Wewnątrzpartyjne konflikty w głosowaniach sejmowych w PO i PiS w latach 2001–2014

• Authors: Stolicki Dariusz

Title variants

EN

Conflicts within PO and PiS in parliamentary votings in the period 2001–2014

Abstracts

EN

The aim of the article was to analyze the inconsistent votings from the period 2001–2014, that is those votings which revealed inner conflicts or disharmonies in the two biggest Polish political parties – Platforma Obywatelska (Civic Platform) and Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (Law and Justice). The notion has never been analyzed before, therefore the research presented was of exploratory nature. Inconsistent votings were analyzed according to categories (legislative, personal, control, supervisory, resolution-making, etc.) and, in the case of votings on lawmaking bills, also according to the matter of a proposed bill. Inconsistent votings other than lawmaking were analyzed through a simplified case study in order to determine the reason for the lack of consistency. The most important results of the analysis were the significant drop in the number of inconsisten votings after 2005 both in PO and PiS; the clear division into the governing party and the opposition (however, inconsistency within the former is less common; and the most vital areas of inconsistency. Said areas include personal and ideological issues, European affairs (in PO up until the fourth term of office, whereas in PiS mainly due to ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon), as well as budget amendments (yet only in opposition parties). The analysis of correlation of inconsistencies within PiS and PO shows that the more those parties grow apart politically, the less often there is dissonance within them occurring at the same time.

Keywords

EN

political parties; voting; opposition

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie
• Journal: Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia Politologica
• Year: 2015
• Issue: 15
• Pages: 134-164

Contributors

author

Stolicki Dariusz

• Centrum Badań Ilościowych nad Polityką Uniwersytet Jagielloński

References

• Andeweg R. B., J. Thomassen. 2011. „Pathways to party unity: Sanctions, loyalty, homogeneity and division of labour in the Dutch parliament”, Party Politics 17 (5).
• Becher M., U. Sieberer. 2008. Discipline, Electoral Rules and Defection in the Bundestag, 1983–94”, German Politics 17 (3).
• Bowler S., D. M. Farrell, R. S. Katz (eds.). 1999. Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, Columbus, OH.
• Carey J. M., 2007. „Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting”, American Journal of Political Science 51 (1).
• Carey J. M., Getting Their Way, or Getting in the Way? Presidents and Party Unity in Legislative Voting, Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA, 28.08.2002 [dostęp 1.09.2014] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.6.4615 &rep=rep1&type=pdf.
• Carrubba C. J., M. Gabel, L. Murrah, R. Clough, E. Montgomery, R. Schambach. 2006. „Off the Record: Unrecorded Legislative Votes, Selection Bias and Roll-Call Vote Analysis”, British Journal of Political Science 36 (4).
• Davidson-Schmich L. K. 2006. „The Origins of Party Discipline: Evidence from Eastern Germany”, German Politics & Society 24 (2).
• Depauw S. 2003. „Government Party Discipline in Parliamentary Democracies: The Cases of Belgium, France and the United Kingdom in the 1990s”, Journal of Legislative Studies 9 (4). Wewnątrzpartyjne konflikty w głosowaniach sejmowych w PO i PiS … [163]
• Desposato S. W. 2005. „Correcting for Small Group Inflation of Roll-Call Cohesion Scores”, British Journal of Political Science 35 (4).
• Hazan R. Y. 2003. „Does Cohesion Equal Discipline? Towards a Conceptual Delineation”,Journal of Legislative Studies 9 (4).
• Hix S. 2004. „Electoral Institutions and Legislative Behavior. Explaining Voting Defection in the European Parliament”, World Politics 56.
• Hug S. 2010. „Selection Effects in Roll Call Votes”, British Journal of Political Science 40 (1).
• Katz R. S. 1986. Party Government: A Rationalistic Conception. W Visions and Realities of Party Government, G. Francis Castles, R. Wildenmann (eds.). Berlin.
• Laver M., K. A. Shepsle. 1996. Making and Breaking Governments. Cabinets and Legislatures in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge–New York.
• Martin S., S. Depauw. 2009. Legislative Party Discipline and Cohesion in Comparative Perspective. W Intra-Party Politics and Coalition Governments in Parliamentary Democracies, D. Giannetti, K. Benoit (eds.). London.
• Middlebrook J. 2003. „Les méthodes de vote au sein des parlements”, Informations constitutionnelles et parlementaires 53 (186).
• Owens J. E. 2004. „Explaining Party Cohesion and Discipline in Democratic Legislatures:Purposiveness and Contexts”, Journal of Legislative Studies 9 (4).
• Ozbudun E. 1970. Party Cohesion in Western Democracies: A Causal Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA.
• Popper K. R. 1989. Conjectures and Refutations. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge(1963). London–New York.
• Rice S. A. 1928. Quantitative Methods in Politics. New York.
• Rice S. A. 1925. „The Behavior of Legislative Groups: A Method of Measurement”, Political Science Quarterly 40 (1).
• Sieberer U. 2006. „Party Unity in Parliamentary Democracies: A Comparative Analysis”, Journal of Legislative Studies 12 (2).
• Skjæveland A. 2001. „Party Cohesion in the Danish Parliament”, Journal of Legislative Studies 7 (2).
• Słomczyński W., P. Poznański, G. Harańczyk, J. K. Sokołowski. 2008. Spójność polskich ugrupowań parlamentarnych. W Wybrane aspekty funkcjonowania Sejmu w latach 1997–2007, J. K. Sokołowski, P. Poznański (red.). Kraków.
• Stebbins R. A. 2001. Exploratory Research in the Social Sciences, Thousand Oaks, CA.
• Tavits M. 2009. „The Making of Mavericks: Local Loyalties and Party Defection”, Comparative Political Studies 42 (6).
• Thames F. C. 2005. „A House Divided: Party Strength and the Mandate Divide in Hungary, Russia, and Ukraine”, Comparative Political Studies 38 (3).
• Thames F. C. 2007. „Discipline and Party Institutionalization in Post-Soviet Legislatures”, Party Politics 13 (4).
• Uchwała Sejmu z dnia 30 lipca 1992 r. Regulamin Sejmu, tekst jednolity M.P. z 2012 r.poz. 32.
• Uchwała Senatu z dnia 23 listopada 1990 r. Regulamin Senatu, tekst jednolity M.P.z 2014 r. poz. 529.