Veto Threats: Rhetoric in a Bargaining Game

Steven Matthews ()

The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1989, vol. 104, issue 2, 347-369

Abstract: A specific bargaining game is studied, motivated by the speech-making, billproposing, and bill-vetoing observed in legislative processes. The game has two players, a chooser and a proposer, with the preferences of the chooser not known to the proposer. The chooser starts the game by talking. Then the proposer proposes an outcome, which the chooser accepts or vetoes. Only two kinds of perfect equilibria exist. In the more interesting kind the chooser tells the proposer which of two sets contains his type. Two proposals are possibly elicited, a compromise proposal and the proposer's favorite proposal. Ironically, only the compromise proposal is ever vetoed.

Date: 1989
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (77)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/2937851 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
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:oup:qjecon:v:104:y:1989:i:2:p:347-369.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

The Quarterly Journal of Economics is currently edited by Robert J. Barro, Lawrence F. Katz, Nathan Nunn, Andrei Shleifer and Stefanie Stantcheva

More articles in The Quarterly Journal of Economics from President and Fellows of Harvard College
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().