Comparative Elections and Party Systems (CPO 6756)

Fall 2016

Fridays, Periods 2-4 (8:30-11:30)

When possible, we will meet in the department’s conference room (216 Anderson Hall). Otherwise, we will meet in our assigned classroom, Matherly Hall 0010.

(Last Updated August 15, 2016)

Contents

Contact Information

Course Objectives

Student Responsibilities

Grading Scale (Grade Point Equivalent)

Required Reading

Policies and Related Information

Course Outline

Week 1 (Aug 26) – Course Introduction

Week 2 (September 2) – Parties and Elections in Democratic Regimes

Requests for “Author” Presentations Due

Week 3 (September 9) – Voter Turnout: The Importance of Context

Reaction Paper Option 1

Week 4 (Sept 16) – Parties and Elections in Authoritarian Regimes

Reaction Paper Option 2

Week 5 (September 23) – Electoral System Effects on Parties and Representation

Paper Proposals Due

Week 6 (September 30) – The Endogeneity of Electoral Rules

Reaction Paper Option 3

Week 7 (October 7) – Party Institutionalization and Party System Continuity

Reaction Paper Option 4

Week 8 (Oct 14) – No Class (Homecoming)

Week 9 (October 21) – New Parties and Party System Change

Reaction Paper Option 5

Week 10 (October 28) – Economic Voting in Democratic Regimes

Reaction Paper Option 6

Week 11 (November 4) – The Political Economy of Authoritarian Elections

Reaction Paper Option 7

Week 12 (November 11) – No Class (Veterans Day)

Week 13 (November 18) – Election Fraud

Week 14 (November 25) – No Class (Thanksgiving Break)

Week 15 (December 2) – Paper Presentations

Week 16 (December 9) – No Class (Reading Days)

Final Papers Due on Monday, December 12 at 11:30 am through Turnitin.com

Contact Information

Professor Bryon Moraski Office Hours

313 Anderson Hall Tuesdays, 11:00-12:30Phone: 352-273-2361 & by appointment

Email:

Website:

Return to Top

Course Objectives

The seminar exposes graduate students to major issues related to the study of elections and political parties in comparative context. Major topics in the course include the functions and operation of elections in authoritarian and democratic regimes, the features and effects of electoral systems, the roles that electoral institutions and elite behavior play in producing a proliferation orscarcity of parties.

Return to Top

Student Responsibilities

Students will be assessed on the basis of attendance and participation in the seminars, written analyses of assigned reading, and an empirical research paper that could eventually be presented at a professional conference. Final course grades will reflect the following distribution:

25%: Weekly attendance and participation

The seminar should be viewed as an opportunity for the exchange of ideas among scholars. We will discuss and evaluate the weekly readings. Students must not only complete the readings but also spend some time thinking critically about their contentions. Everyone is expected to contribute to class discussion on a weekly basis.
Any absence requires an explanation.

More than one unexcused absence will result in a zero for this component of the course grade.

Any student with more than one excused absence will be required to submit an additional reaction paper (that is, one in addition to the five discussed below) per additional absence. Details on submitting these papers will be discussed as needed.

“Audience participation” during presentations by your colleagues (see below) will factor into this portion of your grade.

5%: “Author” presentations

Students will present the main arguments and findings of one article from theassigned readings. The articles available for this assignment have asterisks (**) preceding the author(s) in the list of readings below.

Presentations should last 12-15 minutes, simulating a paper presentation at a scholarly conference. “Authors” will then field questions from the “audience” and defend the work.Everyone, then, must read the selections and prepare to askquestions.

Students should select as many as five pieces that interest them and rank their preferences from 1 (indicating most preferred) to five (indicating least preferred but acceptable).

This ranking should be emailed to me prior to the start of Week 2’s seminar. The assignment of articles will respect student requests while aiming for one presentation per week.

20% (4% each): Five reaction papers on the assigned readings

The syllabus lists seven reaction paper options. Students should write on only five.
To avoid penalties, the papers must be submitted via Turnitin.com before the start of class.

The class ID for Turnitin.com is 13092855.

The enrollment password is CPO6756.

Reaction papers should be no more than 750 words in length. They should be double-spaced and have standard margins.

Failure to observe the word limitation will result in a lower grade. There will be many instances in your careers where you will be confined to a limited amount of space.

Papers should be either a constructive critiqueof a substantial component of the reading or an elaborationof ideas from the reading. For the former, papers should be both well-argued and mindful of how the authors might respond. For the latter, papers should demonstrate original thinking and offer potentially novel theoretical or methodological insights for the topic under consideration for the week.
Papers should not simply summarize the assigned readings. Summaries should be just enough to set up your argument or contribution.

I am interested in promising ideas that you may be able to develop in the years to come.

Also, avoid relying too heavily on a “pet” country or theme.

Turning papers in late is not acceptable. If a student must turn in a paper following the seminar and is out of paper options to meet the five required, the student will be assigned to write on an additional work of my choosing and the average grade across the two papers will receive a 10% penalty. (I will not read a late paper if the student retains the option of turning in a paper for a subsequent week.)

45%: A research paper that, with revision, could be presented at a professional conference.

A three-page research proposal will be due at the beginning of Week 5’sseminar.
Prior to Week 5, I will provide guidelines for writing the proposal and the paper. Failure to follow these guidelines will reduce the grade you receive for these submissions by 10%.

Students will be required to rewrite and resubmit substandard proposals.

Students should submit a new proposal if they dramatically change their paper topic.

For late papers or proposals, I will use the date and time of submission at Turnitin.com to assess the appropriate late penalty. Papers submitted after the deadline but prior to 11:59 pm of the day in question will be penalized 5%. From then on, papers will be penalized an additional 5% for each day that they are late.

5%: Paper presentations

In Week 15, students will present drafts of their research papers to the class and field questions from the audience.

Grading Scale(Grade Point Equivalent)

A = 90 or above 4.00

A- = 87-89 3.67

B+ = 84-86 3.33

B = 80-83 3.00

B- = 77-79 2.67

C+ = 74-76 2.33

C = 70-73 2.00

C- = 67-69 1.67

D+ = 64-66 1.33

D = 60-63 1.00

D- = 57-59 0.67

E = 56 or below 0.00

For information on UF grading policies for assigning grade points, see Note that a grade of C- is not a qualifying grade for major, minor, Gen Ed, or College Basic distribution credit.

Required Reading

We will read a variety of works including books, chapters, and articles. I will email book chapters using the course listserv. You are responsible for locating the assigned scholarly articles. Most, if not all of them, are available electronically via the University of Florida’s Online Library Catalog. In addition, we will read the following books that I recommend you purchasing for your library.

Blaydes, Lisa. 2011.Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt. New York: Cambridge University Press
Dalton, Russell J., David M. Farrell, and Ian McAllister. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press
Franklin, Mark N. 2004. Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies since 1945. New York: Cambridge University Press
Hyde, Susan D. 2011. The Pseudo-Democrat's Dilemma: Why Election Observation Became an International Norm. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press
Moser, Robert G. and Ethan Scheiner. 2012.Electoral Systems and Political Context: How the Effects of Rules Vary Across New and Established Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press
Schedler, Andreas. 2013. The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism. New York: Cambridge University Press

Return to Top

Policies and Related Information

Persons with Disabilities

Students requesting classroom accommodation must first register with the Dean of Students Office. The Dean of Students Office will provide documentation to the student who must then provide this documentation to the instructor when requesting accommodation. Anyone with a disability should feel free to see me during office hours to make the necessary arrangements.

Policies on Cell Phones and Laptops

Students should turn cell phones to silent or vibrate before coming to class. Each time a student’s cell phone rings or each time that a student texts during class, 1% will be deducted from that student’s final grade (1% per instance). If a call or text is urgent, please quietly leave the classroom to answer it. Laptops should be used only for course-related activities (e.g., taking notes or reviewing the reading). Violations will also result in a 1% penalty. I do not intend to make a show of these penalties. Instead, I will most likely pause and make a note. My silence, then, does not mean that infractions have gone unnoticed.

