Skip to main content
Book cover

Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching pp 265–285Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Party Switching, Party Systems, and Political Representation

  • Chapter

Abstract

The literature on parties and party systems assumes that electoral competition and intraparty policy deliberations are the two primary mechanisms for making parties responsive to public opinion. By implication, this suggests that little else happens between elections to keep politicians responsive to voters. The recent work on party switching, however, has begun to analyze how the reaffiliations of politicians that occur between elections constitute a third, and so far largely overlooked, mechanism of political representation (Kato 1998; Laver and Benoit 2003, 215–216; Zielinski, Slomczynski, and Shabad 2005). The growing literature on party switching has analyzed its import for representation in various ways. Most scholars have concentrated on its representational consequences in the legislative arena and legislative-executive relations by analyzing how switching affects committee assignments, roll-call voting, coalition formation, and ministerial portfolio assignments (Desposato 2006; Grose and Yoshinaka 2003; Heller and Mershon 2005; Mershon and Shvetsova 2008; Nokken 2000). A smaller number of scholars have investigated how party switching affects the larger dynamics of party systems.

Keywords

  • Vote Share
  • Party System
  • Political Representation
  • Strategic Vote
  • Electoral Competition

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

We would like to thank Carol Mershon and Will Heller for their thoughtful comments. Research for this chapter was supported by Estonian Targeted Financing Grants 0182573 and 0180128.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1057/9780230622555_10
  • Chapter length: 21 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-0-230-62255-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

10.7 References

  • Àgh, Attila. 1999. “The Parliamentarization of the East Central European Parties: Party Discipline in the Hungarian Parliament, 1990–96.” In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, ed. Shaun Bowler, David Farrell, and Richard Katz, 167–188. Columbus: Ohio University 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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cary, Noel. 1996. The Path to Christian Democracy: German Catholics and the Party System from Windhorst to Adenauer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. 1990. Elections in the Baltic States and Soviet Republics: A Compendium for Reports on the Parliamentary Elections Held in 1990. Washington: Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowley, Philip. 1996. “ ‘Crossing the Floor’: Representative Theory and Practice in Britain.” Public Law 2: 214–224.

    Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Deschouwer, Kris. 1994. “The Decline of Consociationalism and the Reluctant Modernization of Belgian Mass Parties.” In How Parties Organize, ed. Richard Katz and Peter Mair, 80–108. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, Maurice. 1951. Les Partis Politiques. Paris: Armand Colin.

    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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  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.

    CrossRef  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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kaack, Heino. 1972. “Fraktions-und Parteiwechsler im Deutschen Bundestag.” Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 3 (1): 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato, Junko. 1998. “When the Party Breaks Up: Exit and Voice among Japanese Legislators.” American Political Science Review 92 (4): 857–870.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, Richard, and Peter Mair. 1993. “The Evolution of Party Organizations in Europe: The Three Faces of Party Organization.” American Review of Politics 14: 593–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koole, Ruud. 1994. “The Vulnerability of the Modern Cadre Party in the Netherlands.” In How Parties Organize, ed. Richard Katz and Peter Mair, 278–302. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreppel, Amie. 2002. The European Parliament and Supranational Party System: A Study in Institutional Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreuzer, Marcus. 2001. Institutions and Innovation: Voters, Parties, and Interest Groups in the Consolidation of Democracy: France and Germany, 1870–1939. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreuzer, Marcus. n.d. “How Party Systems Form: Path Dependency and the Institutionalization of the Postwar German Party System.” British Journal of Political Science. Forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreuzer, Marcus, and Vello Pettai. 2003. “Patterns of Political Instability: Affiliation Patterns of Politicians and Voters in Post-Communist Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.” Studies in Comparative International Development 38 (2): 76–98.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kuran, Timor. 1991. “Now Out of Never: The Element of Surprise in the East European Revolution of 1989.” World Politics 44 (1): 7–48.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Laver, Michael, and Kenneth Shepsle. 1999. “How Political Parties Emerged from the Primeval Slime: Party Cohesion, Party Discipline and the Formation of Governments.” In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Governments, ed. Shaun Bowler, David Farrell, and Richard Katz, 23–48. Columbus: Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieven, Anatol. 1993. The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania and the Path to Independence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Stein Rokkan. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction.” In Party Systems and Voter Alignments, ed. Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magaloni, Beatriz. 2006. Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and Its Demise in Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, Scott, and Timothy Scully. 1995. Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, Peter. 1990. “The Electoral Payoffs of Fission and Fusion.” British Journal of Political Science 20 (1): 131–142.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, Peter. 1997. Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Wolfgang. 1993. “The Relevance of the State for Party System Change.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 5 (4): 419–454.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nokken, Timothy. 2000. “Dynamics of Congressional Loyalty: Party Defection and Roll-Call Behavior, 1947–97.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 25 (3): 417–444.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, Andreas. 1995. “Under-and Overinstitutionalization: Some Ideal Typical Propositions Concerning New and Old Party Systems.” In Working Paper # 213. Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheiner, Ethan. 2005. Democracy without Competition in Japan: Opposition Failure in a One-Party Dominant State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, James M., Jr., and Michael M. Ting. 2002. “An Informational Rationale for Political Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (1): 90–110.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Taagepera, Rein. 1990. “The Baltic States.” Electoral Studies 9 (4): 303–311.

    CrossRef  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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Marcus Kreuzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vello Pettai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Copyright information

    © 2009 William B. Heller and Carol Mershon

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    Kreuzer, M., Pettai, V. (2009). Party Switching, Party Systems, and Political Representation. In: Heller, W.B., Mershon, C. (eds) Political Parties and Legislative Party Switching. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230622555_10

    Download citation