Policymaking in Multiparty Presidential Regimes: A Comparison between Brazil and Ecuador

This paper explores why two countries with similar electoral, partisan, and presidential institutions, have produced significantly different policy outcomes in Latin America. Brazil and Ecuador are conventionally known as having highly fragmented party systems, where legislators have great incentives to cultivate a personal vote. Presidents are perceived to be strong and to make large use of government resources in order to advance their agenda. Yet, policies in Brazil are more likely to respond to shocks and to be more stable over time than policies in Ecuador, where policies remain vulnerable to political changes and realignments. We argue that this variation is explained by the different nature of political coalitions formed in each country. We identify three factors that increase the executive's ability to craft governing coalitions in congress: the availability of valuable coalition currencies, the influence of long‐term political horizons, and the extent to which political transactions are credibly and effectively enforced.     

On Law and Logic

Abstract. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the role played by logic in the legal domain. In the traditional conception which underlies the movement of codification, judges are able to find in the legal system (the Master System) a unique answer for every legal problem. This entails its completeness, consistency and the possibility of deriving from it the contents of all judicial decisions. Although the ideal model of this conception is supported by important theoretical and political ideals, it has significant shortcomings. The elements of normative systems (Master Systems) are "norms" and not mere "norm-formulations." A "norm" is the meaning attributed to normative linguistic expressions. The set of all normative expressions, such as statutes, codes, etc. forms what is called the Master Book. One of the main problems for the ideal model is the identification of a normative system behind the Master Book. Interpretative arguments are the tools designed to solve these problems. Although the requirements of the model are not totally fulfilled in actual practice, it remains as an effective ideal rational goal behind legal activities linked to adjudication and most theoretical approaches to law.     

Positivism and Communitarianism: Between Human Rights and Democracy*

Abstract The author deals with theoretical connections between legal positivism and communitarianism. Such connections prove to be relevant not only for a better understanding of these two trends of thought but also in order to throw light on important philosophical issues like human rights and democracy. Deep links are traced and recognized between the so-called positivism “in action,” and especially its ideological thesis, and communitarianism.     

Agenda Power,Executive Decree Authority,and the Mixed Results of Reform in the Brazilian Congress

This article examines how institutional change in the use of extraordinary legislation affects delegation of power and unilateral action in new democracies. From 1988 to 2001, Brazilian presidents were able to reissue decrees indefinitely and thus had substantial legislative power. In 2001, Congress amended the constitution so as to restrict the president to a single reissue of each lapsed decree. This reform has had mixed results: although it ended the practice of infinite reissues, it induced Presidents Cardoso and Lula to use more decrees than previous executives had. Presidential agenda power, rather than being reduced, has been sharpened. By analyzing patterns of presidential initiatives from 1995 to 2005, we demonstrate the mixed results of this constitutional reform.