Return to top

Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism

UF students are bound by The Honor Pledge which states, “We, the members of the University of Florida community, pledge to hold ourselves and our peers to the highest standards of honor and integrity by abiding by the Honor Code. On all work submitted for credit by students at the University of Florida, the following pledge is either required or implied: “On my honor, I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid in doing this assignment.”

The Honor Code ( specifies a number of behaviors that are in violation of this code and the possible sanctions. Furthermore, you are obligated to report any condition that facilitates academic misconduct to appropriate personnel.

In the event that I discover that a student is cheating or has plagiarized, s/he will automatically fail the course and will be reported to Student Judicial Affairs. Acts of Plagiarism include:

Turning in a paper or another assignment that was written by someone else (i.e., by another student, by a research service, or downloaded off the Internet);
Copying, verbatim, a sentence or paragraph of text from the work of another author without properly acknowledging the source through a commonly accepted citation style and using quotation marks;
Paraphrasing (i.e., restating in your own words) text written by someone else without citing that author;
Using a unique idea or concept, which you discovered in a specific reading, without citing that work.

Course Evaluations

Students are expected to provide feedback on the quality of instruction in this course based on 10 criteria. These evaluations are conducted online at Evaluations are typically open during the last two or three weeks of the semester, but students will be given specific times when they are open. Summary results of these assessments are available to students at

Additional Information

Phone numbers and contact sites for university counseling services and mental health

Services can be found at or you may call 392-1575. To contact the University Police Department call 392-1111 or 9-1-1 for emergencies.

Return to top

Course Outline

(Subject to changes)

Week 1 (Aug 26) –Course Introduction

Week 2 (September 2) –Parties and Elections in Democratic Regimes

Requests for “Author” Presentations Due

Dalton et al., Political Parties & Democratic Linkage

Week 3 (September 9) – Voter Turnout: The Importance of Context

Reaction Paper Option 1

Franklin,Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies since 1945
**Ezrow, Lawrence and Georgios Xezonakis. 2016. “Satisfaction with Democracy and Voter Turnout: A Temporal Perspective.” Party Politics 22(1): 3-14

Return to Top

Week 4 (Sept 16) – Parties and Elections in Authoritarian Regimes

Reaction Paper Option 2

Schedler,The Politics of Uncertainty
**Slater, Dan. 2008. “Can Leviathan Be Democratic? Competitive Elections, Robust Mass Politics, and State Infrastructural Power.” Studies in Comparative International Development 43:252-72

Return to Top

Week 5 (September 23)– Electoral System Effects on Parties and Representation

Paper Proposals Due

Moser and Scheiner,Electoral Systems and Political Context

Week 6 (September 30) –The Endogeneity of Electoral Rules

Reaction Paper Option 3

Lundell,The Origins of Electoral Systems in the Post-war Era
**Bowler, Shaun, Todd Donovan, and Jeffrey A. Karp. 2006. “Why Politicians Like Electoral Institutions: Self-Interest, Values, or Ideology?” Journal of Politics 68(2): 434-446
**Cusak, Thomas, Torben Iverson and David Soskice. 2007. “Economic Interests and the Origins of Electoral Systems.” American Political Science Review 101(3): 373-92
**Kreuzer, Marcus. 2010. “Historical Knowledge and Quantitative Analysis: The Case of the Origins of Proportional Representation.” American Political Science Review 104(2): 369-392

