1. Cabinets Majoritarian democracy: Single party majority executive
Consensual democracy: Parties share the executive office
Two factors important:
Number of parties
Executives support in parliament

2. Classification of Cabinets
Cabinet support
Minimal winning
Oversized
Minority
Most majoritarian: Single party & minimal winning
Most consensual: Multiparty and oversized

3. Coalition Theories Parliamentary government
Definition: The cabinet/executive relies on the parliament’s confidence.
Hence, a majority of legislators must not wish to remove the cabinet
Elections result in a distribution of parliamentary seats among parties
Which parties form a cabinet?

4. Coalition Theories
If a majority party exists it is likely to form a cabinet by itself
Exception: Wartime coalitions
What if no party has a majority?
Can we predict which parties form a coalition?
What factors are likely to matter?
Distribution of seats
Policy preferences

5. Coalition Theories Minimal winning coalitions Minimum size coalitions
Coalition parties have a majority of seats
Removing any party from coalition reduces it to a minority
Minimum size coalitions
Minimal winning
Smallest in terms of legislative seats

6. Coalition Theories Minimum number of parties Minimal range coalition
Minimal winning
Fewest number of parties
Minimal range coalition
Parties with similar policy preferences form a coalition

7. Coalition Theories Minimal connected winning coalitions
Not minimal winning
Connected – does not exclude parties with moderate policy preference relative to other cabinet parties
Policy viable coalitions
Minimal winning
Always includes the party of the median legislator (or median party)

8. Predictions
A B C D E
Minimal winning: ABC, ADE, BCD, BE, CE
Minimum size: ADE
Minimum #parties: BE, CE
Minimal range: ABC, BCD, CE
Minimal connected: ABC, BCD, CDE
Policy viable: ABC, BCD, CE

9. Minority & Oversized Cabinets
All the theories predict the formation of a (minimal) majority cabinet
Cabinets are, however, often minority or oversized cabinets
Minority cabinets almost the rule in Sweden, Denmark
Nearly 1/3 of all cabinets are minority cabinets
About 1/5 are oversized

10. Minority & Oversized Cabinets
How do we explain this ‘anomaly’?
Cabinet participation can be costly
Accountability may harm parties electorally
May decrease likelihood of future cabinet participation (loss of identity)
Oversized cabinets
Narrow majorities dangerous
Insurance against defections
Minimizes individual legislator’s bargaining power

11. Minority & Oversized Cabinets
Parties care about policy
Thus, B may be better of in coalition ABC than coalition BC
External threats
Need to minimize domestic conflict
Institutions
Investiture vote (note Sweden)
Constructive vote of no confidence
Votes of confidence in France
Committees

12. Minority & Oversized Cabinets
Requirements regarding cabinet membership (Belgium – linguistic)
Need to change constitution or legislation requiring super-majorities

13. Minority Cabinets
Where do minority cabinets fit into the majoritarian-consensual classification
Minority cabinets tend to be single-party but do not have majority support
Two types can be distinguished
Continuous bargaining over policy
‘Majority cabinets in disguise’
=> The former is more common – similar to oversized cabinets?

14. Presidential Cabinets
Differences between parliamentary and presidential cabinets:
Presidential cabinets do not rely on the confidence of the legislature
Parliamentary cabinets are collegial, presidential cabinets are not

15. Unusual Cabinets Austria The U.S. Grand coalition cabinets 1949-1966
Minimal winning but composed of the two largest parties (holding 92% of seats)
Oversized?
The U.S.
Partisan cabinets
Token opposition members

16. Unusual Cabinets Japan LDP has a majority from 1976 to 1993
Behaves like a minority cabinet – attempts to build oversized coalitions to pass legislation

17. Cabinets in 36 Democracies
Measuring majoritarianism:
Average of percentage of minimal winning and one-party cabinets
Problematic?
Relationship with party system
Strong negative relationship
Surprising?

