IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v75y1993i4p301-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Majority Rule Outcomes and the Choice of Germaneness Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Humes, Brian D

Abstract

Much work in the field spatial models has concerned the conditions under which majority rule is stable in a multidimensional policy space. Some have suggested that legislative practices such as germaneness rules (Shepsle, 1979; Denzau and Mackay, 1981, 1983; Krehbiel, 1987) and different types of agendas (Shepsle and Weingast, 1984; Banks, 1985; McKelvey, 1986) either induce stability or limit the set of possible outcomes. However, they do not consider ho w stable the choice of these rules may be. This paper shows how the choice of germaneness rules inherits the instability of the policy space. While the use of any particular germaneness rule limits the s et of possible outcomes (Feld and Grofman, 1988), it is shown that the process of choosing these rules is unstable. Copyright 1993 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Humes, Brian D, 1993. "Majority Rule Outcomes and the Choice of Germaneness Rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 301-316, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:75:y:1993:i:4:p:301-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Scott Feld & Samuel Merrill & Bernard Grofman, 2014. "Modeling the effects of changing issue salience in two-party competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 465-482, March.
    2. Evelyn C. Fink, 1995. "Institutional Change as a Sophisticated Strategy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(4), pages 477-510, October.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:75:y:1993:i:4:p:301-16. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.