Return to Top

Week 7 (October 7) –PartyInstitutionalization and Party System Continuity

Reaction Paper Option 4

Lipset, Seymour Martin and Stein Rokkan. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction.” In Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan (eds), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: The Free Press, pp. 1-64
Neto, Octavio Amorim and Gary W. Cox. 1997. “Electoral Institutions, Cleavage Structures and the Number of Parties.” American Journal of Political Science 41(1): 149-174
**Levitsky, Steven. 1998. “Institutionalization and Peronism: The Concept, the Case and the Case for Unpacking the Concept.” Party Politics4(1):77-92
**Randall, Vicky and Lars Svåsand. 2002. “Party Institutionalization in New Democracies.” Party Politics 8(1): 5-29
**Pedahzur, Ami and Avraham Brichta. 2002. “The Institutionalization of Extreme Right-wing Charismatic Parties: A Paradox?” Party Politics 8(1): 31-49
**Mainwaring, Scott and Edurne Zoco. 2007. “Political Sequences and the Stabilization of Interparty Competition: Electoral Volatility in Old and New Democracies.”Party Politics 13(2): 155-178
**Gehlbach, Scott and Philip Keefer. 2011. “Investment without Democracy: Ruling-party Institutionalization and Credible Commitment in Autocracies.” Journal of Comparative Economics 39(2): 123-139

Return to Top

Week 8 (Oct 14) –No Class (Homecoming)

Week 9 (October 21) –New Parties and Party System Change

Reaction Paper Option 5

Janda, Kenneth and Robert Harmel. 1994. “An Integrated Theory of Party Goals and Party Change.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 6(3): 259-287
Janda, Kenneth, Robert Harmel, Christine Edens, and Patricia Goff. 1995. “Changes in Party Identity: Evidence from Party Manifestos.” Party Politics1(2): 171-196

Tavits, Margit. 2006.“Party System Change: Testing a Model of New Party Entry.”Party Politics12(1):99-119
**Pop-Eleches, Grigore. 2010. “Throwing out the Bums: Protest Voting and Unorthodox Parties after Communism.”World Politics 62(2): 221–260.
**Lupu, Noam. 2014. “Brand Dilution and the Breakdown of Political Parties in Latin America.” World Politics 66(4): 561-602
**Manning, Carrie and Ian Smith. 2016. “Political Party Formation by Former Armed Opposition Groups after Civil War.” Democratization 23(6): 972-89
Mainwaring, Scott, Carlos Gervasoni, and Annabella España-Najera. [Forthcoming] “Extra- and Within-System Electoral Volatility.” Party Politics: Online first at

Return to Top

Week 10 (October 28) – Economic Voting in Democratic Regimes

Reaction Paper Option 6

Powell, G. Bingham, Jr. and Guy D. Whitten 1993. “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context.” American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 391-414
**Anderson, Christopher J. 2000. “Economic Voting and Political Context: AComparative Perspective.”Electoral Studies 19: 151–170
**Duch, Raymond M. 2001. “A Developmental Model of Heterogeneous Economic Voting in New Democracies.” American Political Science Review95(4): 895-910
Anderson, Cameron. 2006. “Economic Voting and Multilevel Governance.” American Journal of Political Science 50(2): 449-63
**Hellwig, Timothy and David Samuels. 2007. “Voting in Open Economies: The Electoral Consequences of Globalization.” Comparative Political Studies40(3):283-306
Lobo, Marina Costa and Michael S. Lewis-Beck. 2012. “The Integration Hypothesis: How the European Union Shapes Economic Voting.” Electoral Studies 31: 522–528

Week 11 (November 4) – The Political Economy of Authoritarian Elections

Reaction Paper Option 7

Blaydes,Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt
**Frye, Timothy and Andrei Yakovlev. 2016. “Elections and Property Rights: A Natural Experiment from Russia.” Comparative Political Studies 49(4): 499-528

Week 12 (November 11) – No Class (Veterans Day)

Week 13 (November 18) – Election Fraud

Hyde, The Pseudo-Democrat’s Dilemma
**Ziblatt, Daniel. 2009. “Shaping Democratic Practice and the Causes of Electoral Fraud: The Case of Nineteenth-Century Germany.” American Political Science Review 103(1): 1-21

Return to Top

Week 14 (November 25) – No Class (Thanksgiving Break)

Week 15 (December 2) – Paper Presentations

Week 16 (December 9) – No Class (Reading Days)

Final Papers Due on Monday, December 12 at 11:30 am through Turnitin.com

Return to Top