Rose-colored glasses or suspicion? Effects of coalitional cues on evaluations of checks and balances reforms

Abstract

Why do citizens (re-)elect leaders and parties that systematically undermine democratic institutions? Democratic backsliding is a process in which political leaders with authoritarian tendencies alter democratic checks and balances. Reforms of checks and balances can reshape and undermine existing democratic institutions and skew the political playing field in the advantage of authoritarian incumbents and their supporters. How do citizens respond to such reforms? In this article I study the effects of coalitional allegiance on (a) support for reforms and (b) motivations assigned to the reformers who propose to change checks and balances. Importantly, I study whether participants evaluate such reform proposals differently than other proposals. As reforms altering checks and balances pose a threat especially to the citizens in the opposition – their democratic rights might be constrained – the stakes in such reforms are high. I compare the checks and balances reforms to a simple administrative reform that does not have differential effects on citizens depending on their position vis-à-vis the government. I used a mixed-design survey experiment with a large sample (N = 1040) of Polish citizens. The results show that (1) the supporters of the ruling coalition evaluate all reforms through rose-colored glasses, whereas the opponents are more suspicious of potential violations of democratic rules; (2), the administrative reform was evaluated more positively and not seen as ill-intended, by contrast with the checks and balances reforms. All in all, this study indicates that even citizens, who find democratic institutions very important, see reforms of checks and balances differently depending on who proposes them. Overall, however, the reforms of checks and balances are not received with great enthusiasm of citizens.

When Should Governments Listen to Social Protests? The Effects of Public Support and Outcome Favorability

“…These hypotheses capture the possible effects of different factors, but they leave out one of the most prominent proposed explanations of citizen attitudes towards aspects of democracy -partisanship and party cues. There is a large number of studies suggesting that support for democratic principles is strongly affected by the parties favoured by the citizens and the messages these parties send (Carey et al 2022;Fossati, Muhtadi, and Warburton 2021;Frederiksen 2024;Gidengil, Stolle, and Bergeron-Boutin 2022;Graham and Svolik 2020;Mazepus 2022;Simonovits, McCoy, and Littvay 2022;Touchton, Klofstad, and Uscinski 2023). We do not disagree with these results and accept that partisanship likely plays a big role in whether people will be accepting of policy decisions that ignore social protests or not, e.g.…”

Democratic mind: Under what conditions can political intuitions help us sustain democratic checks and balances?

“…A pilot survey experiment conducted with a representative sample in Poland (Mazepus 2022) found that citizens were especially weary of attempts by politicians to limit the right to protest (in comparison to the extension of the presidential term limit and violations of the independence of judges). This finding indicates that there might be differences in the value assigned to different checks and balances that are a result of particular political intuitions.…”