This study investigates how supermajority rules in a legislature affect electoral competition. We construct an extensive-form game wherein parties choose policy platforms in an election. Post election, the policy is determined based on a legislative voting rule. At symmetric equilibrium, supermajority rules induce divergence of policy platforms if and only if the parties are sufficiently attached to their preferred platform. Thus, supermajority rules may not always lead to moderate policies once electoral competition is considered.
AckermanB (2000) We the People, Volume 2: Transformations. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
2.
Ansolabehere S, Rodden J and Snyder JM Jr (2006) Purple America. Journal of Economic Perspectives 20(2): 97–118.
3.
AghionPAlbertoAFrancescoT (2004) Endogenous political institutions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics119(2): 565–611.
4.
Brady DW and Volden C (1998) Revolving Gridlock: Politics and Policy from Jimmy Carter to Clinton. Boulder, CO: Westview.
5.
BrennanGHamlinA (1998) Expressive voting and electoral equilibrium. Public Choice95(1): 149–175.
6.
CalvertRL (1985) Robustness of the multidimensional voting model: Candidate motivations, uncertainty, and convergence. American Journal of Political Science 29(1): 69–95.
7.
Chwe MSY (1999) Minority voting rights can maximize majority welfare. American Political Science Review 93(1): 85–97.
8.
CompteOJehielP (2017) On the optimal majority rule. mimeo.
9.
Dion D, Boehmke FJ, MacMillan W and Shipan CR (2016) The filibuster as a war of attrition. The Journal of Law and Economics 59(3): 569–595.
10.
DownsA (1957) An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy65(2): 135–150.
11.
GrahamBBernhardtD (2015) Flexibility vs. protection from an unrepresentative legislative majority. Games and Economic Behavior93: 59–88.
12.
HamlinAJenningsC (2011) Expressive political behaviour: Foundations, scope and implications. British Journal of Political Science, 41(3): 645–670.
13.
HartleyHOFitchER (1951) A chart for the incomplete beta-function and the cumulative binomial distribution. Biometrika38(3/4): 423–426.
14.
KangM (2017) Representation, sophisticated voting, and the size of the gridlock region. Journal of Theoretical Politics29(4): 623–646.
15.
Kishishita D (2019) An informational role of supermajority rules in monitoring the majority party's activities. Journal of Public Economic Theory 21(1): 167–196.
16.
KnightB (2000) Supermajority voting requirements for tax increases: Evidence from the states. Journal of Public Economics76(1): 41–67.
17.
Koger G (2012) Filibustering and partisanship in the modern senate. 217–228, Rowman & Littlefield.
18.
KrehbielK (1996) Institutional and partisan sources of gridlock: A theory of divided and unified government. Journal of Theoretical Politics8(1): 7–40.
19.
KrehbielK (1998) Pivotal Politics: Theory of US Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Li H (2001) A theory of conservatism. Journal of Political Economy 109(3): 617–636.
21.
LijphartA (1984) Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian & Consensus Government in Twenty-one Countries. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
22.
MatakosKTroumpounisOXefterisD (2016) Electoral rule disproportionality and platform polarization. American Journal of Political Science60(4): 1026–1043.
23.
MerrillSAdamsJ (2007) The effects of alternative power-sharing arrangements: Do moderating institutions moderate party strategies and government policy outputs?. Public Choice131(3): 413–434.
24.
Persico N (2004) Committee design with endogenous information. The Review of Economic Studies 71(1): 165–191.
25.
PeressM (2009) Optimal supermajority requirements in a two-party system. The Journal of Politics71(4): 1379–1393.
26.
Persson T, Roland G and Tabellini G (1997) Separation of powers and political accountability. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(4): 1163–1202.
27.
PolbornMKJamesMS Jr. (2017) Party polarization in legislatures with office-motivated candidates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics132(3): 1509–1550.
28.
RoemerJ (1994) A theory of policy differentiation in single issue electoral politics. Social Choice and Welfare11(4): 355–380.
29.
Stone DF (2013) Media and gridlock. Journal of Public Economics 101: 94–104.
30.
The Law Library of Congress. 2017. Parliamentary Procedures Requiring a Supermajority in Selected Jurisdictions.
31.
WittmanD (1983) Candidate motivation: A synthesis of alternative theories. The American Political Science Review1(1): 142–157.