Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T07:23:34.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Minimum Winning Electoral Coalitions Under Presidentialism: Reality or Fiction? The Case of Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Aline Machado
Aline Machado*
Affiliation:
Florida International University. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article studies the motivations of party leaders to form “minimum winning” electoral coalitions—alliances that cease to be winning if one member is subtracted. In Brazil, concurrent elections stimulate political actors' coordination, and electoral alliances are allowed. In 2002 and 2006, moreover, the Electoral Supreme Court obliged those parties with presidential candidates to replicate this electoral arrangement in the district. Under “verticalization,” parties with presidential candidates could not form alliances with rival parties in the concurrent legislative and gubernatorial elections. Verticalization arguably pushed party leaders to form minimum winning electoral coalitions. This new rule forced them to reconsider the contributions of each possible ally in the elections for president, federal deputy, and governor. Examining the elections from 1998 to 2006, this study finds that under verticalization, while parties did form more electoral coalitions with those partners they considered crucial to win, they did so at the expense of policy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , Fall 2009 , pp. 87 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2009

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

Abrucio, Fernando. 1998. Os barões dafederação. São Paulo : Hucitec.Google Scholar
Abrucio, Fernando, and Samuels, David. 2000. Federalism and Democratic Transitions: the “New” Politics of Governors in Brazil. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 30, 2: 43–61.Google Scholar
Ames, Barry. 2001. The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1970. Conflict of Interest: A Theory of Divergent Goals with Applications to Politics. Chicago : Markham.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1997. The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and Collaboration. Princeton : Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Braga, Maria do Socorro. 2006. Dinâmica de coordenação eleitoral em regime presidencialista e federativo: determinantes e conseqüências das coligações partidárias no Brasil. In Reforma política: lições da história recente, ed. Ary Dillon Soares, Gláucio and Rennó, Lucio. Rio de Janeiro : Fundação Getúlio Vargas. 228–45.Google Scholar
Brambor, Thomas, Roberts Clark, William, and Golder, Matt. 2006. Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analysis. Political Analysis 14, 1: 63–82.Google Scholar
Carey, John, and Reinhardt, Gina. 2004. State-level Institutional Effects on Legislative Coalition Unity in Brazil. Legislative Studies Quarterly 29, 1: 23–47.Google Scholar
Carreirão, Yan de Souza. 2006. Ideologia e partidos políticos: um estudo sobre coligações em Santa Catarina. Opinião Pública 12, 1: 136–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cucolo, Eduardo. 2002. Garotinho ataca Serra: Pstu e Pco batem em Lula. Folha de São Paulo online, October 1. <http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/brasil/ult96u38874.shtml> >Google Scholar
De Swaan, Abram. 1973. Coalition Theories and Cabinet Formations: A Study of Formal Theories of Coalition Formation Applied to Nine European Parliaments After 1918. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Fleischer, David. 2007. A política de coligações no Brasil: antes e depois da verticalização, impactos sobre os partidos. Série Ceppac– Centro de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação sobre as Américas 6. <http://www.unb.br/ics/ceppac/conteudo/serie/006fleischer2007.pdf> >Google Scholar
Franklin, Mark N., and Mackie, Thomas T.. 1984. Reassessing the Importance of Size and Ideology for the Formation of Governing Coalitions in Parliamentary Democracies. American Journal of Political Science 28, 4 (November): 671–92.Google Scholar
Gamson, William A. 1961. A Theory of Coalition Formation. American Sociological Review 26, 3 (June): 373–82.Google Scholar
Golder, Sona Nadenichek. 2006. The Logic of Pre-Electoral Coalition Formation. Columbus : Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Hershey, Marjorie R. 2007. Party Politics in America. New York : Longman.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark P. 1997a. Federalism and the Number of Parties in Argentine Congressional Elections. Journal of Politics 59, 2 (May): 538–49.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark P. 1997b. Evaluating Argentina's Presidential Democracy, 1983–1995. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, Scott and Shugart, Matthew. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. 259–99.Google Scholar
Kinzo, Maria D'Alva. 2003. Parties and Elections: Brazil's Democratic Experience Since 1985. In Brazil Since 1985: Economy, Polity, and Society, ed. Kinzo, and Dunkerley, James. London : Institute of Latin American Studies, University of London. 25–29.Google Scholar
