The Effects of Increasing versus Decreasing Private Goods on Legislative Bargaining: Experimental Evidence
نویسندگان
چکیده
Recent interest in reducing budget deficits raises questions regarding the impact of cuts versus increases in private good allocations on legislative bargaining. We investigate this issue using an experimental design where the outcomes are theoretically isomorphic. Payoffs are similar between the two cases, but which type gets their proposals passed changes substantially. Both gains and losses help to “grease” the legislative bargaining “wheels” in terms of the time it takes to reach agreement, but gains are more effective than losses. This difference is attributed to a change in agents’ reference point in going from gains to losses.
منابع مشابه
Reference Point Effects in Legislative Bargaining: Experimental Evidence
Recent interest in reducing budget deficits raises questions regarding the impact on legislative bargaining of cuts versus increases in government spending. Using an experimental design where the outcomes are theoretically isomorphic results in significant differences in bargaining outcomes: There are longer delays in reaching agreement with cuts than with increases, along with which legislativ...
متن کاملPork Versus Public Goods: An Experimental Study of Public Good Provision Within a Legislative Bargaining Framework
We experimentally investigate a legislative bargaining model with both public and particularistic goods. Consistent with the qualitative implications of the model: There is near exclusive public good provision in the pure public good region, in the pure private good region minimum winning coalitions sharing private goods predominate, and in the “mixed” region proposers generally take some parti...
متن کاملBargaining in Legislatures over Particularistic and Collective Goods
We develop a bargaining model in which a legislature divides a budget among particularistic and collective goods. By incorporating both private and public goods in a unified model, we uncover nonmonotonic relationships between legislative preferences for collective spending and the amount of the budget actually allocated to collective goods. Put simply, policy proposers can exploit coalition pa...
متن کاملThe Executive Toolbox: Building Legislative Support in a Multiparty Presidential Regime
How do presidents win legislative support under conditions of extreme multipartism? Comparative presidential research has offered two parallel answers, one relying on distributive politics and the other claiming that legislative success is a function of coalition formation. The authors merge these insights in an integrated approach to executive-legislative relations while also considering dynam...
متن کاملEndogenous Federal Grants and Crowd-out of State Government Spending: Theory and Evidence from the Federal Highway Aid Program
Contrary to simple theoretical predictions, existing evidence suggests that federal grants do not crowd out state government spending. A legislative bargaining model with endogenous grants documents a positive correlation between grant receipts and preferences for public goods; this correlation has likely biased existing work against measuring crowd-out. To correct for such endogeneity, the mod...
متن کامل