Veto players and democratic trade-offs (a newbie's cry for help) (house of representatives, Congress)

[hangugo]

Hi, everyone!

I am a newbie in the PoliSci field and I am totally lost working on this assignment.

I have this fictional republic on the Moon (not my idea, it's in the assignment), which has presidential governance system with 4 roughly equal parties (Left, Center-Left, Center-Right and Right), and PR electoral system. I have a problem defining the democratic trade-offs (though I have an idea it will be resoluteness at the expense of decisiveness), because I need to know the approximate number of veto players, since the resoluteness increases with the increase of the effective number of vetoes held by the veto players. Is each of the parties a veto player? Are there any other veto players, besides the parties and the president (such as the government, the judiciary, etc.)?
Also I wrote about 2 possibilities of the parties to form either (1) Left and Right coalitions, or (2) a Centrist coalition. Can coalitions be veto players and if so, do they replace the parties as veto players or add up to the number?

Last question: I know that separation of power takes place in the presidential republic, but what about separation of purpose?

I have the following guidelines:

Setting Up Ambition to Counter Ambition
[*]Separation of power defines the number of institutional agents whose consent is needed to change the legislative status quo: presidential or not? bicameral or not? federal or not? independent judicial review or not?
[*]Separation of purpose defines the number of partisan agents whose consent is needed to change the legislative status quo: a single party controls all the relevant offices or institutions or not? the parties are factionalized or not?
[*]The effective number of vetoes refers to the veto points held by actors with distinct preferences.
Democratic Trade-offs
[*]Decisiveness: the ability to enact and implement policy change.
[*]Resoluteness: the ability to commit to maintaining a given policy.
[*]As the effective number of vetoes increases, the polity becomes more resolute, and less decisive; the reverse is also true.
[*]Public-regardedness versus Private-regardedness: how much aims to provide public goods; improve allocative efficiency; and promote the general welfare?
[*]The greater the number of effective vetoes, the more private regarding will be the policies enacted.
[*]This is a consequence of bargaining among veto players, where each veto player will be able to demand, and receive, side payments in the form of narrowly targeted policies.
Power, Purpose, and Outcomes
http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/3047/ppocopy.jpg


I would greatly appreciate any kind of help, since I'm running out of time.

Thank you in advance!

[Okiegirlfriend]

I wish you luck......better buckle down! There are so many libs on the forum. They don't know how to think so you are on your own!

[slenderbone]

I'd pack a bong and go look for a CO-ED

[kaimuki]

Originally Posted by Okiegirlfriend

I wish you luck......better buckle down! There are so many libs on the forum. They don't know how to think so you are on your own!

I'm overwhelmed with all of the advice you offered to the OP. More righty drivel!

[delusianne]

do your own homework.

[sanrene]

because I need to know the approximate number of veto players

As you must know, it takes 2/3 rds of congress to override a presidential veto. It also takes 2/3 rd of the states to amend the constitution....so something along those lines in your 4-party system.

Coalitions I would think cannot be veto players - considering each and every member of your 4-party system has only one vote. They could vote in a block, but still they only get one vote.

Good luck.

[afoigrokerkok]

Originally Posted by sanrene

It also takes 2/3 rd of the states to amend the constitution.

It takes 3/4th of the states to amend the Constitution.

[sanrene]

It takes 3/4th of the states to amend the Constitution.

Oh well. Brain fart.

First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures

I got confused. No wonder there are so few amendments.

I was close;

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,
which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.