In 2004 the Swiss people accepted a new equalization scheme and a new distribution of competences between the federal state and the cantons. Braun (2009) argues that the reform was successful because of the capacity of veto-players to overcome their interests and adopt a 'problem-solving' interaction mode. We propose a different interpretation and argue that distributive issues and the accommodation of actors' interests crucially mattered. We identify three mechanisms that contribute to a successful reform, i.e. package-deals, side-payments, and the downsizing of the reform. Our in-depth, mainly qualitative study of both the content of the reform and related decision-making process supports the pertinence of these strategies for the explanation of the successful reform of Swiss federalism.

While electoral research usually distinguishes voters from abstainers, in the Swiss direct democratic context one needs to take into account a third category of citizens, the selective voters, who decide anew at each vote whether they will participate or not. This article offers an investigation of this common but under‐researched form of participation. To that end, we take advantage of a unique data‐set linking official turnout data with survey data. Our results show that selective voters constitute the bulk of the electorate. While they form a heterogeneous group in terms of socio‐demographic characteristics, selective voters lean more towards abstainers than towards permanent voters with respect to political variables. We argue that this is not necessarily bad news in terms of democratic theory.

R esum e: L'apparition de sections cantonales divergentes lors des votations populaires est un ph enom ene r ecurrent en Suisse. Toutefois, malgr e l'int erêt de son analyse pour appr ecier la coh esion interne des partis, ce ph enom ene a et e d elaiss e par la litt erature r ecente. Nous comblons ce manque par une analyse a la fois quantitative et qualitative des sections divergentes lors des votations populaires des deux derni eres l egislatures (2003-2007 et 2007-2011). L'analyse quantitative illustre une stabilit e, voire une l eg ere diminution, du ph enom ene. L'analyse qualitative ( etudes de cas) quant a elle, relativise son impact sur la coh esion des partis: ses manifestations les plus importantes sont circonscrites a des domaines sp ecifiques et sont provoqu ees par des configurations particuli eres, ou des causes sp ecifiques.