IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v51y2021i1p104-130..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legislative Territorialization: The Impact of a Decentralized Party System on Individual Legislative Behavior in Argentina

Author

Listed:
  • Paula Clerici

Abstract

The conventional understanding in the scholarly literature is that the main dimension that sets legislators’ ideal points is the tension between the government and the opposition parties. In this article, I challenge this claim, demonstrating that this alignment is contingent on the level of party system nationalization. These consequences have not been fully documented. Using DW-NOMINATE to calculate Argentine legislators’ ideal points (1983–2017), I show that individual territorialization in roll call voting increases when the party system is more decentralized. Legislators are closer to their provincial delegation, irrespective of which party they belong to, when there are low levels of party nationalization. At the individual level, this mechanism may be understood by the competing principals’ theory: because party system decentralization implies a response to local dynamics over national dynamics, cross-pressured legislators may favor their subnational principal.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula Clerici, 2021. "Legislative Territorialization: The Impact of a Decentralized Party System on Individual Legislative Behavior in Argentina," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 51(1), pages 104-130.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:51:y:2021:i:1:p:104-130.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjaa036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ., 2018. "Reform and political coalition: 1990–2003," Chapters, in: The Institutional Evolution of China, chapter 4, pages 104-154, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Hix, Simon & Noury, Abdul, 2016. "Government-Opposition or Left-Right? The Institutional Determinants of Voting in Legislatures," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 249-273, May.
    3. repec:gig:joupla:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:67-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Andr� Borges & Adrian Albala & Lucia Burtnik, 2017. "Pathways to Nationalization in Multilevel Presidential Systems: Accounting for Party Strategies in Brazil and Argentina," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 47(4), pages 648-672.
    5. Spirling, Arthur & McLean, Iain, 2007. "UK OC OK? Interpreting Optimal Classification Scores for the U.K. House of Commons," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 85-96, January.
    6. Hanna Bäck & Marc Debus & Jochen Müller & Henry Bäck, 2013. "Regional Government Formation in Varying Multilevel Contexts: A Comparison of Eight European Countries," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 368-387, March.
    7. John M. Carey, 2007. "Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 92-107, January.
    8. repec:gig:joupla:v:4:y:2012:i:2:p:3-38 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Calvo, Ernesto, 2007. "The Responsive Legislature: Public Opinion and Law Making in a Highly Disciplined Legislature," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(2), pages 263-280, April.
    10. Mark P. Jones & Wonjae Hwang, 2005. "Party Government in Presidential Democracies: Extending Cartel Theory Beyond the U.S. Congress," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 267-282, April.
    11. Poole, Keith & Lewis, Jeffrey B. & Lo, James & Carroll, Royce, 2011. "Scaling Roll Call Votes with wnominate in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 42(i14).
    12. repec:gig:joupla:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:73-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Zoltán Fazekas & Martin Ejnar Hansen, 2022. "Incentives for non-participation: absence in the United Kingdom House of Commons, 1997–2015," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 51-73, April.
    2. Tiffany D Barnes & Jinhyeok Jang, 2016. "How the size of governing coalitions shape legislative behavior: A subnational analysis of Argentine legislative chambers, 1992–2009," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 301-319, December.
    3. repec:gig:joupla:v:5:y:2013:i:1:p:95-125 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:gig:joupla:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:67-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:gig:joupla:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:73-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Christopher Hare & Keith T. Poole, 2015. "Measuring ideology in Congress," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 18, pages 327-346, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. repec:gig:joupla:v:4:y:2012:i:2:p:3-38 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. James Lo, 2013. "Voting Present," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, December.
    9. Or Tuttnauer, 2018. "If you can beat them, confront them: Party-level analysis of opposition behavior in European national parliaments," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 278-298, June.
    10. Mattozzi, Andrea & Snowberg, Erik, 2018. "The right type of legislator: A theory of taxation and representation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 54-65.
    11. Cloléry, Héloïse, 2023. "Legislators in the crossfire: Strategic non-voting and the effect of transparency," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:3:p:95-126 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Carol Mershon, 2020. "Challenging the wisdom on preferential proportional representation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(1), pages 168-182, January.
    14. Nuria Font & Ixchel Pérez‐Durán, 2023. "Legislative Transparency in the European Parliament: Disclosing Legislators' Meetings with Interest Groups," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 379-396, March.
    15. Christine Benesch & Monika Bütler & Katharina Hofer, 2019. "Who Benefits from More Transparency in Parliamentary Voting?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 17(01), pages 36-41, May.
    16. David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2012. "Do Female Representatives Adhere More Closely to Citizens’ Preferences Than Male Representatives?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2012-02, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. Spencer, Simon & Bredin, Don & Conlon, Thomas, 2018. "Energy and agricultural commodities revealed through hedging characteristics: Evidence from developing and mature markets," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 1-20.
    18. Simon Hix & Abdul Noury & Gerard Roland, 2018. "Is there a selection bias in roll call votes? Evidence from the European Parliament," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 211-228, July.
    19. Timini, Jacopo, 2020. "Staying dry on Spanish wine: The rejection of the 1905 Spanish-Italian trade agreement," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Ryan J. Vander Wielen, 2023. "Party leaders as welfare-maximizing coalition builders in the pursuit of party-related public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 75-99, January.
    21. Becker, Sascha O. & Hornung, Erik, 2020. "The Political Economy of the Prussian Three-Class Franchise," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1143-1188, December.
    22. Caroline Close & Lidia Nunez Lopez, 2016. "At the root of parliamentary party cohesion: the role of intraparty heterogeneity and party ideology," CEVIPOL Working Papers 1/2016, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    23. Monika Mühlböck & Nikoleta Yordanova, 2017. "When legislators choose not to decide: Abstentions in the European Parliament," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 323-336, June.
    24. Reza Mousavi & Bin Gu, 2019. "The Impact of Twitter Adoption on Lawmakers’ Voting Orientations," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 133-153, March.
    25. Chitralekha Basu & Carles Boix & Sonia Giurumescu & Paulo Serôdio, 2022. "Democratizing from Within: British Elites and the Expansion of the Franchise," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 139, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.

    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:oup:publus:v:51:y:2021:i:1:p:104-130.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    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.