Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:47:03.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electoral Reform, Institutional Change, and Party Adaptation in Uruguay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Jeffrey Cason
Jeffrey Cason*
Affiliation:
Middlebury College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Uruguay's stable, institutionalized party system has undergone substantial changes in recent years, both from the increasing electoral strength of the left and from changes made to the electoral system in 1996. Analyzing the debut of that new system in the 1999 national and 2000 municipal elections, this article concludes that Uruguay is moving from what was a fairly evenly divided three-party system to one in which the longstanding traditional parties will confront, as a bloc, the stronger left. The electoral analysis shows that the bloc dynamic took over whenever elections were close between the left and one of the traditional parties.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , Fall 2002 , pp. 89 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Buchanan, Paul. 1995. State, Labor, Capital: Democratizing Class Relations in the Southern Cone. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Búsqueda (Montevideo). 1999. Elecciones nacionales del 31/10/99: resultados finales. November 11.Google Scholar
Cabrera, Ernesto. 1996. Multiparty Politics in Argentina? Electoral Rules and Changing Patterns. Electoral Studies 15, 4: 477–95.Google Scholar
Caetano, Gerardo, and José, Rilla. 1994. Historia contemporánea del Uruguay, de la colonia al Mercosur. Montevideo: Editorial Fin de Siglo.Google Scholar
Cason, Jeffrey. 2000. Electoral Reform and Stability in Uruguay. Journal of Democracy 11, 2: 85–98.Google Scholar
Coppedge, Michael. 1998. The Dynamic Diversity of Latin American Party Systems. Party Politics 4, 4: 547–68.Google Scholar
Correa Freitas, Ruben, and Cristina, Vázquez. 1997. La reforma constitutional de 1997: análisis constitucionaly administrativo. Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria.Google Scholar
Costa Bonino, Luis. 1995. La crisis del sistema político uruguayo. Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria.Google Scholar
El Espectador (Montevideo). 2000. Para Luis Hierro López, el Partido Colorado sale fortalecido de las elecciones municipales. http:www.espectador.comtextele99municipele05161.htm.Google Scholar
Filgueira, Fernando, and Jorge, Papadópulos. 1997. Putting Conservatism to Good Use? Long Crisis and Vetoed Alternatives in Uruguay. In The New Politics of Inequality in Latin America: Rethinking Participation and Representation, ed. Douglas, A. Chalmers et al. New York: Oxford University Press. 360–87.Google Scholar
Finch, Henry. 1995. The Uruguayan Election of 1994. Electoral Studies 14, 2: 232–36.Google Scholar
Gillespie, Charles Guy. 1991. Negotiating Democracy: Politicians and Generals in Uruguay. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
González, Luis Eduardo. 1991. Political Structures and Democracy in Uruguay. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
González, Luis Eduardo. 1995. Continuity and Change in the Uruguayan Party System. In Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, ed. Scott, Mainwaring and Timothy, R. Scully. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 138–63.Google Scholar
González, Luis Eduardo, Felipe, Montestier, Rosario, Queirolo, and Mariana Sotelo, Rico. 1999. Los partidos políticos uruguayos en tiempos de cambio. Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard. 1986. Intraparty Preference Voting. In Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences, ed. Bernard, Grofman and Arend, Lijphart. New York: Agathon Press. 85–103.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Timothy, R. Scully. 1995. Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America. In Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, and Scully, . Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1–34.Google Scholar
McCoy, Jennifer. 1999. Chávez and the End of “Partyarchy” in Venezuela. Journal of Democracy 10, 3: 64–77.Google Scholar
McDonald, Ronald H., and Mark Ruhl, J.. 1989. Party Politics and Elections in Latin America. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Monestier, Felipe. 1999. Partidos por dentro: la fraccionalización de los partidos políticos en el Uruguay (1954–1994). in González et al. 1999. 19–85.Google Scholar
El Observador (Montevideo). 1999a. “Ahora es mucho más complicado el apoyo a Lacalle” si éste llega a ganar. April 21.Google Scholar
El Observador (Montevideo). 1999b. Blancos convocaron a votar por Batlle. November 10.Google Scholar
El Observador (Montevideo). 2000a. Primera fuerza, pero con cifras en rojo. May 16.Google Scholar
El Observador (Montevideo). 2000b. Un triunfo bianco con regusto amargo. May 15.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1999 (1994). Delegative Democracy. In Counterpoints: Selected Essays on Authoritarianism and Democratization, ed. O'Donnell, . Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Originally published in Journal of Democracy 5, 1 (1994): 55–69.Google Scholar
Peeler, John. 1998. Building Democracy in Latin America. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Pereira, Marcelo. 1996. El Proyecto, sus pros y sus contras. Brecha (Montevideo). December 5: 2–3.Google Scholar
Pereira, Marcelo. 2000. Algo viejo, algo nuevo y algo prestado. Brecha. May 19: 2–3.Google Scholar
Queirolo, Rosario. 1999. La tradicionalización del Frente Amplio: la conflictivi-dad del proceso de cambio. in González et al. 1999. 87–127.Google Scholar
Roberts, Kenneth M., and Erik, Wibbels. 1999. Party Systems and Electoral Volatility in Latin America: a Test of Economic, Institutional, and Structural Explanations. American Political Science Review 93, 3: 575–90.Google Scholar
Rubio, Enrique. 2000. Las elecciones municipales: reflexiones básicas. Escenario 2 (Montevideo), http:www.escenario2.org.uynumero2rubio.html.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1986. The Influence of Electoral Systems: Faulty Laws or Faulty Method? In Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences, ed. Bernard, Grofman and Arend, Lijphart. New York: Agathon Press. 43–68.Google Scholar
Semino, Miguel. 1998. Panorama del nuevo sistema electoral. In Reflexiones sobre la reforma constitucional de 1996, ed. Carlos Mata, Prates. Montevideo: Fundacion de Cultura Universitaria.Google Scholar
Sotelo Rico, Mariana. 1999. La longevidad de los partidos tradicionales uruguayos desde una perspectiva comparada. in González et al. 1999. 129–65.Google Scholar
Uruguay en la Coyuntura. 2000a. Elecciones municipales 14 de mayo. http:www.uc.org.uyd0500.htm.Google Scholar
Uruguay en la Coyuntura. 2000b. Resultado de las elecciones del domingo 14 por departamento. http:www.uc.org.uyde050012.htm.Google Scholar
Uruguay Total. 1999. Como votó el país, http:www.uruguaytotal.comeleccionescomo_yoto_el_pais.htm.Google Scholar
Waksman, Guillermo. 2000. Los partidos politicos después del ciclo electoral. Brecha. May 19.Google Scholar