Skip to main content
Log in

Equilibrium and efficiency in an organized vote market

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study an organized market for votes, in which trade is directed by a market "specialist". This market mechanism always produces an equilibrium outcome, and whenever vote buying occurs the alternative chosen is Pareto superior to the alternative that would be chosen without trade. We then characterize the equilibrium outcomes in a one-dimensional policy space, and show that if the distribution of ideal points is skewed enough, then the equilibrium with vote buying differs from the equilibrium without vote buying (the median ideal point). This difference reflects the ability of an intense minority to obtain a policy it prefers in exchange for side-payments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Becker, G. (1983). A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 98: 371–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernholz, P. (1973). Logrolling, Arrow paradox and cyclical preferences. Public Choice 15: 87–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernholz, P. (1974). Logrolling, Arrow paradox and decision rules: A generalization. Kyklos 27: 49–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, T.C. and Goodman, R.P. (1973). Private demands for public goods. American Economic Review 63: 280–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. and Riker, W.H. (1973). The paradox of vote trading. American Political Science Review 67: 1235–1247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J.M. and Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T.N. and Ferguson, L.C. (1983). City money. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1966). The possibility of a social welfare function. American Economic Review 56: 1105–1122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coughlin, P. (1992). Probabilistic voting theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzau, A.T. and Munger, M.C. (1986). Legislators and interest groups: How unorganized interests get represented. American Political Science Review 80: 89–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H. and Prewitt, K. (1973). Labyrinths of democracy. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldstein, M.S. (1975). Wealth neutrality and local choice in public education. American Economic Review 65: 75–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferejohn, J. (1974). Sour notes on the theory of vote trading. Mimeo, California Institute of Technology.

  • Goodman, J.S. (1975). The dynamics of urban government and politics. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, T. (1973). Incentives in teams. Econometrica 41: 617–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haefele, E. (1971). A utility theory of representative government. American Economic Review 61: 350–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadane, J.B. (1972). On division of the question. Public Choice 13: 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koford, K. (1982). Centralized vote trading. Public Choice 39: 245–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koford, K. (1987). Scale economies and rent-seeking in legislative parties. Public Choice 52: 35–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koford, K. (1993). The median and the competitive equilibrium in one dimension. Public Choice 76: 276–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, H.F. (1975). Local education expenditures, fiscal capacity, and the composition of the property tax base. National Tax Journal 28: 145–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, J. and Philipson, T. (1992). Vote trading and the Coase theorem. Unpublished manuscript, University of Chicago.

  • Lovell, M.C. (1978). Spending for education: The exercise of public choice. Review of Economics and Statistics 60: 487–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.C. (1973). Constitutional democracy and social welfare. Quarterly Journal of Economics 87: 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.C. and Murell, P. (1986). Interests groups and the size of government. Public Choice 48: 125–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, R.E. (1967). The possibility of a social welfare function: Comment. American Economic Review 57: 1300–1304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipson, T. and Snyder, J.M. Jr. (1992). Voting buying vs. the median voter model: Empirical evidence from municipal spending. Unpublished manuscript, University of Chicago.

  • Poole, K. and Rosenthal, H. (1985). A spatial model for legislative roll call analysis. American Journal of Political Science 29: 357–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, K. and Rosenthal, H. (1991). Patterns of congressional voting. American Journal of Political Science 35: 228–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, T. and Rosenthal, H. (1983). A constitution for solving asymmetric externality games. American Journal of Political Science 27: 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salop, S. (1979). Monopolistic competition with outside goods. Bell Journal of Economics 10: 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J.E. (1979). Ideological coalitions in congress. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, T. (1977). Collective choice, separation of issues and vote trading. American Political Science Review 71: 999–1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, T. (1981). The universal instability theorem. Public Choice 37: 487–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M. and Van der Heyden, L. (1978). Logrolling and budget alocation games. International Journal of Game Theory 7: 151–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, J.M. Jr. (1991). On buying legislatures. Economics and Politics 3: 93–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, J.H. (1988). Is vote-selling desirable? Public Choice 59: 117–194.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Philipson, T.J., Snyder, J.M. Equilibrium and efficiency in an organized vote market. Public Choice 89, 245–265 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00159358

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00159358

Keywords

Navigation