{"title":"Generous Legislators? A Description of Vote Trading Agreements (Theory and Experiments)","authors":"Rafael Hortala-Vallve","doi":"10.1561/100.00010034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legislators trade influence to attain approval of their most preferred bills. The classical example is found in pork barrel politics with concentrated benefits and diffuse costs where logrolling agreements involving two (or more) legislators can load costs onto legislators excluded from the winning coalition. As Ferejohn et al (1987) show, the cheapest of these outcomes is the only agenda independent one. We model the bargaining game amongst legislators and show that this outcome can be supported by some specification of legislator preferences, but we shed light on a different outcome that has so far been overlooked in the literature: we may observe that legislators most affected by logrolling agreements (those who bear costs with no benefit) may break such coalitions. Specifically, in equilibrium some legislators ‘generously’ offer their support for some bills that are not to their benefit, and obtain NOTHING in exchange. We report evidence from experimental tests in which our theory predicts 2/3 of the subjects’ behaviour.","PeriodicalId":125020,"journal":{"name":"Political Institutions: Legislatures eJournal","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Institutions: Legislatures eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00010034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
Abstract
Legislators trade influence to attain approval of their most preferred bills. The classical example is found in pork barrel politics with concentrated benefits and diffuse costs where logrolling agreements involving two (or more) legislators can load costs onto legislators excluded from the winning coalition. As Ferejohn et al (1987) show, the cheapest of these outcomes is the only agenda independent one. We model the bargaining game amongst legislators and show that this outcome can be supported by some specification of legislator preferences, but we shed light on a different outcome that has so far been overlooked in the literature: we may observe that legislators most affected by logrolling agreements (those who bear costs with no benefit) may break such coalitions. Specifically, in equilibrium some legislators ‘generously’ offer their support for some bills that are not to their benefit, and obtain NOTHING in exchange. We report evidence from experimental tests in which our theory predicts 2/3 of the subjects’ behaviour.
议员们利用影响力来获得他们最喜欢的法案的批准。典型的例子是利益集中而成本分散的猪肉桶政治,涉及两个(或更多)立法者的滚动协议可以将成本转嫁给被排除在获胜联盟之外的立法者。正如Ferejohn et al(1987)所表明的,这些结果中最便宜的是唯一与议程无关的结果。我们对立法者之间的讨价还价博弈进行了建模,并表明这种结果可以得到立法者偏好的某些规范的支持,但我们揭示了迄今为止在文献中被忽视的另一种结果:我们可以观察到,受滚滚协议(那些承担成本而没有收益的人)影响最大的立法者可能会破坏这种联盟。具体来说,在均衡中,一些立法者“慷慨地”支持一些不利于他们的法案,而没有得到任何交换。我们报告了实验测试的证据,其中我们的理论预测了三分之二的受试者的行为。