← ireadpaper · 顶刊中的公共政策研究

僵局、杠杆与政策捆绑

Gridlock, leverage, and policy bundling
Journal of Public Economics · 2022 · Barton E. Lee

中文摘要

我考察了一个动态讨价还价模型:替代现状的方案在讨价还价过程中随机出现,提案者可以将多个替代方案捆绑为一个提案,而一位具有前瞻性的选民选举议程设定者。我表明,政策捆绑通过促进不同政策领域之间的妥协来减少僵局这一普遍观点并不完整。政策捆绑也可能增加僵局:某一参与方可能否决或推迟一项两党共同支持、且各方一致认为优于现状的替代方案,以便将来将这一方案与另一项存在分歧、若不如此捆绑便无法通过的替代方案捆绑在一起。这种形式的僵局更可能在经济或政治稳定时期出现;它的出现提示,传统的立法者意识形态衡量指标会高估极化程度。从选民的角度看,僵局的发生频率过高,导致效率损失。这种“过度僵局”状态源于选民具有前瞻性且缺乏承诺能力。

Abstract

I consider a dynamic model of bargaining where alternatives to the status quo arrive stochastically during the bargaining process, the proposer can bundle multiple alternatives into a single proposal, and a forward-looking voter elects the agenda-setter. I show that the prevailing wisdom that policy bundling reduces gridlock—by facilitating compromise across different policy areas—is incomplete. Policy bundling can also increase gridlock: a player may veto or delay a bipartisan alternative, which is unanimously preferred to the status quo, so that in the future they can bundle this same alternative with a divisive alternative that otherwise would not pass. Gridlock of this form is more likely to occur during periods of economic or political stability and, when it occurs, suggests that traditional measures of legislator ideology will overstate polarization. From the voter’s perspective, gridlock occurs at an inefficiently high frequency. This state of “excess gridlock” is driven by the voter being forward-looking and lacking commitment power.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →