Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T17:54:30.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Government and Opposition in Legislative Speechmaking: Using Text-As-Data to Estimate Brazilian Political Parties’ Policy Positions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2021

Mauricio Y. Izumi Open the ORCID record for Mauricio Y. Izumi [Opens in a new window]  and
Danilo B. Medeiros Open the ORCID record for Danilo B. Medeiros [Opens in a new window]
Mauricio Y. Izumi
Affiliation:
Mauricio Yoshida Izumi is an assistant professor at the Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES), Vitória, Brazil. mauricioizumi@hotmail.com.
Danilo B. Medeiros
Affiliation:
Danilo Buscatto Medeiros is a postdoctoral researcher at the Brazilian Center of Analysis and Planning (CEBRAP), São Paulo, Brazil. danilobuscatto@gmail.com.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research note explores whether the government-opposition dimension that emerges from voting records of Brazilian legislatures also arises in legislative speechmaking. Since the earlier stages of the legislative process are innocuous to policy outcomes, party leaders would have fewer incentives to coerce their copartisans’ behavior in speeches than in roll calls. To test this expectation, this study estimates Brazilian political parties’ policy positions, relying on a sentiment analysis approach to classify 64,000 senators’ speeches. The results suggest that the president and the party leadership exert significant influence not only over how legislators vote but also over how they speak. We speculate that these unforeseen findings are backed by the decisiveness of speeches in passing legislation, the importance leadership gives to party brand, and legislators’ need to signal their positions to leaders and the government.

Keywords

Policy positionstext-as-datalegislative speechmakingpolitical parties
Type
Research Notes
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , February 2021 , pp. 145 - 164
Copyright
© The Authors, 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the University of Miami

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Conflict of interest: the authors declare no potential conflicts of interest in publishing this paper.

