Polarized Platforms and Moderate Policies with Checks and Balances

Posted: 21 Jun 2001

See all articles by Alberto F. Alesina

Alberto F. Alesina

Harvard University - Department of Economics; Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR); National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Howard Rosenthal

New York University

Abstract

In standard spatial models of elections, parties with policy preferences take divergent positions. Their platform positions are less separated than are the parties' ideal policies. If policy is the result of an executive--legislative compromise, the policy preferences of the parties can be moderated by voter behavior. Divided government may result. Since parties anticipate the moderated outcomes, they have an added incentive to choose separated platforms. Consequently, divergence in platforms is greater than in the standard model, especially when uncertainty is high and the legislature more powerful than the executive. For some parameters, parties may even 'posture' by adopting platforms that are more extreme than their 'true' ideal points.

Keyword(s): Elections, Parties, Platform positions, Policies

Suggested Citation

Alesina, Alberto F. and Rosenthal, Howard, Polarized Platforms and Moderate Policies with Checks and Balances. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=252766

Alberto F. Alesina (Contact Author)

Harvard University - Department of Economics ( email )

Littauer Center
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
617-495-8388 (Phone)
617-495-7730 (Fax)

Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

London
United Kingdom

National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

1050 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Howard Rosenthal

New York University ( email )

19 W 4th St
New York, NY New York 10012
United States
4155199591 (Phone)
4155199591 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
802
PlumX Metrics