). (2002). Legislative Politics in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Özbudun, E. (1970). Party cohesion in western democracies: a causal analysis. New York: Sage.
Rodríguez, L. M. R. y Felipe, P. O. (2014). Indicadores de partidos y sistemas de partidos. Madrid: CIS-Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
Romer, T. y Rosenthal, H. (1978). Political Resource Allocation, Control Agendas and the Status Quo. Public Choice, 33, 27-44.
Sánchez, F., Nolte, D. y Llanos, M. (2005). Bicameralismo, Senados y senadores en el Cono Sur latinoamericano. Barcelona: Publicaciones del Parlamento de Catalunya.
Shugart, M. S. y Carey, J. M. (1992). Presidents and Assemblies. Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Siavelis, P. (2002). Coalitions, Voters and Party System Transformation in Post-Authoritarian Chile. Government and Opposition, 37(1), 76-105.
Sieberer, U. (2006). Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 12(2), 150-178.
Spiller, P., Stein, E. y Tommasi, M. (2008). Political institutions, policymaking, and policy: An introduction. En E. Stein y M. Tomassi (Eds.) Policymaking in Latin America. How politics shapes policies. Washington D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank (pp. 1-28).
Stein, E., Tommasi, M., Echebarría, K., Lora, E. y Payne, E. (2006). La política de las políticas públicas. Progreso económico y social en América Latina. Washington: Banco Interamericano del Desarrollo.
Toloza Castillo, M. y Tor-Maureira, S. (2017). Amigos cerca, enemigos más cerca: el gobierno de Sebastián Piñera y las dinámicas legislativas en Chile. Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Política, 26(1), 131-149.
Toro-Maureira, S. (2007). Conducta legislativa ante las iniciativas del Ejecutivo: unidad de los bloques políticos en Chile. Revista de Ciencia Política (Santiago), 27(1), 23-41.
Toro-Maureira, S. y Hurtado, N. (2016). The executive on the battlefield: government amendments and cartel theory in the Chilean Congress. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 22(2), 196-215.
Tsebelis, G. y Alemán, E. (2005). Presidential Conditional Agenda Setting Power in Latin America. World Politics, 57(3), 396-420.
Tsebelis, G. y Money, J. (1997). Bicameralism. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Uhr, J. (2006). Bicameralism. En R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder y B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (pp. 474-494). New York: Oxford University Press.
Alemán, E. (2008). Policy positions in the Chilean senate: An analysis of coauthorship and roll call data. Brazilian Political Science Review, 3, 74-93.
Alemán, E. y Calvo, E. (2008). Analyzing Legislative Success in Latin America: The Case of Democratic Argentina. En G. O’Donnell, J. H. Tulchin y A. Varas (Eds.), New Voices in the Study of Democracy in Latin America. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Alemán, E. y Navia, P. (2016). Presidential Power, Legislative Rules and Law Making in Chile. En E. Alemán y G. Tsebelis (Eds.), Legislative Institutions and Lawmaking in Latin America (pp. 92-121). New York: Oxford University Press.
Alemán, E. y Pachón, M. (2008). Las comisiones de conciliación en los procesos legislativos de Chile y Colombia. Politica y Gobierno, 15(1), 03-34.
Aleman, E. y Saiegh S. M. (2007). Legislative preferences, political parties, and coalition unity in Chile. Comparative Politics, 39(3): 253-272.
Alemán, E. y Tsebelis, G. (2016). Legislative Institutions and Lawmaking in Latin America. Oxford University Press.
Aninat, C. (2006). Balance de poderes legislativos en Chile. ¿Presidencialismo exagerado o base de un sistema político cooperativo? Política, 47(Primavera), 127-148.
Barrett, A. W. y Eshbaugh-Soha, M. (2007). Presidential success on the substance of legislation. Political Research Quarterly, 60(1), 100-112.
Calvo, E. (2014). Legislator success in fragmented congresses in Argentina: Plurality cartels, minority presidents, and lawmaking. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Campos-Parra, H. y Navia, P. (2017). Disciplina legislativa en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2010-2014. Política y Gobierno, 24(1), 81-123.
Campos-Parra, H. y Navia, P. (2020). Ni hoy por ti ni mañana por mí. Cohesión en votaciones de roll call en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2006-2014. Colombia Internacional, 103, 171-197.
Carey, J. M. (2007). Competing principals, political institutions, and party unity in legislative voting. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 92-107.
Carey, J. M. (2009). Legislative Voting and Accountability. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carroll, R. y Nalepa, M. (2020). The personal vote and party cohesion: Modeling the effects of electoral rules on intraparty politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 32(1), 36-69.
Cheibub, J. A., Przeworski, A. y Saiegh, S. (2004). Government Coalitions and Legislative Success Under Presidentialism and Parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science, 34(4)(October), 656-587.
Cox, G. W. (1997). Making votes count. Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y McCubbins, M. D. (2005). Setting the agenda: Responsible party government in the US House of Representatives. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y McCubbins, M. D. (2007). Legislative leviathan: Party government in the House. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G. W. y Morgenstern, S. (2001). Latin America’s reactive assemblies and proactive presidents. Comparative Politics, 33(2): 171-189.
Cutrone, M. y McCarty, N. (2006). Does bicameralism matter? In En B.R. Weingast y D. A. Wittman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy (pp. 180-195), New York: Oxford University Press.
Desposato, S. W. (2005). Correcting for small group inflation of roll-call cohesion scores. British Journal of Political Science, 35(4), 731-744.
Desposato, S. W. (2006). The impact of electoral rules on legislative parties: Lessons from the Brazilian Senate and Chamber of Deputies. The Journal of Politics, 68(4), 1018-1030.