18. Prime Ministerial Power
Presidents have great control over their cabinets
In parliamentary system the power of the Prime Minister can vary greatly
Relationship between the PM’s power and concentration of power in the cabinet
Finds strong relationship

19. Summary Classifying cabinets Theories of coalition formation
Advances
Relationship between type and number of parties
Interesting?
Small number of parties => Majorities more frequent

20. Executive-Legislative Relations
Majoritarian: Executive Dominance
Consensual: Legislative Dominance
Parliamentary vs. Presidential Gov’t
Reliance on legislature’s confidence vs. fixed term
Selection by legislature vs. popular election
Collegial executive vs. one-person executive

21. Parliamentary vs. Presidential Government
Many combination are possible
Empirically there are only ‘pure’ presidential or parliamentary systems
Switzerland is the only exceptions.
Semi-presidentialism
Vary in strength of presidents
France, Austria, Iceland, Portugal, Finland
Lijphart – depends on president’s support
Dissolution power

22. Israel (Is Lijphart right?)
Before 1996 – Parliamentary
Now:
Prime Minister is directly elected
Parliament elected at same time
Parliament can dismiss Prime Minister
Prime Minister can dissolve Parliament
Either requires a new election?
Similarity to a presidential system

23. Parliamentary vs. Presidential Government
Separation of Powers:
In presidential systems it implies that the same person can not serve in both legislative and executive branch
In parliamentary systems, generally, cabinet members are legislators
Netherlands, Norway and Luxembourg the exception

24. Parliamentary vs. Presidential Government
Presidents don’t have the right to dissolve the legislature
Exceptions: France, Israel
In parliamentary system dissolution rights may or may not exist
Norway: Fixed term
Restricted dissolution rights
Unlimited: UK

25. Parliamentary vs. Presidential Government
Head of state/government
Presidential systems: President is both head of state and government
Parliamentary systems: Monarch/President head of state, PM head of Government
Botswana: PM is both
South Africa under Nelson Mandela

26. South Africa
T.he President is elected for five year term by the parliament
The Cabinet consists of the President, as head of the Cabinet, a Deputy President and Ministers. The President appoints the Deputy President and Ministers, assigns their powers and functions, and may dismiss them.
The President:
must select the Deputy President and Ministers from among the members of the National Assembly;
may select no more than two Ministers from outside the Assembly.
The Deputy President must assist the President in the execution of the functions of government.

27. Separation & Balance of Power
Not a simple relationship between presidentialism/parliamentarism and balance of power
Presidents, as well as PMs, can be either strong or weak (Belgium vs. UK, US vs France)

28. Presidential Power Reactive & Proactive Powers
Veto Power
Decree Power
Strength & Cohesion of Presidential Parties
Popular election
Claim to legitimacy

29. Presidential Power Dependence on Partisan Power Constitutional Powers
May lead to instability of power
Constitutional Powers
Generally stable
Vetoes and Decrees still work ‘fairly’ well
Popularity
????….

30. How do we measure balance of power?
Cabinet durability as an indicator for parliamentary government
Q: May inhibit cabinet’s ability to pass a coherent policy program, but does it shift power to the legislature?
The fourth French Republic? Italy?
Cabinet stability vs. Regime stability
How to measure cabinet durability?

31. How do we measure balance of power?
When does a cabinet end? When does a new one begin?
Important factors:
Partisan composition
Elections
Change in PM
Change in type of cabinet (winning, minority, oversized?)
Lijphart: Combines measures.

32. How do we measure balance of power?
Lijphart: Nothing more stable than the U.K. ???
Lijphart: U.S.? Switzerland?
Term limits?

33. Cabinet Type and Cabinet Durability
Durability: Minimal winning party > Minimal winning coalition > Minority party > Oversized > Minority coalition
Caretaker cabinets
Short duration of oversized cabinets. Why?

34. Executive Dominance and Majoritarian Governments
Figure 7.2
Shows a fairly strong relationship
However, executive dominance is really durability and ‘majoritarian cabinet’ is really percentage of minimal winning, one party governments
=> Seems like somewhat an uninteresting finding

35. Summary Attempt to measure balance of power
What is power? Ability to pass legislation/influence policy – even if legislator opposes
What is the outcome?
Better measures? Veto power, Decree power, Agenda setting, etc…
President
Legislature