Constitutional Consequentialism: Bargain Democracy versus Median Democracy

Theoretical Inquiries in Law 3 (1) (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Depending on how people respond to it, a constitution can cause suffering on a vast scale or lay the foundation for a nation’s liberty, prosperity, and equality. As currently practiced, constitutional theory and interpretation especially concern the meaning, history, and philosophy of constitutional texts. These approaches cannot predict the responses of people to constitutions. Constitutional consequentialism, which I advocate, is a research program that aims to predict the effect of alternative forms and interpretations of constitutions on policy values, especially liberty, prosperity, and equality. This paper discusses two constitutional processes. “Median democracy,” which empowers the median voter, is implemented by referenda and ballot initiatives, special districts, and winner-take-all elections. “Bargain democracy,” which lubricates bargaining among factions and regions, is implemented by legislatures, comprehensive governments, and proportional representation. I show that median democracy causes stability, whereas bargain democracy ideally causes efficiency and often causes corruption or instability.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,757

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-12-14

Downloads
10 (#1,477,106)

6 months
5 (#1,062,008)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references