Legislative Democracy in the Bundestag After Reunification

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Michael Koß
{"title":"Legislative Democracy in the Bundestag After Reunification","authors":"Michael Koß","doi":"10.1080/09644008.2021.2019712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article assesses the impact of reunification on the Bundestag from a historical institutionalist perspective. Accordingly, it focuses on procedural development and parties’ behaviour. More specifically, it analyses parties’ control of the legislative agenda and their willingness to obstruct this agenda. Prior to reunification, the Bundestag emerged as a working legislature with decentralised agenda control. Even though the Bundestag was vulnerable to obstruction, especially by questioning the quorum, obstructive behaviour virtually ceased after 1951. After reunification, the Bundestag’s vulnerability was increased when a plenary ‘core time’ was introduced in 1995. However, all parties, including the one most directly related to reunification, the Left Party, continued to abstain from exploiting procedural loopholes. Only the AfD as the other post-1990 newcomer (albeit less directly related to reunification) did so by questioning the quorum to an unprecedented extent after it entered the Bundestag in 2017. So far, this systematic obstruction has only led to a path-dependent procedural reform. If, however, the AfD continues with this behaviour, it can be regarded as a threat to legislative democracy at least indirectly related to German reunification.","PeriodicalId":46640,"journal":{"name":"German Politics","volume":"32 1","pages":"107 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2021.2019712","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article assesses the impact of reunification on the Bundestag from a historical institutionalist perspective. Accordingly, it focuses on procedural development and parties’ behaviour. More specifically, it analyses parties’ control of the legislative agenda and their willingness to obstruct this agenda. Prior to reunification, the Bundestag emerged as a working legislature with decentralised agenda control. Even though the Bundestag was vulnerable to obstruction, especially by questioning the quorum, obstructive behaviour virtually ceased after 1951. After reunification, the Bundestag’s vulnerability was increased when a plenary ‘core time’ was introduced in 1995. However, all parties, including the one most directly related to reunification, the Left Party, continued to abstain from exploiting procedural loopholes. Only the AfD as the other post-1990 newcomer (albeit less directly related to reunification) did so by questioning the quorum to an unprecedented extent after it entered the Bundestag in 2017. So far, this systematic obstruction has only led to a path-dependent procedural reform. If, however, the AfD continues with this behaviour, it can be regarded as a threat to legislative democracy at least indirectly related to German reunification.
统一后联邦议院的立法民主
摘要本文从历史制度主义的角度评估了统一对联邦议院的影响。因此,它侧重于程序的发展和当事人的行为。更具体地说,它分析了政党对立法议程的控制以及他们阻碍这一议程的意愿。在统一之前,联邦议院是一个工作的立法机构,拥有分散的议程控制权。尽管联邦议院很容易受到阻挠,特别是通过质疑法定人数,但1951年后,阻挠行为几乎停止了。统一后,联邦议院的脆弱性在1995年引入全体“核心时间”时增加了。然而,包括与统一关系最直接的政党左翼党在内的所有政党都继续避免利用程序漏洞。只有AfD作为另一个1990年后的新来者(尽管与统一没有太大直接关系),在2017年进入联邦议院后,以前所未有的程度质疑法定人数。到目前为止,这种系统性的阻碍只导致了依赖路径的程序改革。然而,如果AfD继续这种行为,它可以被视为对立法民主的威胁,至少与德国统一间接相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
German Politics
German Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
40
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信