Dockendorff, A. (2019a). When do Legislators Respond to their Constituencies in Party Controlled Assemblies? Evidence from Chile. Parliamentary Affairs, 73(2): 408-428.
Dockendorff, A. (2019b). Who is ready to climb the hill? The effect of legislative activity on promotion to higher offices in Chile. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 25(2), 169-187.
Figueiredo, A. C. y Limongi, F. (2000). Presidential Power, Legislative Organization, and Party Behavior in Brazil. Comparative Politics, 32(2), 151.
Fleisher, R., Bond, J. R. y Wood, B. D. (2008). Which Presidents Are Uncommonly Successful in Congress? En B. A. Rockman y R. W. Waterman (Eds.), Presidential Leadership: The Vortex of Power, pp. 191-214, Oxford University Press New York.
Hagopian, F., Gervasoni, C. y Moraes, J. A. (2009). From patronage to program: The emergence of party-oriented legislators in Brazil. Comparative Political Studies, 42(3), 360-391.
Hiroi, T. (2008). The dynamics of lawmaking in a bicameral legislature: The case of Brazil. Comparative Political Studies, 41(12), 1583-1606.
Jones, M. P. (1995). Electoral Laws and the Survival of Presidential Democracies. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.
Jones, M. P., Spiller, P., Saiegh, S. y Tommasi, M. (2002). Amateur Legislators-Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 656-669.
Kikuchi, H. y Lodola, G. (2014). The effects of gubernatorial influence and political careerism on senatorial voting behavior: The Argentine case. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 6(2), 73-105.
Langston, J. (2006). The changing party of the institutional revolution: Electoral competition and decentralized candidate selection. Party Politics, 12(3), 395-413.
Le Foulon Moran, C. (2020). Cooperation and polarization in a Presidential Congress: Policy networks in the Chilean Lower House 2006-2017. Politics, 40(2), 227-244.
Lemos, L. B. (2006). El sistema de comisiones en el Senado brasileño: jerarquía y concentración de poderes en la década de 1990. América Latina Hoy, 43, 155-182.
Levita, G. (2015). La política como profesión: perfiles y tipos de trayectorias de los senadores argentinos. Telos, 17(1), 38-57.
Lijphart, A. (1990). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Llanos, M. y Nolte, D. (2003). Bicameralism in the Americas: around the extremes of symmetry and incongruence. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 9(3), 54-86.
Llanos, M. y Sánchez, F. (2006). Council of Elders? The Senate and its members in the Southern Cone. Latin American Research Review, 41(1), 133-152.
Londregan, J. B. (2000). Legislative Institutions and Ideology in Chile. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martínez, D. y Navia, P. (2019). Determinantes de la cohesión en la votación del legislativo en las coaliciones oficialistas y de oposición en la Cámara de Diputados de Chile, 2006-2014. Revista de Estudios Políticos, 225-258
Micozzi, J. P. (2013). Does electoral accountability make a difference? Direct elections, career ambition, and legislative performance in the Argentine Senate. The Journal of Politics, 75(1), 137-149.
Morgenstern, S. (2004). Patterns of Legislative Politics. Roll-Call Voting in Latin America and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Morgenstern, S. y Nacif, B. (Eds.). (2002). Legislative Politics in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Özbudun, E. (1970). Party cohesion in western democracies: a causal analysis. New York: Sage.
Rodríguez, L. M. R. y Felipe, P. O. (2014). Indicadores de partidos y sistemas de partidos. Madrid: CIS-Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
Romer, T. y Rosenthal, H. (1978). Political Resource Allocation, Control Agendas and the Status Quo. Public Choice, 33, 27-44.
Sánchez, F., Nolte, D. y Llanos, M. (2005). Bicameralismo, Senados y senadores en el Cono Sur latinoamericano. Barcelona: Publicaciones del Parlamento de Catalunya.
Shugart, M. S. y Carey, J. M. (1992). Presidents and Assemblies. Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Siavelis, P. (2002). Coalitions, Voters and Party System Transformation in Post-Authoritarian Chile. Government and Opposition, 37(1), 76-105.
Sieberer, U. (2006). Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 12(2), 150-178.
Spiller, P., Stein, E. y Tommasi, M. (2008). Political institutions, policymaking, and policy: An introduction. En E. Stein y M. Tomassi (Eds.) Policymaking in Latin America. How politics shapes policies. Washington D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank (pp. 1-28).
Stein, E., Tommasi, M., Echebarría, K., Lora, E. y Payne, E. (2006). La política de las políticas públicas. Progreso económico y social en América Latina. Washington: Banco Interamericano del Desarrollo.
Toloza Castillo, M. y Tor-Maureira, S. (2017). Amigos cerca, enemigos más cerca: el gobierno de Sebastián Piñera y las dinámicas legislativas en Chile. Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Política, 26(1), 131-149.
Toro-Maureira, S. (2007). Conducta legislativa ante las iniciativas del Ejecutivo: unidad de los bloques políticos en Chile. Revista de Ciencia Política (Santiago), 27(1), 23-41.
Toro-Maureira, S. y Hurtado, N. (2016). The executive on the battlefield: government amendments and cartel theory in the Chilean Congress. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 22(2), 196-215.
Tsebelis, G. y Alemán, E. (2005). Presidential Conditional Agenda Setting Power in Latin America. World Politics, 57(3), 396-420.
Tsebelis, G. y Money, J. (1997). Bicameralism. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Uhr, J. (2006). Bicameralism. En R. A. W. Rhodes, S. A. Binder y B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (pp. 474-494). New York: Oxford University Press.
Campos-Parra, H., & Navia, P. D. (2022). egislative cohesiveness in the most important chamber: The case of the Senate in Chile, 1990-2018. América Latina Hoy, 90, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.14201/alh.25398
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
+
−