To what extent do electoral institutions influence positions on same-sex marriage? Debates over same-sex marriage legislation have increased globally for the past 20 years, yet little research focuses on either debates in East Asia or the effect of electoral institutions. Using an original dataset on Taiwanese legislators and their public stances on same-sex marriage, this research finds that legislators elected under proportional representation (PR) are consistently more likely to support same-sex marriage laws than their counterparts elected in single-member districts (SMDs), even after controlling for partisanship. The results here not only highlight overlooked institutional influences on support, but also tie the broader literature on mixed-member systems to the growing research on same-sex marriage rights.
AndersenRobertFetnerTina (2008) Economic Inequality and Intolerance: Attitudes toward homosexuality in 35 democracies. American Journal of Political Science52(4): 942–958.
CareyJohn M (2007) Political Institutions, Competing Principals, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting. American Journal of Political Science51: 92–107.
ClarkTerryMartinaitisZilvinasDilbaRamunas (2008) Electoral Mandate and Party Cohesion: Does it matter in Lithuania?. The Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics24: 317–337.
6.
CoxKaren ESchoppaLeonard J (2002) Interaction Effects in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems. Comparative Political Studies35(9): 1027–1053.
7.
DaltonRussell JTanakaAiji (2007) Partisanship and Party System Institutionalization. Party Politics13: 179–196.
8.
D’AnieriPaul (2007) Understanding Ukrainian Politics: Power, Politics, and Institutional Design. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
9.
De La BruyereEmily (2014) Taiwan Activists Push for Same-Sex Marriage Bill. New York Times, May22.
10.
DoorenspleetRenske (2005) Electoral Systems and Democratic Quality: Do mixed systems combine the best or the worst of both worlds? An explorative quantitative cross-national study. Acta Politica40(1): 28–49.
11.
FiorinaMorris (1976) Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Haider-MarkelDonald PJoslynMark R (2008) Beliefs About the Origins of Homosexuality and Support For Gay Rights: An empirical test of attribution theory. Public Opinion Quarterly72: 291–310.
14.
HallPeter ATaylorRosemary CR (1996) Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies44(5): 936–957.
15.
HeitshusenValerieYoungGarryWoodDavid M (2005) Electoral Context and MP Constituency Focus in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science49(1): 32–45.
16.
HerronErik (2002) Electoral Influences on Legislative Behavior in Mixed-Member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada. Legislative Studies Quarterly27(3): 361–382.
JouWilly (2011) How Do Citizens in East Asian Democracies Understand Left and Right?. Japanese Journal of Political Science12(1): 33–55.
22.
JunWae-WonHixSimon (2010) Electoral Systems, Political Career Paths and Legislative Behavior: Evidence from South Korea’s mixed-member system. Japanese Journal of Political Science11: 153–171.
23.
KerevelYann (2010) The Legislative Consequences of Mexico’s Mixed-Member Electoral System, 2000–2009. Electoral Studies29(4): 691–703.
24.
LancasterThomas DPattersonW David (1990) Comparative Pork Barrel Politics: Perceptions from the West German Bundestag. Comparative Political Studies22(4): 458–477.
25.
MayhewDavid R (1974) Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.
26.
MoserRobert G (1997) The Impact of Parliamentary Electoral Systems in Russia. Post-Soviet Affairs13(3): 284–302.
PiersonPaulSkocpolTheda (2002) Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science. In KatznelsonIraMilnerHelen V (eds) Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York and London: WW Norton.
31.
ReedSteven RScheinerEthan (2003) Electoral Incentives and Policy Preferences: Mixed motives behind party defections in Japan. British Journal of Political Science33: 469–490.
32.
RichTimothy S (2013) The Electoral Incentives for Legislator Perceptions in Mixed Systems: Integrating evidence from East Asia. Representation49(1): 17–31.
33.
RichTimothy S (2014) Party Voting Cohesion in Mixed Member Legislative Systems: Evidence from Korea and Taiwan. Legislative Studies Quarterly39(1): 113–135.
ShengShing-YuanHuangShih-Hao (2006) Why Does the Taiwanese Public Hate the Legislative Yuan?. Taiwan Democracy Quarterly3(3): 85–128.
36.
ShepsleKenneth A (1989) Studying Institutions: Some lessons from the rational choice approach. Journal of Theoretical Politics1(2): 131–147.
37.
ShugartMatthewWattenbergMartin P (eds) (2001) Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: The Best of Both Worlds?Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
SiebererUlrich (2010) Behavioral Consequences of Mixed Electoral Systems: Deviating voting behavior of district and list MPs in the German Bundestag. Electoral Studies29: 484–96.
39.
SmithMiriam (2005) The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage in Canada and the United States. PS: Political Science & Politics38(2): 225–228.
40.
SmithTom W (2011) Cross-National Differences in Attitudes Towards Homosexuality. Working Paper. Williams Institute, UCLA, May1.
41.
ThamesFrank CEdwardsMartin S (2006) Differentiating Mixed-Member Electoral Systems: Mixed-member majoritarian and mixed-member proportional systems and government expenditures. Comparative Political Studies39(7): 905–927.
42.
ThompsonMark R (2001) Whatever Happened to “Asian Values”?Journal of Democracy12(4): 154–165.
WeingastBarry (1998) Political Institutions: Rational choice perspectives. In GoodinRobert EKlingemannHans-Dieter (eds) A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 167–190.
45.
ZakariaFareed (1994) Culture is Destiny: A conversation with Lee Kuan Yew. Foreign Affairs73(2): 189–194.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