Lavareda, Antônio. 1991. A democracia nas urnas: o processo partidário eleitoral brasileiro. Rio de Janeiro : Rio Fundo/IUPERJ.Google Scholar
Laver, M. J., and Budge, Ian. 1992. Party Policy and Government Coalitions. London : Macmillan.Google Scholar
Leiserson, Michael. 1970. Coalition Government in Japan. In The Study of Coalition Behavior, ed. Groennings, Kelley and Leiserson, . New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1984. Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries. New Haven : Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Limongi, Fernando, and Figueiredo, Argelina. 1995. Partidos políticos na Câmara dos Deputados, 1989–1994. Dados 38, 3: 497–525.Google Scholar
Limongi, Fernando, and Figueiredo, Argelina. 2000. Presidential Power, Legislative Organization, and Party Behavior in Brazil. Comparative Politics 32, 2 (January): 151–70.Google Scholar
Limongi, Fernando, and Figueiredo, Argelina. 2006. Poder de agenda na democracia brasileira: desempenho do governo no presidencialismo pluripartidário. In Reforma política: lições da história recente, ed. Ary Dillon Soares, Gláucio and Rennó, Lucio. Rio de Janeiro : Fundação Getúlio Vargas. 249–80.Google Scholar
Lourenço, Luiz Cláudio. 2003. Ativação, reforço e cristalização: pistas sobre os efeitos do horário gratuito de propaganda eleitoral. In Das ruas às urnas: partidos e eleições no Brasil contemporâneo, ed. Telles, Edward, Souza, Helcimara, and Ignácio, João. Caxias do Sul : Educs. 171–86.Google Scholar
Lyne, Mona M. 2004. Endogenous Institutions: Electoral Law and Internal Party Dynamics in Brazil. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2.Google Scholar
Lyne, Mona M. 2005. Parties as Programmatic Agents: a Test of Institutional Theory in Brazil. Party Politics 11, 2 (March): 193–216.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott. 1991. Politicians, Parties, and Electoral Systems. Comparative Politics 24, 1 (October): 21–43.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford : Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Nicolau, Jairo. 1996. Multipartidarismo e democracia: um estudo sobre o sistema partidário brasileiro. RJ : FGV, 1996.Google Scholar
Nicolau, Jairo. n.d. Banco de dados eleitorais do Brasil. <http://jaironicolau.iuperj.br/database/deb/port/> >Google Scholar
Power, Timothy J., and Mochel, Marília. 2008. Political Recruitment in an Executive-Centric System: Presidents, Governors, and Ministers in Brazil. In Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America, ed. Siavelis, Peter and Morgenstern, Scott. University Park : Penn State University Press. 218–40.Google Scholar
Raile, Eric, Pereira, Carlos, and Power, Timothy J.. 2006. The Presidential Toolbox: Generating Support in a Multiparty Presidential Regime. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, August 31.Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1962. The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven : Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Saisi, Katia. 2004. Os sentidos da mudança na campanha eleitoral 2002. Paper presented at the 27th Congresso Brasileiro de Ciências da Comunicação. <http://www.pluricom.com.br/forum.php?artigo=3> >Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 2000a. The Gubernatorial Coattails Effect: Federalism and Congressional Elections in Brazil. Journal of Politics 62, 1 (February): 240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuels, David. 2000b. Concurrent Elections, Discordant Results: Presidentialism, Federalism, and Governance in Brazil. Comparative Politics 33, 1 (October): 1–20.Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 2003. Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Santos, Fabiano. 2002. Partidos e comissões no presidencialismo de coalizão. Dados 45, 2: 237–64.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Rogério. 1999. Coligações eleitorais e sistema partidário no Brasil. Ph.D. diss., Instituto Universitário de Pesquisas do Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew. 1995. The Electoral Cycle and Institutional Sources of Divided Electoral Government. American Political Science Review 89, 2 (June): 327–43.Google Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and Carey, John. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sousa, Vivaldo. 2006. Eleições brasileiras 2006: será que o direito de reeleição para governadores e presidente da república e a verticalização afetam as coligações na disputa de cargos proporcionais? Paper presented at the 8th Conference of the Brazilian Studies Association, Nashville.Google Scholar
Taagepera, Rein, and Shugart, Matthew. 1989. Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems. New Haven : Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 1990. Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics. Berkeley : University of California Press.Google Scholar
Vaz, Lucio. 2001. Governo libera mais R$18,4 mi a aliados. Folha de São Paulo online, May 12. <http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/brasil/ult96u19710.shtml> >Google Scholar