Pagando o preço de governar: custos de gerência de coalizão no presidencialismo brasileiro

Abstract

This paper examines the effects of a president's coalition management decisions on the costs of governing. An innovative Governing Costs Index (GCI) was developed, taking into consideration political and financial transfers made by the president to coalition parties. GCI is calculated employing a principal component analysis. The relationship between the variations on the management strategies and the costs were estimated using a first-differences panel. GCI was considered as the dependent variable and the coalition size, ideological heterogeneity, and cabinet proportionality among partners as the explanatory variables. Results indicate that large, ideologically heterogeneous coalitions and disproportional cabinets tend to be more expensive over time. The results also suggest that presidential decisions about how to manage coalitions influence governing costs in important ways, even when controlling exogenous constraints like party fragmentation at the Congress and presidential popularity. In addition, spending more political and financial resources with coalition allies does not necessarily lead to greater political support for the president in the Congress. Keywords: governing costs; coalition management; multiparty presidential system; president; Executive-Legislative relations. Pagando o preço de governar: custos de gerência de coalizão no presidencialismo brasileiroEste artigo analisa os efeitos das estratégias do presidente de como gerir sua coalizão sobre os custos de governar ao longo do seu mandato. Foi desenvolvido um Índice inédito de Custo de Governo (ICG) considerando as transferências políticas e monetárias feitas pelo presidente aos partidos da sua coalizão. O ICG foi calculado a partir de análise de componentes principais. As relações entre as variações de estratégias de gerência e seus custos foram estimadas por meio de um painel não balanceado em primeiras diferenças, tendo como variável dependente o ICG e como variáveis explicativas o tamanho da coalizão, a heterogeneidade ideológica e a alocação proporcional de poder entre parceiros. Os resultados indicam que coalizões grandes, ideologicamente heterogêneas e desproporcionais tendem a ser mais caras ao longo do tempo. As decisões presidenciais de como gerenciar suas coalizões influenciam os custos de governo, mesmo controlando por aspectos exógenos, como fragmentação partidária na Câmara dos Deputados e popularidade presidencial. Além disso, gastar mais recursos políticos e financeiros com os aliados da coalizão não significa necessariamente maior apoio político no Legislativo. Palavras-chave: custos de governo; gerência de coalizão; presidencialismo multipartidário; presidente; relações Executivo-Legislativo. Pagando el precio de gobernar: costos del manejo de coalición en el presidencialismo brasileñoEste artículo analiza los efectos de las decisiones presidenciales del manejo de la coalición en los costos para gobernar. Se utiliza el análisis de componentes principales para crear el Índice de Costo de Gobierno (ICG) y se utiliza RAP | The p...

Filiações partidárias e nomeações para cargos da burocracia federal (1999-2018)

“…In DAS 5 and 6 positions, among the party appointees, percentages varied between 39% of PT affiliates, in the second term of Lula, and reached 53% in Dilma's second term. In addition to discovering that the PT concentrated political power in the division of ministerial positions (Bertholini & Pereira, 2017, Praça et al, 2011, there is also a concentration in upper level bureaucratic posts. 17…”

“…Due to the lack of detailed or systematic data on party affiliations in bureaucracy, the specialized literature assumes that: a) appointing a party minister gives the party exclusive rights to choose names within high level ministerial bureaucracy; and b) that these choices are predominantly partisan. This is the case in the original analyzes on the relationship between government coalition and the president's legislative support, and usually this is related to the debate on party proportionality in the cabinet's power division (Amorim, 2019;Bertholini & Pereira, 2017). 1 In general, this analysis considers that the chain of command from the minister to his subordinates would flow through links connected by common party ties.…”

Transformation or Substitution? The Workers’ Party and the Right in Northeast Brazil

“…Presidents in multiparty democracies typically borrow strategies from parliamentary systems when distributing cabinet posts as trade chips in order to build congressional majorities -something the literature dubs "coalitional presidentialism" (Abranches 1998;Chaisty, Cheeseman, and Power 2018). Depending on macroeconomic conditions and compositional factors (e.g., proportionality and ideological heterogeneity), coalitional maintenance costs can be quite high, thus impacting cabinet size, ministry expenditure levels, and the availability of pork for legislators (Bertholini and Pereira 2017). In federal systems, where representatives are linked to subnational constituencies, cabinet distribution must also weigh up territorial considerations, thus linking national and local politics.…”

“…But the greatest change in the PT's growth strategy came after it took national office and then began to expand into the Northeast Region by leveraging the prerogatives and resources of executive office at the national level to build pragmatic alliances. These new allies were increasingly heterogeneous and thus raised the costs of maintaining the president's (and governors') coalition (Bertholini and Pereira 2017), which ultimately cost the PT its transformational project.…”

Sobreviviendo a reformas, impopularidad y casos de corrupción: el presidencialismo de coalición del Brasil de Temer

“…Si la base de apoyo al gobierno se desplomó en 2016 durante la presidencia de Rousseff (2011-2016) (Nunes y Ranufo 2017), al año siguiente vio un presidente con una coalición de apoyo disciplinado y mayoritario que ha garantizado un alto éxito legislativo de las iniciativas presidenciales. Aun cuando la presidencia en Brasil tiene capacidad presupuestaria, administrativa y legislativa para construir el apoyo mayoritario, el contexto de un congreso con elevada fragmentación partidaria (Limongi 2006), la administración de esta coalición política es uno de los principales desafíos en la implementación de las políticas públicas del gobierno (Bertholini y Pereira 2017). El año 2017 fue testigo del elevado éxito del presidente Temer en esta tarea (Pereira 2017), hecho aún más impresionante dada la negativa coyuntura política, social y económica que caracterizó al país.…”