POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS AND ACTIVITIES AND INSTITUTIONS POLITICAL Zbigniew Machelski Models of bicameral parliaments. A comparative approach Regardless of any structural properties “chambers of reflection” that were to ensure and internal differences (unicameralism vs. full optimisation and high standard of the bicameralism), the parliament defines the legislative process. This is a reference to the formal framework within which other or- tradition of the Republican Rome, whose Se- ganisations and institutions in society are to natus (literally council of elders) has become operate. The aim of the article is not so much a nearly universally recognised role model1. to analyse but to classify bicameralism. Each The reference to tradition is important, but classification has its strengths and weakness- it does not explain all contemporary polit- es. First, as in the case of most tools used in ical phenomena, which are the domain of comparative methods, it carries with it a risk political science. Studies conducted in the of simplifications, without which, howev- mid-1990s confirmed that 126 legislatures er, formal modelling is impossible. Second, in various geographical regions of the world making comparisons is associated with easy were unicameral, while 56 were bicameral2. manipulation of some variables. This often In the initially bicameral system, unicamer- stems from political scientists’ own prej- alism has clearly become dominant. udice, when they try to examine political The discussion about the sense of the phenomena in accordance with their own bicameral system keeps coming back from preferences. In analyses of bicameralism, time to time, also in Poland3. Critics of bi- this is manifested in a tendency to attribute cameralism are trying to demonstrate that rationality only in the case of federal or large the bicameral structure of the parliament is states. Third, all comparative methods only a product of history and not of reason. They define partial identity of the studied phe- ignore Montesquieu’s tripartite separation of nomena, which makes it difficult to establish powers4, in which bicameralism guarantees boundaries. The decision largely depends on a balance between the representation of the the observer. This type of analysis of the bi- people and that of the wealthy or the high cameral parliament model, separated from born. The contemporary Polish political sci- the entirety of specific political systems, is by ence has not devoted much attention to the no means an erroneous approach, though it structural properties of bicameralism, only is certainly incomplete. indicating the most general features of this At the beginning of the estate monar- system5. Apart from works by Andrzej An- chy, there emerged a custom whereby upper toszewski, Jacek K. Sokołowski and Jarosław houses were sui generis “second instances of Szymanek, there are no comprehensive em- the better born”, “chambers of resistance” or pirical studies. WROCŁAWSKIE STUDIA POLITOLOGICZNE 13/2012 Wrocławskie Studia Politologiczne 13, 2012 © for this edition by CNS machelski.indd 1 2014-07-03 13:45:37 2 Typology of bicameralism was primarily influenced by external bodies. In the first case we are dealing with parties of After the period of “behavioural revolution”, parliamentary origin, in the second – with contemporary political science has become parties of extra-parliamentary origin10. Re- susceptible to various forms of critical the- ferring to the relations between the party or- ory, i.e. a school of thought according to ganisation and the parliamentary group, the which the proper purpose of science is cri- French political scientist considered three tique and social change, and not only under- variants characterising types of parliaments: standing and explaining a thesis. Assuming a) preponderance of representatives over the that in social sciences scholars should think party; b) relative balance between the parlia- only in terms of trying to invalidate or falsi- mentary group and the party leadership; c) fy theories and not to prove them, political domination of the party leadership over the scientists are forced to think critically. This parliamentary group11. This is the basis for makes it possible to avoid a situation, when a typology of legislature models according POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS AND ACTIVITIES AND INSTITUTIONS POLITICAL “simply analyzing a polity as it is amounts to to the following features: 1) representatives a tacit endorsement of its institutions and enjoy considerable autonomy with regard to the distribution of power”6. Critical think- the party leadership and the external party ing has several characteristics, but is pri- structure; 2) cooperation between the parlia- marily dependent on empirical verification, mentary group and the party organisation is which means that pronounced opinions are characterised by a state of equilibrium and based on observation or experience7. Em- the effectiveness of both structures is by no pirical verification means that observation means only theoretical; 3) interactions are determines our acceptance or rejection of a replaced by a penetration of the parliamen- statement concerning what we “know”. If we tary structure by the party organisation, with say, for example, that “a single-winner voting the party leader becoming the head of the system is conducive to [...] electoral corrup- parliamentary group and, in favourable cir- tion, facilitates political autonomisation of cumstances, the prime minister or leader of interest groups and growth of anarchy in re- the opposition in the parliament12. Among lations within parliamentary parties”8, then the most frequently studied parliaments, the we should corroborate such statements with United States Congress is considered to be in tangible evidence. We can make this sort of the first group, while the British parliament generalisations, but we accept the fact that – in the third group. they are constantly revised. Normative con- Duverger’s typology is the source of clusions should stem from an empirical as- many operational concepts. Legislatures, sessment of relations. In each classification or as representative bodies, are elected and typology the adopted criteria are of key sig- are made up of people belonging to various nificance9. They help us evaluate individual political parties. Parties analysed on the cases (system-specific) and capture the uni- electoral level and the parliamentary-cabi- versal nature of the studied phenomena with- net level organise the election of represent- in the entire political space (space-bound). atives, but also express conflicts. The nature The first typology of parliaments pre- of these conflicts translates into the quality sented in political science was Maurice of work in the parliament. Winning seats Duverger’s system. Generally speaking, it is in the parliament often means that the pro- about whether a parliamentary group as an gramme of political parties is substantially electoral committee played a key role in the modified in comparison with their election birth of a party, or whether its foundation manifestos. It becomes more “sophisticat- Wrocławskie Studia Politologiczne 13, 2012 © for this edition by CNS machelski.indd 2 2014-07-03 13:45:37 3 POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS AND ACTIVITIIES AND INSTITUTIONS POLITICAL ed” in the sense and for the reason that it 3) modified arenas: the classic example ACTIVITIES AND INSTITUTIONS POLITICAL should not hinder any possibility of coali- was the Parliament of the Fourth Republic in tion bargaining. The basic modifying factor France, but the group also includes the par- is the distribution of power in the parlia- liaments in Germany and Italy16; ment after an election. 4) full arenas, e.g. parliaments completely Two successive typologies of parliaments dominated by the ruling majority, in which – by Nelson W. Polsby and Michael L. Mezey the main forum for confrontation is the re- – are similar. Polsby notes that parliaments lation between the ruling majority and the differ in terms of their policy making powers opposition, with the opposition having little expressed in their capability of limiting the influence on the legislative process. This var- power of the government. The policy mak- iant is best exemplified by the United King- ing power of legislatures can be presented dom and the Fifth Republic in France (in the as a continuum, with strong parliaments on former owing to the strong position of the one extreme, and weak parliaments on the cabinet and the prime minister, in the latter other. The former are described as “trans- – owing to the position of the president in formative” legislatures, the latter – as “are- the system)17. nas”13. Government proposals are modified Mezey’s typology is based on the policy in the course of procedures defining the di- making power of the legislature and its sup- vision of labour in the parliament. The final port in society18. The first case is about the ef- outcome is determined by political prefer- fectiveness of the legislatures in implement- ences of parliamentary groups, quality of ing their own legislative initiatives and their their work and professional preparation of impact on the content of the government’s the members. Transformative legislatures proposals. This makes it possible to distin- are structurally capable of policy making guish “strong” and “weak” parliaments. A and autonomous decision making. Arenas, strong parliament is effective on three levels: on the other hand, are places of dispute be- a) modification