Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching pp 3–28Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Introduction: Legislative Party Switching, Parties, and Party Systems

  • Chapter

Abstract

That political parties are fundamental to the functioning of modern democracies is well known. Politicians build their careers within parties, parties convey information to voters about candidate preferences, and parties provide labels that identify candidates to voters. When voters choose candidates for office, they delegate decision making on public policy to parties and to party-identified representatives. Repeated elections give voters the opportunity to hold parties responsible and accountable for policy decisions and outcomes. Parties thus are indispensable elements of democratic delegation and representation (Cox 1997; Filippov, Ordeshook, and Shvetsova 2004; Powell 2000; Schattschneider 1942; Stokes 1999).

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

1.7 References

  • Àgh, Attila. 1999. “The Parliamentarization of the East Central European Parties: Party Discipline in the Hungarian Parliament, 1990–1996.” In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, ed. Shaun Bowler, David M. Farrell, and Richard S. Katz, 167–188. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, John H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, John H., and William T. Bianco. 1992. “A Game-Theoretic Model of Party Affiliation of Candidates and Office Holders.” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 16 (8/9): 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ames, Barry. 2001. The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder, Jr., and Charles Stewart III. 2001. “The Effects of Party and Preferences on Congressional Roll Call Voting.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 26 (4): 533–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australia, Parliament. 2007. Parliamentary Handbook of the Commonwealth of Australia: Historical Information on the Australian Parliament. http://www.aph.gov.au/library/handbook/historical/index.htm. Last accessed August 8, 2007.

  • Barnes, Samuel H. 1977. Representation in Italy: Institutionalized Tradition and Electoral Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, David P. 1998. “Comparative Dynamics of Parliamentary Governments.” American Political Science Review 92 (3, September): 593–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belford, Aubrey. 2005. Interview: The Great Labor Schism. Pulse Books, 6 May. http://www.vibewire.net/3/node/4279.

  • Best, Robin. 2008. “Equal Access for All? Electoral Institutions and the Dynamics of Party System Size in Western Democracies, 1950–2005.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Best, Robin, and William B. Heller. 2005. “Safety in Numbers? Seat Shares and Discipline in Legislative Parties.” Paper presented at ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Granada, Spain, April 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bille, Lars, and Karina Pedersen. 2004. “Electoral Fortunes and Responses of the Social Democratic Party and Liberal Party in Denmark: Ups and Downs.” In Political Parties and Electoral Change, ed. Peter Mair, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Fritz Plasser, 207–233. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booysen, Susan. 2006. “The Will of the Parties versus the Will of the People? Defections, Elections, and Alliances in South Africa.” Party Politics 12 (6): 727–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowler, Shaun, David M. Farrell, and Richard S. Katz, eds. 1999. Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, Eric C., and Mark N. Franklin. 1973. “Aspects of Coalition Payoffs in European Parliamentary Democracies.” American Political Science Review 67 (2, June): 453–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneau, Thomas C., P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, Richard Gunther, Arend Lijphart, and Leonardo Morlino. 2001. “Democracy, Southern European Style.” In Parties, Politics, and Democracy in the New Southern Europe, ed. P. Nikiforos Diamandouros and Richard Gunther, 16–82. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, David, and Gareth Butler. 2000. Twentieth Century British Political Facts 1900–2000. 8th ed. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Canada, House of Commons. 2006. “Members of the House Who Crossed the Floor of the House of Common or Who Changed Parties 1867 to Date.” Canada, House of Commons, Library of Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canon, David T., and David J. Sousa. 1992. “Party System Change and Political Career Structures in the U.S. Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 17 (3): 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, John M., and Matthew Soberg Shugart. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas.” Electoral Studies 14 (4, December): 417–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castle, David, and Patrick J. Fett. 2000. “Member Goals and Party Switching in the U.S. Congress.” In Congress on Display, Congress at Work, ed. William T. Bianco, 231–241. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • CBC News. 2003a. Bloc MP Crosses over to Liberals, December 3. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/12/02/bloc031102.html. Last accessed August 14, 2006.

