Party cohesion in legislatures is a topic of longstanding concern to political scientists because cohesion facilitates democratic representation. We examine the cohesion of transnational party groups in the European Parliament, which is part of the EU’s bicameral system, and study the oftentimes competing pressures to which MEPs are subject from their EP party groups and national governments. Our explanation focuses on the conditions under which MEPs take policy positions that differ from those of their party groups. We propose that national governments lobby their national MEPs more intensely on issues of high national salience and on which they are in a weak bargaining position in the Council. The analyses offer a unique approach to the study of party cohesion that is based on the policy positions taken by each national delegation of MEPs in each of the three main party groups and national governments on specific controversial issues.
AchenCH (2006) Institutional realism and bargaining models. In: ThomsonRStokmanFNAchenCH. (eds) The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 86–123.
2.
AldrichJH (1995) Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
AttinàF (1990) The voting behaviour of the European Parliament members and the problem of Europarties. European Journal of Political Research18: 557–579.
4.
BörzelTHosliMO (2003) Brussels between Bern and Berlin: Comparative federalism meets the European Union. Governance16(2): 179–202.
5.
BowlerSFarrellDMKatzRS (eds) (1999) Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government. Columbus, OH: Ohio State Press.
6.
BraunDTausendpfundM (2014) The impact of the Euro crisis on citizens’ support for the European Union. Journal of European Integration36(3): 231–245.
7.
Bueno de MesquitaB (1994) Political forecasting: An expected utility method. In: Bueno de MesquitaBStokmanFN (eds) European Community Decision-Making: Models, Applications and Comparisons. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 71–104.
8.
CameronCM (2000) Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
CareyJM (2007) Competing principals, political institutions, and party unity in legislative voting. American Journal of Political Science51(1): 92–107.
10.
CarrubbaCJGabelMMurrahL. (2006) Off the record: Unrecorded legislative votes, selection bias and roll-call vote analysis. British Journal of Political Science36(4): 691–704.
11.
CorbettRJacobsFShackletonM (2003) The European Parliament. 5th edition. London: John Harper Publishing.
12.
CoxGWMcCubbinsMD (1993) Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
13.
DesposatoSW (2004) The impact of federalism on National Party cohesion in Brazil. Legislative Studies Quarterly29(2): 259–285.
14.
Hayes-RenshawFWallaceH (2006) The Council of Ministers. 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
15.
HeisenbergD (2005) The institution of consensus in the European Union: Formal vs. informal decision-making in the Council. European Journal of Political Research44(1): 65–90.
16.
HixS (1998) Elections, parties and institutional design: A comparative perspective on European Union democracy. West European Politics21(3): 19–52.
17.
HixSNouryARolandG (2007) Democratic Politics in the European Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
KreppelA (2002) The European Parliament and Supranational Party System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
KreppelATsebelisG (1999) Coalition formation in the European Parliament. Comparative Political Studies32: 933–966.
20.
LewisJ (2008) Strategic bargaining, norms and deliberation. In: NaurinDWallaceH (eds) Unveiling the Council of the European Union: Games Governments Play in Brussels. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 165–184.
21.
MamadouhVRaunioT (2003) The committee system: Powers, appointments and report allocation. Journal of Common Market Studies41(2): 333–351.
22.
McElroyGBenoitK (2010) Party policy and group affiliation in the European Parliament. British Journal of Political Science40(2): 377–398.
23.
McElroyGBenoitK (2012) Policy positioning in the European Parliament. European Union Politics13(1): 150–167.
24.
NorpothH (1976) Explaining party cohesion in congress: The case of shared policy attitudes. American Political Science Review70(4): 1156–1171.
25.
NugentN (1999) The Government and Politics of the European Union. 4th edition. London: Macmillan.
26.
PooleKTRosenthalH (1997) Congress: A Political-economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
RaunioT (2000) Losing independence or finally gaining recognition? Contacts between MEPS and national parties. Party Politics6(2): 211–223.
28.
Ripoll ServentA (2013) Holding the European Parliament responsible: Policy shift in the Data Retention Directive from consultation to codecision. Journal of European Public Policy20(7): 972–978.
ThomassenJ (1994) Empirical research into political representation: Failing democracy or failing models. In: JenningsMKMannTE (eds) Elections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren Miller. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 237–264.
31.
ThomassenJJASchmittH (1999) Partisan structures in the European Parliament. In: KatzRMWesselsB (eds) The European Parliament, the National Parliaments, and European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 129–148.
32.
ThomassenJNouryAVoetenE (2004) Party competition in the European Parliament. Evidence from roll call and survey analyses. In: MarksGSteenbergenM (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 141–164.
33.
ThomsonR (2011) Resolving Controversy in the European Union: Legislative Decision-Making before and after Enlargement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
ThomsonRArreguiJLeuffenD. (2012) A new dataset on decision-making in the European Union before and after the 2004 and 2007 enlargements (DEUII). Journal of European Public Policy19(4): 604–622.
35.
WhitakerR (2005) National parties in the European Parliament: An influence in the committee system?European Union Politics6(1): 5–28.
