Public Choice

, Volume 171, Issue 1–2, pp 187–206 | Cite as

Defecting alone or splitting together? Individual and collective party switching by legislators

Article
  • 232 Downloads

Abstract

While the nature of party switching is expected to have significant consequences for democratic representation, the current literature has not explored sufficiently the different dynamics that facilitate legislators to depart from their parties individually or collectively. We argue that target parties’ concerns about the policy consequences of absorbing an ideologically different group of legislators constrain the opportunities of factions even though they share the same electoral concerns as individual legislators. Turkey’s highly unstable legislative party system from 1991 to 2002 allows us to conduct a two-stage conditional logit analysis of party affiliation. In line with our theory, we find that individual switchers are affected by immediate electoral concerns while policy related factors matter most in cases of factional and/or collective switches.

Keywords

Party switching Faction MP Turkey Representation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this paper was previously presented at the Midwest Political Association Meeting in Chicago, March 2011. We are grateful to Melis Nazlı for her able help with data collection and the conference participants for their feedback. We also thank Abdurahman Aydemir and Kerim Can Kavakli who provided valuable suggestions on the statistical analysis, the participants of our expert survey on party positions, and the two anonymous referees.

Supplementary material

11127_2017_433_MOESM1_ESM.doc (589 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 589 kb)

References

  1. Aleskerov, F., Ersel, H., & Sabuncu, Y. (2000). Power and coalitional stability in the Turkish parliament 1991–1999. Turkish Studies, 1(2), 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayan Musil, P., & Dikici Bilgin, H. (2014). Types of outcomes in factional rivalries: Lessons from non-democratic parties in Turkey. International Political Science Review, 37(2), 166–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Back, H. (2008). Intra-party politics and coalition formation: Evidence from Swedish local government. Party Politics, 14(1), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Back, H., & Dumont, P. (2007). Combining large-n and small-n strategies: The way forward in coalition research. West European Politics, 30(3), 467–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakker, R., de Vries, C., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Marks, G., et al. (2015). Measuring party positions in Europe: The Chapel Hill expert survey trend file, 1999–2010. Party Politics, 21(1), 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brambor, T., Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14(1), 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canon, D. T., & Sousa, D. J. (1992). Party system change and political career structures in the U.S. Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 17(3), 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ceron, A. (2012). Bounded oligarchy: How and when factions constrain leaders in party position-taking? Electoral Studies, 31(4), 689–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ceron, A. (2015). The politics of fission: An analysis of faction breakaways among Italian parties (1946–2011). British Journal of Political Science, 45(1), 121–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ceron, A. (2016). Inter-factional conflicts and government formation: Do party leaders sort out ideological heterogeneity? Party Politics, 22(6), 797–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ciftci, S., Forrest, W., & Tekin, Y. (2008). Committee assignments in a nascent party system: The case of the Turkish Grand National Assembly. International Political Science Review, 29(3), 303–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cox, G. W., & Rosenbluth, F. (1995). Anatomy of a split: The liberal democrats of Japan. Electoral Studies, 14(4), 355–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Desposato, S. W. (2006). Parties for rent? Careerism, ideology, and party switching in Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies. American Journal of Political Science, 50(1), 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Desposato, S. W. (2009). Party switching in Brazil: Causes, effects, and representation. In W. B. Heller & J. Mershon (Eds.), Political parties and legislative party switching (pp. 109–146). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Desposato, S. & Scheiner, E. (2008). Governmental centralization and party affiliation: Legislator strategies in Brazil and Japan. American Political Science Review, 102(4), 509–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heller, W. B., & Mershon, C. (2005). Party switching in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, 1996–2001. The Journal of Politics, 67(2), 536–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heller, W. B., & Mershon, C. (2008). Dealing in discipline: Party switching and legislative voting in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, 1988–2000. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 910–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heller, W. B., & Mershon, C. (2009). Introduction: Legislative party switching, parties, and party systems. In W. B. Heller & J. Mershon (Eds.), Political parties and legislative party switching (pp. 3–28). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hooghe, L., Bakker, R., Brigevich, A., de Vries, C., Edwards, E., Marks, G., et al. (2010). Reliability and validity of measuring party positions: The Chapel Hill expert surveys of 2002 and 2006. European Journal of Political Research, 49(5), 687–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kalaycioglu, E., & Carkoglu, A. (2007). Turkish democracy today: Elections, protest and stability in an Islamic society. New York: I.B.Tauris.Google Scholar
  22. Kato, J. (1998). When the party breaks up: Exit and voice among Japanese legislators. American Political Science Review, 92(4), 857–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katz, R. S. (2006). Party in democratic theory. In R. S. Katz & W. Crotty (Eds.), Handbook of party politics (pp. 34–47). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kesgin, B., & Kaarbo, J. (2010). When and how parliaments influence foreign policy: The case of Turkey’s Iraq decision. International Studies Perspectives, 11(1), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kreuzer, M., & Pettai, V. (2009). Party switching, party systems, and political representation. In W. B. Heller & J. Mershon (Eds.), Political parties and legislative party switching (pp. 265–286). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kselman, D. (2009). Electoral institutions, intra-party competition, and political conflict. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Duke University.Google Scholar
  27. Laver, M., Kenneth, B., & John, G. (2003). Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression models for categorical outcomes using stata (3rd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  29. McLaughlin, E. (2011). Electoral regimes and party-switching floor-crossing in South Africa’s local legislatures. Party Politics, 18(4), 563–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McMenamin, I., & Gwiazda, A. (2011). Three roads to institutionalisation: Vote-, office- and policy-seeking explanations of party switching in Poland. European Journal of Political Research, 50(6), 838–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mershon, C. (2008). Legislative party switching and executive coalitions. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 9(3), 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mershon, C., & Shvetsova, O. (2008). Parliamentary cycles and party switching in legislatures. Comparative Political Studies, 41(1), 99–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mershon, C., & Shvetsova, O. (2013). The microfoundations of party system stability in legislatures. Journal of Politics, 75(4), 865–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morgenstern, S. (2001). Organized factions and disorganized parties: Electoral incentives in Uruguay. Party Politics, 7(2), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mutlu-Eren, H. (2015). Keeping the party together. Public Choice, 164(1), 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nokken, T. P. (2009). Party switching and the procedural party agenda in the US house of representatives. In W. B. Heller & J. Mershon (Eds.), Political parties and legislative party switching (pp. 81–108). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. O’brien, D. Z., & Shomer, Y. (2013). A cross-national analysis of party switching. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 38(1), 111–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1985). A spatial model for legislative roll call analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(2), 357–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Powell, G. B. (2000). Elections as instruments of democracy: Majoritarian and proportional visions. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Radean, M. (2013). Party politics and legislative party switching. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations, Florida State University.Google Scholar
  41. Reed, S. R. & Scheiner, E. (2003). Electoral incentives and policy preferences: Mixed motives behind party defections in Japan. British Journal of Political Science, 33(3), 469–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sayarı, S. (2007). Towards a new Turkish party system? Turkish Studies, 8(2), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shabad, G., & Slomczynski, M. (2004). Inter-party mobility among parliamentary candidates in post-communist East Central Europe. Party Politics, 10(2), 151–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Strom, K., & Muller, W. C. (1999). Political parties and hard choices. In W. C. Muller & K. Strom (Eds.), Policy, office or votes? How political parties in Western Europe make hard decisions (pp. 1–35). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thames, F. C. (2007). Searching for the electoral connection: Parliamentary party switching in the Ukrainian Rada, 1998–2002. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 32(2), 223–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Turan, I. (1985). Changing horses in midstream: Party changers in the Turkish National Assembly. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 10(1), 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Turan, I. (2003). Volatility in politics, stability in parliament: An impossible dream? The Turkish Grand National Assembly during the last two decades. Journal of Legislative Studies, 9(2), 151–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Turan, I., Iba, S., & Zarakol, A. (2005). Inter-party mobility in the Turkish Grand National Assembly: Curse or blessing? European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue No. 3, Being an MP in Contemporary Turkey. http://www.ejts.org/document400.html.
  49. Volkens, A., Lehmann, P., Merz, N., Regel, S., Werner, A., & Schultze, H. (2014). The manifesto data collection. Manifesto project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2014b. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).Google Scholar
  50. Young, D. J. (2014). An initial look into party switching in Africa: Evidence from Malawi. Party Politics, 20(1), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sabancı UniversityTuzlaTurkey

Personalised recommendations