Governmental Change in a President-Parliamentary Regime: The Case of Russia 1994-2003

Morgan-Jones, Edward; Schleiter, Petra

doi:10.2747/1060-586x.20.2.123

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As confrontations between Boris Yeltsin and the Duma in the 1990s demonstrated, the president may judge that new elections will result in an even more opposition-oriented Duma and may therefore prefer to seek agreement with the Duma. See Troxel 2003 andMorgan-Jones andSchleiter 2004. 4.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presidential Support in the Russian State Duma

Remington

2006

Legislative Studies Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent comparative research on presidential systems has analyzed the ways in which presidents build majorities for their legislative agendas. Through an analysis of roll‐call votes from the 2000‐03 Russian State Duma on a set of issues reflecting President Putin's legislative agenda, I examine the impact of parliamentary party affiliation, policy preferences, issue type, and electoral mandate type on structuring floor support for the president. I also assess the implications of a mixed electoral system for building legislative coalitions in multiparty legislatures. Further, my findings shed light on Putin's recent reforms of the Duma's rules and procedures and the country's electoral system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presidential Support in the Russian State Duma

Remington

2006

Legislative Studies Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only cabinets formed after the 1999 parliamentary elections in Armenia can be considered as truly political rather than technocratic (Fuller, 1999). In Russia and Ukraine cabinets continued to be formed on largely technocratic principles during the entire 1991–2002 period, which is in marked contrast to the majority of democratic semi‐presidential regimes found in post‐communist Europe (Morgan‐Jones and Schleiter, 2004; Protsyk, 2003).…”

Section: Intra‐executive Competition In President‐ Parliamentary Regimesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Intra-Executive Competition between President and Prime Minister: Patterns of Institutional Conflict and Cooperation under Semi-Presidentialism

Protsyk

2006

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article examines the dynamics of political competition over the control of the executive that shapes the coexistence of popularly elected presidents and prime ministers in semi-presidential regimes. It explores how variation in the political status of cabinet and the character of the party system, as well as differences in presidential and parliamentary powers over the cabinet, affects both the type and intensity of intra-executive conflict in democratic and semi-democratic environments. It demonstrates that presidents' and prime ministers' strategies in intra-executive relations in both types of political environment are systematically affected by the nature and extent of cabinet's political support in parliament, as well as by the degree of presidential control over cabinet.The post-communist transition led to the proliferation of semi-presidential regimes in East Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union.The coexistence of popularly elected presidents and prime ministers, which is a distinct feature of a semi-presidential constitutional framework, and which is often labeled as 'intra-executive' coexistence, has proven to be prone to conflict in most of these regimes. Among the factors leading to conflict, scholars often cite personality, ideological differences magnified by certain party system configurations, newness of institutional designs and constitutional ambiguities (Baylis, 1996;Elgie, 1999a;Taras, 1997).Very few attempts, however, have been made to arrive at some comparative framework for analyzing intra-executive conflict.This article examines the systematic effects that variations in presidential and parliamentary powers over cabinet, in political composition of parliament and in the political status of cabinet have on the probability of intra-executive conflict in semi-presidential regimes. Intra-executive conflict, which is defined as political confrontation between president and prime minister over the control of the executive branch of government, is first put into the framework of institutional relationships among the president, parliament and cabinet. I argue that conceptualizing this relationship in terms of a multiple principal-agent model enhances our understanding of how semi-presidentialism works.Secondly, I discuss how the political status of cabinet, which is determined by the character of parliamentary composition and the level of party system development, affects the set of incentives that prime ministers face in a semi-

show abstract

“…This practice was especially common during the presidency of Boris Yeltsin, who nevertheless got into a bitter conflict with parliament (e.g. Clark 1998;Morgan-Jones, Schleiter 2004;Protsyk 2005a: 746). 16.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Government Formation in Europe: The Role of the Head of State

Brunclík¹

2015

CJPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analytical tools are presently lacking to study the role played by the head of state in the government formation process (GFP). To remedy this absence, this paper provides a detailed analysis of that role. Two variables are of major concern: a) the formal powers of the head of state in the GFP, and b) the control over the GFP held by the parliament. These two variables are used to construct a scheme that shows the pronounced heterogeneity exhibited by GFP patterns. The GFP is seen as the result of an institutionally structured bargaining process in which institutional variations make for major differences in expected outcomes. The analysis reveals a large number of GFP patterns. Examples of the GFP taken from several European countries show the patterns should not be subsumed under broad categories, since overgeneralization may lead to confusion and cause the role played by the head of state and political regimes in European countries to be misunderstood.

show abstract

Governmental Change in a President-Parliamentary Regime: The Case of Russia 1994-2003

Cited by 18 publications

References 23 publications

Presidential Support in the Russian State Duma

Presidential Support in the Russian State Duma

Intra-Executive Competition between President and Prime Minister: Patterns of Institutional Conflict and Cooperation under Semi-Presidentialism

Patterns of Government Formation in Europe: The Role of the Head of State

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About