  • CBC News. 2003b. MacKay Slams Brison for Joining Liberals, December 10. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/12/10/brison_031210.html. Last accessed August 14, 2006.

  • Chang, Chuan-hsien. 2006. “Politics of Defection: Reinvestigating Influence of Electoral System over Party System.” Paper presented at the James F. Jakobsen Conference 2006, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corstange, Daniel. 2000. “Denmark: The Party System from 1963 to 2000.” In International Comparative Political Parties Project, ed. Kenneth Janda. http://www.janda.org/icpp/index.htm. Last accessed June 28, 2007.

  • Cox, Gary W. 1987. The Efficient Secret: The Cabinet and the Development of Political Parties in Victorian England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Gary W. 1997. Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Gary W. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, Ivor, and Anthony King. 1995. SDP: The Birth, Life, and Death of the Social Democratic Party. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desposato, Scott W. 2003. “The Impact of Party Switching on Legislative Behavior in Brazil.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA, August 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desposato, Scott W. 2006. “Parties for Rent? Ambition, Ideology, and Party Switching in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 62–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewachter, Wilfried. 1987. “Changes in Particratie: The Belgian Party System from 1944 to 1986.” In Party Systems in Denmark, Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Belgium, ed. Hans Daalder, 285–363. New York: St. Martin’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Döring, Herbert, ed. 1995. Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe. New York: St. Martin’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, James N., Lanny W. Martin, and Michael F. Thies. 2003. “Influence without Confidence: Upper Chambers and Parliamentary Government Formation.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, James N., and Michael F. Thies. 2001. “The Importance of Concurrence: The Impact of Bicameralism on Government Formation and Duration.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 19–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, Maurice. 1964. Political Parties. Translated by B. North, and R. North. Cambridge: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist. 2005a. “After the Vote.” May 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist. 2005b. “Belinda’s Leap.” May 21, 40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filippov, Mikhail, Peter C. Ordeshook, and Olga V. Shvetsova. 2004. Designing Federalism: A Theory of Self-Sustainable Federal Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • France, Assemblée Nationale. 2007. “Modifications apportées à la composition de l’Assemblée Nationale, XIe legislature.” http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/11/qui/modifications-11leg.asp. Last accessed May 11, 2007.

  • Grofman, Bernard, and Arend Lijphart, eds. 1986. Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences. New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grofman, Bernard, Evald Mikkel, and Rein Taagepera. 2000. “Fission and Fusion of Parties in Estonia, 1987–1999.” Journal of Baltic Studies 31 (4): 329–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grose, Christian R., and Antoine Yoshinaka. 2003. “The Electoral Consequences of Party Switching by Incumbent Members of Congress, 1947–2000.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (1): 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, William B. 1997. “Bicameralism and Budget Deficits: The Effect of Parliamentary Structure on Government Spending.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 22 (4): 485–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, William B. 2001. “Making Policy Stick: Why the Government Gets What It Wants in Multiparty Parliaments.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (4, October): 780–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, William B. 2007. “Divided Politics: Bicameralism, Parties, and Policy in Democratic Legislatures.” Annual Review of Political Science 10: 245–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, William B., and Carol Mershon. 2005. “Party Switching in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, 1996–2001.” Journal of Politics 67 (2): 536–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, William B., and Carol Mershon. 2008. “Dealing in Discipline: Party Switching and Legislative Voting in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, 1988–2000.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (4): 910–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkin, Jonathan. 1999. Party Formation and Democratic Transition in Spain: The Creation and Collapse of the Union of the Democratic Center. New York: St. Martin’s.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, John D. 1992. “Restrictive legislative Procedures in France and the U.S.” American Political Science Review 86 (3): 675–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, John D. 1996. Rationalizing Parliament: Legislative Institutions and Party Politics in France. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kato, Junko, and Kentaro Yamamoto. 2005. “Competition for Power: Party Switching as a Means for Changing Party Systems in Japan.” Paper presented at the meeting of the Research Work Group on Legislative Party Switching, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keesings Contemporary Archives. 1957. Bristol: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O. 1964. Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohno, Masuru. 1997. Japan’s Postwar Party Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krehbiel, Keith. 1991. Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lalvani, Mala. 2005. “Coalition Governments: Fiscal Implication for the Indian Economy.” American Review of Political Economy 3 (1): 127–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laver, Michael. 1998. “Models of Government Formation.” Annual Review of Political Science 1: 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laver, Michael, and Kenneth Benoit. 2003. “The Evolution of Party Systems between Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 47 (2, April): 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laver, Michael, and Norman Schofield. 1990. Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Left Socialist Party, Denmark. 1997. “Documents and History.” English version last updated December 3, 1997. http://www.venstresocialisterne.dk/uk_index.htm. Last accessed June 27, 2007.

  • Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Stein Rokkan. 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacRae, Duncan. 1967. Parliament, Parties, and Society in France 1946–1958. New York: St. Martin’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, Scott P. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, Scott P., and Aníbal Pérez Linán. 1997. “Party Discipline in the Brazilian Constitutional Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 22 (4): 453–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, Scott P., and Mariano Torcal. 2005. “Party System Institutionalization and Party System Theory after the Third Wave of Democratization.” Unpublished paper, Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, Peter, and Michael Marsh. 2004. “Political Parties in Electoral Markets in Postwar Ireland.” In Political Parties and Electoral Change, ed. Peter Mair, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Fritz. Plasser. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Lanny, and Georg Vanberg. 2004. “Policing the Bargain: Coalition Government and Parliamentary Scrutiny.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (1, December): 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Lanny, and Georg Vanberg. 2005. “Coalition Policymaking and Legislative Review.” American Political Science Review 99 (1): 73–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, Nolan M., Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 2001. “The Hunt for Party Discipline in Congress.” American Political Science Review 95 (3): 673–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElroy, Gail M. 2003. “Party Switching in the European Parliament: Why Bother?” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mejía Acosta, Andres. 1999. “Indisciplina y deslealtad en el congreso ecuatoriano.” Iconos (6, January): 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol. 2001. “Contending Models of Portfolio Allocation and Office Payoffs to Party Factions: Italy, 1963–79.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (2, April): 277–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol. 2002. The Costs of Coalition. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol. 2008. “Legislative Party Switching and Executive Coalitions.” Unpublished paper, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol, and Olga Shvetsova. 2005. “Electoral Cycles and Party Switching: Opportunistic Partisan Realignment in Legislatures.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol, and Olga Shvetsova. 2007. “Institutional Determinants of Party System Change and Party Volatility in Legislatures.” Unpublished paper, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol, and Olga Shvetsova. 2008a. “Parliamentary Cycles and Party Switching in Legislatures.” Comparative Political Studies 41 (1): 99–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol, and Olga Shvetsova. 2008b. “Party Switching in Sitting Parliaments and the Midterm Effect.” Paper presented at Annual Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research, Rennes, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mershon, Carol, and Timothy P. Nokken. 2008. “Party Formation and Changes of Party Affiliation among Legislators: The United States and Great Britain in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Gary, and Norman Schofield. 2003. “Activists and Partisan Realignment in the United States.” American Political Science Review 97 (2): 245–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Gary, and Norman Schofield. 2008. “The Transformation of the Republican and Democratic Party Coalitions in the US.” Perspectives on Politics 6 (3): 433–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miskin, Sarah. 2003. “Politician Overboard: Jumping the Party Ship.” Unpublished paper, Parliament of Australia: Parliamentary Library—Politics and Public Administration Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe, Terry M., and Michael Caldwell. 1994. “The Institutional Foundations of Democratic Government: A Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 150 (1): 171–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Wolfgang C., and Kaare Strøm, eds. 1999. Policy, Office, or Votes: How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nokken, Timothy P. 2000. “Dynamics of Congressional Loyalty: Party Defection and Roll Call Behavior, 1947–1997.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (3): 414–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nokken, Timothy P., and Keith T. Poole. 2004. “Congressional Party Defection in American History.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 29 (4): 545–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ordeshook, Peter C., and Olga V. Shvetsova. 1994. “Ethnic Heterogeneity, District Magnitude, and the Number of Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 38 (1, February): 100–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. Bingham, Jr. 2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy: Majoritarian and Proportional Visions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, Adam, Susan C. Stokes, and Bernard Manin, eds. 1999. Democracy, Accountability, and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, Steven R., and Ethan Scheiner. 2003. “Electoral Incentives and Policy Preferences: Mixed Motives behind Party Defections in Japan.” British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 469–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riker, William H. 1982. “The Two-Party System and Duverger’s Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science.” American Political Science Review 76 (4): 753–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez de Dios, Manuel. 1999. “Parliamentary Party Discipline in Spain.” In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, ed. Shaun Bowler, David M. Farrell, and Richard S. Katz, 141–162. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santero, F. Javier. 1998. “Pacto de los partidos contra el transfuguismo en los ayuntamientos.” El Mundo July 8. http://www.elmundo.es/1998/07/08/espana/08N0026.html. Last accessed July 29, 2008.