References

REFERENCES

Abranches, Sérgio. 1988. Presidencialismo de coalizão: o dilema institucional brasileiro. Dados 31, 1: 5–38.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, John, and Richard, McKelvey. 1977. A Method of Scaling with Applications to the 1968 and1972 Presidential Elections. American Political Science Review 71, 1: 111–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ames, Barry. 2000. The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Amorim, Neto, Octavio. 2009. Gabinetes presidenciais, ciclos eleitorais e disciplina legislativa no Brasil. Dados 43, 3: 479–519.Google Scholar
Armstrong, David, et al. 2014. Analyzing Spatial Models of Choice and Judgment with R. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Christian, Doyle, David, and Wiesehomeier, Nina. 2017. Presidents, Policy Compromise, and Legislative Success. Journal of Politics 79, 2: 380–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bäck, Hanna, and Marc, Debus. 2016. Political Parties, Parliaments and Legislative Speechmaking. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Henry. 1985. The Perils of Survey Research: Inter-Personally Incomparable Responses. Political Methodology 11, 3–4: 269–91.Google Scholar
Clifford, Carrubba, Gabel, Matthew, and Hug, Simon. 2008. Legislative Voting Behavior, Seen and Unseen: A Theory of Roll-Call Vote Selection. Legislative Studies Quarterly 33, 4: 543–72.Google Scholar
Clifford, Carrubba, Gabel, Matthew, Murrah, Lacey, Clough, Ryan, Montgomery, Elizabeth, and Schambach, Rebecca. 2006. Off the Record: Unrecorded Legislative Votes, Selection Bias and Roll-Call Vote Analysis. British Journal of Political Science 36, 4: 691–704.Google Scholar
Centro de Estudos de Opinião Pública (CESOP). 2017. Estudo eleitoral brasileiro. Report. Campinas: Banco de Dados do Centro de Estudos de Opinião Pública.Google Scholar
Clinton, Joshua, and Jackman, Simon. 2009. To Simulate or Nominate? Legislative Studies Quarterly 34, 4: 593–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua, Jackman, Simon, and Rivers, Douglas. 2004. The Statistical Analysis of Rollcall Data. American Political Science Review 98, 2: 355–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Public. In Ideology and Discontent, ed. Apter, David. New York: Free Press. 206–61.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary. 2006. The Organization of Democratic Legislatures. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, ed. Weingast, Barry and Wittman, Donald. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 141–61.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary, and Matthew, McCubbins. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenno, Richard. 1978. Homestyle: House Members in Their Districts. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Figueiredo, Argelina, and Limongi, Fernando. 1999. Executivo e legislativo na Nova Ordem Constitucional. Rio de Janeiro: Editora FGV.Google Scholar
Freitas, Andréa. 2016. O presidencialismo da coalizão. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Konrad Adenauer.Google Scholar
Geweke, John. 1992. Evaluating the Accuracy of Sampling-Based Approaches to Calculating Posterior Moments. In Bayesian Statistics 4, ed. Bernando, José et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 169–93.Google Scholar
Grimmer, Justin, and Brandon, Stewart. 2013. Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts. Political Analysis 21, 3: 267–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984–87. The Theory of Communicative Action, vols. 1 and 2. Trans. McCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Hare, Christopher, Armstrong, David II, Baker, Ryan, Carroll, Royce, and Poole, Keith. 2014. Using Bayesian Aldrich-McKelvey Scaling to Study Citizens’ Ideological Preferences and Perceptions. American Journal of Political Science 59, 3: 759–74.Google Scholar
Highton, Benjamin, and Michael, Rocca. 2005. Beyond the Roll-Call Arena: The Determinants of Position Taking in Congress. Political Research Quarterly 58, 2: 303–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hug, Simon. 2009. Selection Effects in Roll Call Votes. British Journal of Political Science 40, 1: 225–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izumi, Mauricio. 2016. Governo e oposição no senado brasileiro (1989–2010). Dados 59, 1: 91–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, Murray, Christopher, Salomon, Joshua, and Tandon, Ajay. 2004. Enhancing the Validity and Cross-Cultural Comparability of Measurement in Survey Research. American Political Science Review 98, 1: 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauderdale, Benjamin, and Alexander, Herzog. 2016. Measuring Political Positions from Legislative Speech. Political Analysis 24, 3: 374–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laver, Michael, and Schofield, Norman. 1998. Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, Benoit, Kenneth, and Garry, John. 2003. Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as Data. American Political Science Review 97, 2: 311–31.Google Scholar
Leoni, Eduardo. 2002. Ideologia, democracia e comportamento parlamentar: a Câmara dos Deputados (1991–1998). Dados 45, 3: 361–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Bing. 2012. Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies 5, 1: 1–167.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization: The Case of Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, Andrew, and Kevin, Quinn. 2002. Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain: Monte Carlo for the US Supreme Court, 1953–1999. Political Analysis 10, 2: 134–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lanny, and Georg, Vanberg. 2008. Coalition Government and Political Communication. Political Research Quarterly 61, 1: 502–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Paul. 1999. Coalition Discipline, Enforcement Mechanisms, and Intraparty Poli-Tics. In Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government, ed. Bowler, Shaun, Farrell, David M., and Katz, Richard S.. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. 269–88.Google Scholar
Monroe, Burt, and Philip, Schrodt. 2009. Introduction to the Special Issue: The Statistical Analysis of Political Text. Political Analysis 16, 4: 351–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreira, Davi. 2020. Com a palavra os nobres deputados: ênfase temática dos discursos dos parlamentares brasileiros. Dados 63, 1: 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neiva, Pedro. 2011a. Disciplina partidária e apoio ao governo no bicameralismo brasileiro. Revista de Sociologia e Política 19, 39: 183–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neiva, Pedro. 2011b. Coesão e disciplina partidária no Senado Federal. Dados 54, 2: 289–318.Google Scholar
Pang, Bo, and Lee, Lillian. 2008. Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2, 1–2: 1–135.Google Scholar
Pereira, Carlos, and Bernardo, Mueller. 2002. Comportamento estratégico em presidencialismo de coalizão: as relações entre executivo e legislativo na elaboração do orçamento brasileiro. Dados 45, 2: 265–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierucci, Antonio Flávio. 1999. Ciladas da diferença. São Paulo: Editora 34.Google Scholar
Plummer, Martyn. 2015. rjags: Bayesian Graphical Models Using MCMC. R package version 4-4. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rjags/index.html Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2007. Ideology and Congress. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
Power, Timothy, and Cesar, Zucco. 2009. Estimating Ideology of Brazilian Legislative Parties, 1990–2005: A Research Communication. Latin American Research Review 44, 1: 218–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, Timothy. 2012. Elite Preferences in a Consolidating Democracy: The Brazilian Legislative Surveys, 1990–2009. Latin American Politics and Society 54, 4: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, Leôncio Martins. 1987. Quem é quem na Constituinte: uma análise sociopolítica dos partidos e deputados. São Paulo: OESP-Maltese.Google Scholar
Samuels, David. 1999. Incentives to Cultivate a Party Vote in Candidate-Centric Electoral Systems: Evidence from Brazil. Comparative Political Studies 32, 4: 487–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, Fabiano. 2003. O poder legislativo no presidencialismo de coalizão. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Daniel, Traber, Denise, and Benoit, Kenneth. 2017. Estimating Intra-Party Preferences: Comparing Speeches to Votes. Political Science Research and Methods 5, 2: 379–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slapin, Jonathan, and Proksch, Sven-Oliver. 2008. A Scaling Model for Estimating TimeSeries Party Positions from Texts. American Journal of Political Science 52, 3: 705–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarouco, Gabriela, and Rafael, Madeira. 2013. Partidos, programas e o debate sobre esquerda e direita no Brasil. Revista de Sociologia e Política 21, 45: 149–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiesehomeier, Nina, and Kenneth, Benoit. 2009. Presidents, Parties and Policy Competition. Journal of Politics 71, 4: 1435–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucco, Cesar. 2009. Ideology or What? Legislative Behavior in Multiparty Presidential Settings. Journal of Politics 71, 3: 1076–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucco, Cesar, and Benjamin, Lauderdale. 2011. Distinguishing Between Influences on Brazilian Legislative Behavior. Legislative Studies Quarterly 36, 3: 363–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Izumi and Medeiros Dataset

Dataset

https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/laps
Link