2018
DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsy041
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding Legislative Speech in the Turkish Parliament: Reconsidering the Electoral Connection under Proportional Representation

Abstract: We aim to address two weaknesses of the growing literature on legislative debate and legislative behaviour. First, most studies on legislative speech focus on the role of party unity and individual dissent on speech-making behaviour and largely ignore the role of legislators’ own calculations regarding their electoral vulnerability. Secondly, research on legislative behaviour that studies mechanisms other than legislative speech usually explores the role of electoral incentives where there is Single Member Dis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This trade-off is, however, not merely automatic, but part of an MP's calculus in deciding what to say in the House: Crewe (2015) finds that, in practice, raising local issues is often a means to avoid issues of national controversy. This basic insight contributes to my choice of the parliamentary record as the raw material for discerning MPs' focus, building on other work about constituency focus (Blidook & Kerby, 2011;Bulut & İlter, 2018;Kellermann, 2016;Martin, 2011;Soroka, Penner, & Blidook, 2009).…”
Section: Literature and Theorymentioning
confidence: 91%
“…This trade-off is, however, not merely automatic, but part of an MP's calculus in deciding what to say in the House: Crewe (2015) finds that, in practice, raising local issues is often a means to avoid issues of national controversy. This basic insight contributes to my choice of the parliamentary record as the raw material for discerning MPs' focus, building on other work about constituency focus (Blidook & Kerby, 2011;Bulut & İlter, 2018;Kellermann, 2016;Martin, 2011;Soroka, Penner, & Blidook, 2009).…”
Section: Literature and Theorymentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Technically, Turkey is a multi-party system, yet the increasing hegemony of the AKP government and changes to a presidential system resulted in the regime's manifestation of executive and judicial control within a polarized political landscape that suppresses various forms of opposition in civil society, media, academia, or political parties (Center for American Progress, 2017; Kalaycioglu, 2019). In addition to the increasingly questionable status of free and fair elections, the Turkish electoral system characterizes as close list proportional representation (PR system), multi-member districts hindering voter influence on party lists as well as a prevalent culture of strict party discipline (Bulut and Ilter, 2020).…”
Section: Locating the Case: Turkey As A Hybrid Regimementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their results demonstrate that party leaderships favor incumbents who make more speeches and who display higher issue concentration (Yildirim, Kocapinar, and Ecevit 2019b). Bulut and İlter’s (2020) study on legislative speech shows that electorally vulnerable MPs are more likely to deliver speeches related to their local constituency. Similarly, Ecevit and Kocapınar (2018) show that candidates’ popularity at the district level is an important determinant of party list choice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%