  • Schattschneider, E. E. 1942. Party Government. New York: Rinehart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler, Peter. 1999. Datenhandbuch zur Geschichte des Deutschen Bundestages 1949 bis 1999. Band I. Berlin: Deutscher Bundestag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Rogério. 1999. “Migração partidária e reeleição na Câmara dos Deputados.” Novos Estudos CEBRAP 54 (July): 127–146. Schofield, Norman. 2006. Architects of Political Change: Constitutional Quandaries and Social Choice Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, Norman, and Michael Laver. 1985. “Bargaining Theory and Portfolio Payoffs in European Coalition Governments, 1945–83.” British Journal of Political Science 15 (2): 143–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, Norman, and Itai Sened. 2006. Multiparty Democracy: Parties, Elections and Legislative Politics in Multiparty Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • South Africa, Parliament of the Republic. 2008. “State of Parties in the NA.” http://www.parliament.gov.za/live/content.php?Category_ID=148. Last accessed July 29, 2008.

  • Stokes, Susan C. 1999. “Political Parties and Democracy.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 243–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strøm, Kaare. 1990. “A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 34 (2, May): 565–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundquist, James L. 1983. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thames, Frank C. 2005. “Parliamentary Party Switching in the Ukrainian Rada, 1998–2002.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomás Mallén, Beatriz. 2002. Transfuguismo parlamentario y democracia de partidos. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, George, and Jeannette Money. 1997. Bicameralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Turan, Ilter. 1985. “Changing Horses in Midstream: Party Changers in the Turkish National Assembly.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 10 (1): 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, Kenneth N. 1990. “Nuclear Myths and Political Realities.” American Political Science Review 84 (3, September): 731–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Stephen, Richard Rose, and Ian McAllister. 1997. How Russia Votes. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshinaka, Antoine. 2005. “House Party Switchers and Committee Assignments: ‘Who Gets What, When, and How?’” Legislative Studies Quarterly 30 (3): 391–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zielinski, Jakub, Kazimierz M. Slomczynski, and Goldie Shabad. 2005. “Electoral Control in New Democracies: The Perverse Incentives of Fluid Party Systems.” World Politics 57 (3): 365–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. William B. Heller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carol Mershon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

William B. Heller Carol Mershon

Copyright information

© 2009 William B. Heller and Carol Mershon

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Heller, W.B., Mershon, C. (2009). Introduction: Legislative Party Switching, Parties, and Party Systems. In: Heller, W.B., Mershon, C. (eds) Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230622555_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation