The advantages of ideological cohesion: A model of constituency representation and electoral competition in multi-party democracies

Journal of Theoretical Politics

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 37-70

  McGann, A J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Factions; Parties; Spatial modeling; Tiebout

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036112698     PISSN: 09516298     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/095169280201400104     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Adams, G. (1998) 'An Evolution-Based Model of Party Dynamics', Paper presented at 1998 Public Choice Society Annual Meeting, 13-15 March.
2. Adams, G. (2000) 'Beyond Control: A Model of Parties as Complex Adaptive Systems', Paper prepared for presentation at New York University, 30 March.
3. Adams, J. and S. Merrill (1999a) 'Party Policy Equilibrium for Alternative Spatial Voting Models: An Application to the Norwegian Storting', European Journal of Political Research 36: 235-55.
4. Adams, J. and S. Merrill (1999b) 'Modeling Party Strategies and Policy Representation in Multiparty Elections: Why are Parties so Extreme", American Journal of Political Science 43: 765-91.
5. Aldrich, J. (1983) 'A Downsian Spatial Model with Party Activism', American Political Science Review 77: 974-90.
6. Aldrich, J. and M. McGinnis (1989) 'A Model of Party Constraints on Optimal Candidate Positions', Mathematical and Computer Modeling 12: 437-50.
7. Austen-Smith, D. and J. Banks (1988) 'Elections, Coalitions and Legislative Outcomes', American Political Science Review 82.2: 405-22.
8. Axelrod, R. (1970) Conflict of Interest: A Theory of Divergent Goals with Applications to Politics, Chicago: Markham.
9. Bewley, T. (1981) 'A Critique of Tiebout's Theory of Local Public Expenditures', Econometrica 49: 713-40.
10. Border, K. (1985) Fixed Point Theorems with Applications to Economics and Came Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Burke, E. (1770/1898) 'Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents', in E. Payne (ed.) Burke Select Works Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
12. Castles, F. (1978) The Social Democratic Image of Society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
13. Comanor, W. (1976) 'The Median Voter Rule and the Theory of Political Choice', Journal of Public Economics 5: 169-77.
14. Conley, J. and M. Wooders (1997) 'Equivalence of the Core and Competitive Equilibrium in a Tiebout Economy with Crowding Types', Journal of Urban Economics 41: 421-40.
15. Davis, O., M. Hinich, M. and P. Ordeshook (1970) 'An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process', American Political Science Review 64(2): 426-48.
16. De Palma, A., G. Hong and J.-F. Thisse (1990) 'Equilibrium in Multiparty Competition with Uncertainty', Social Choice and Welfare 7: 247-59.
17. Dowding, K., P. John and S. Biggs (1994) Tiebout: A Survey of the Empirical Literature', Urban Studies 31: 767-97.
18. Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
19. Duverger, M. (1954) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modem State. London: Methuen.
20. Eaton, B. and R. Lipsey (1975) The Principle of Minimum Differentiation Reconsidered: Some New Developments in the Theory of Spatial Competition", Review of Economic Studies 42: 27-49.
21. Enelow, J. and M. Hinich (1984) The Spatial Theory of Voting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Greenberg, J. and B. Shitovitz (1988) 'Consistent Voting Rules for Competitive Local Public Goods Economies', Journal of Economic Theory 46: 223-36.
23. Grofman, B., W. Koetzle and A. McGann (1998) 'The Mode as a Preference Induced and Structure Induced Equilibrium. With An Application to Leadership Selection in the US House of Representatives', Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA 9 March-9 June.
24. Grofman, B., W. Koetzle and A. McGann (Forthcoming) 'Congressional Leadership 1965-1996: A New Look at the Extremism versus Centrality Debate', Legislative Studies Quarterly.
25. Hinich, M. (1977) 'Equilibrium in Spatial Voting: The Median Voter Result is an Artifact', Journal of Economic Theory 16: 208-19.
26. Hinich, M. and M. Munger (1994) Ideology and the Theory of Political Choice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
27. Hotelling, H. (1929) 'Stability in Competition', The Economic Journal 39: 41-57.
28. Johnson, N. and S. Kotz (1970) Continuous Univariate Distributions - 1: Distributions in Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
29. Johnson, P. (1998) 'An Agent-Based Model of the Exchange Theory of Interest Groups', Paper prepared for delivery at the 1998 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA, September.
30. Kitschelt, H. (1992) The Logics of Party Formation: Ecological Politics in Belgium and West Germany. Ithica: Cornell University Press.
31. Kitschelt, H. (1994) The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Kollman, K. J. Miller and S. Page (1992) 'Adaptive Parties in Spatial Elections', American Political Science Review 86.
33. Kollman, K., J. Miller and S. Page (1997) 'Political Institutions and Sorting in a Tiebout Model', American Economic Review 87: 977-92.
34. Konishi, H. (1996) 'Voting with Ballots and Feet: Existence of Equilibrium in a Local Public Good Economy', Journal of Economic Theory 38: 480-509.
35. McGann, A.J. (1997) 'Modeling the Effects of Intra-Party Institutions on Systems of Party Competition (Skewness, Party Dominance and The Accommodation of Shifts in Public Opinion)', Paper prepared for delivery at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, 28-31 August.
36. McGann, A.J. (1999a) 'The Modal Voter Result: Preference Distributions, Intra-Party Competition and Political Dominance', PhD Dissertation, Department of Political Science, Duke University.
37. McGann, A.J. (1999b) 'Why Unidimensionality: How Party Systems Produce Ideological Coherence', Paper prepared for delivery at the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA, 2-5 September.
38. McGann, A.J., B. Grofman and W. Koetzle (Forthcoming) 'Why Party Leaders are More Extreme than their Members: Modeling Sequential Elimination Elections in the US House of Representatives', Public Choice.
39. Merrill, S. and J. Adams (1999) 'An Algorithm to Compute Nash Equilibria in Probabilistic, Multiparty Spatial Models with a Measured Nonpolicy Component', Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Public Choice Society, New Orleans, 12-4 March.
40. Merrill, S., B. Grofman, T. Brunell and W. Koetzle (1999) 'The Power of Ideologically Concentrated Electorates', Journal of Theoretical Politics 11(1): 57-74.
41. Milchtaich, I. and E. Winter (1997) 'Stability and Segregation in Group Formation', Mimeo, Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Washington University, St Louis.
42. Miller, N. (1996) 'Majority Rule and Minority Interests', in I. Shapiro and R. Hardin (eds) Political Order: Nomos XXXVIII. New York: New York University Press.
43. Panebianco, A. (1988) Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. Robertson, D. (1976) A Theory of Party Competition. London: John Wiley & Sons.
45. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1979) 'Market Models of Local Government: Exit, Voting, and the Land Market', Urban Economics 6: 319-39.
46. Strom, K. (1990) 'A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties', American Journal of Political Science 34(2): 565-98.
47. Tiebout, C. (1956) 'A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures', Journal of Political Economy 64(5): 416-24.
48. Westhoff, F. (1977) 'Existence of Equilibria with a Local Public Good', Journal of Economic Theory 14: 84-112.
49. Westhoff, F. (1979) 'Policy Inferences from Community Choice Models: A Caution', Journal of Urban Economics 6: 535-49.
50. Wolfram, S. (1996) The Mathematica Book, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Wolfram Media/Cambridge University Press.
51. Wooders, M. (1980) 'The Tiebout Hypothesis: Near Optimality in Local Public Good Economies', Econometrica 49: 1467-85.