Bargaining in Legislatures: A New Donation Paradox

Maria Montero

No 2010-19, Discussion Papers from The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham

Abstract: It is well known that proposers have an advantage in the canonical model of bargaining in legislatures: proposers are sure of being part of the coalition that forms, and, conditional on being in a coalition, a player receives more as a proposer than as a coalition partner. In this paper I show that, if parties di¤er in voting weight, it is possible for a party to donate part of its proposing probability to another party and be better-o¤ as a result. This can happen even if the recipient never includes the donor in its proposals. Even though actually being the proposer is valuable, having a higher probability of being proposer may be harmful.

Keywords: legislative bargaining; weighted majority games; voting paradoxes (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C78 D72 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010-11
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cedex/documents/papers/2010-19.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Chapter: Bargaining in Legislatures: A New Donation Paradox (2023)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:not:notcdx:2010-19

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers from The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham School of Economics University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham NG7 2RD. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jose V Guinot Saporta (jose.guinotsaporta@nottingham.ac.uk).