Some people view Brazilian politics as chaotic, others as stagnated. In this work, presented at the Wilson Center Brazil Institute, I show that pre-electoral coordination helps to solve this apparent contradiction.

1. Brazilian Politics: between chaos and stagnation
Fernando Guarnieri
Center for Metropolitan Studies – CEM/CEBRAP

2. Este trabalho, e todo seu conteúdo com exceção dos slides 5 ,6 e 9, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
Para ver uma cópia desta licença, visite http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

3. ● Voters Choice is the Bright Side of Elections
● Pre-Electoral Coordination: The Dark (Hidden)
Side of Elections.
● Political parties try to win elections even before
they start and sometimes they do.

4. President 1
Governors 27
Senators 27
Federal Legislators 513
State Legislators 1059

5. President 1
Governors 27
Senators 27
Federal Legislators 513
State Legislators 1059
600
3000

6. Brazil
Belgium
Ecuador
246810
EffectiveNumberofLegislativeParties
2 4 6 8 10
Effective Number of Electoral Parties
32 parties make Brazil one of the most fragmented party systems in the world
Calvo, E. (2013)

7. 21 parties are represented in the Lower House
Party labels don't help voters to differentiate among parties

8. Parties' seat share in the Lower House is stable in time

9. Party % Seats
PT 17%
PMDB 15%
PSDB 8%
PSD 8%
PP 8%
Total 56%
The Brazilian legislative party system is very concentrated:
5 Parties control more than 50% of the seats in the Lower House

10. Concentration is even higher in Presidential Elections:
PT and PSDB collect more than 80% of presidential votes since 1994

11. State Vote Vote % Voters
SP PSDB 51% PT 35% 22.32%
MG PSDB 63% PMDB 34% 10.64%
RJ PMDB 66% PV 21% 8.50%
BA PT 64% DEM 16% 7.16%
RS PT 54% PMDB 25% 5.88%
PR PSDB 52% PDT 46% 5.47%
PE PSB 83% PMDB 14% 4.63%
CE PSB 61% PSDB 20% 4.42%
PA PSDB 49% PT 36% 3.62%
SC DEM 53% PP 25% 3.37%
MA PMDB 50% PC do B 29% 3.21%
1st
Place 2nd
Place
Share of votes of the parties that finished in 1st
and 2nd
places in the 2010
elections.
The polarization in presidential elections is reproduced at the
state level. PSDB and PT compete in 7 of the 10 most populous
states in Brazil.

12. support/head PT PS B PD T PMD B PS D B PFL
PT 0.62 0 .19 0.14 0.05 0.00
PS B 0.55 0 .14 0.14 0.10 0.05
PD T 0.24 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.03
PMD B 0.11 0.04 0 .07 0.36 0.29
PS D B 0.03 0.00 0 .05 0.54 0.23
PTB 0.08 0.06 0 .11 0.20 0.30 0.18
PL 0.32 0.04 0 .03 0.19 0.19 0.17
PPR/PPB/PP 0.02 0.06 0 .10 0.24 0.29 0.25
PFL 0.00 0.00 0 .02 0.24 0.47
Parties are consistent in the way they form coalitions. Left wing
parties ally with PT in the presidential elections and right wing
parties ally with PSDB, forming two blocks. At the state level
alliances between parties from different blocks are also rare.
Relative frequency of party alliances in gubernatorial elections
between 1982 an 2010.

13. Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 1994. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 1998.
Voters are consistent in consecutive elections
1994 → 1998

14. Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 1998. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 2002.
Voters are consistent in consecutive elections
1998 → 2002

15. Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 2002. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 2006.
Voters are consistent in consecutive elections?
2002 → 2006

16. Voters are consistent in consecutive elections
2002 → 2006
(Limongi e Guarnieri, forthcomming)

17. Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Lula in 2006. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Dilma in 2010.
Voters are consistent in consecutive elections
2006 → 2010

18. Voters are consistent in elections at different levels
Gubernatorial → Presidential (PSDB)
Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Alckmin in 2010. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Serra in 2010.

19. Voters are consistent in elections at different levels
Gubernatorial → Presidential (PT)
Each point represents a ballot station (400 voters). The horizontal axis
shows the proportion of votes for Mercadante in 2010. The vertical axis
shows the proportion of votes for Dilma in 2010.

20. ● How can such a fragmented system be so
predictable and stable?
● Because elections happen in two stages.
● In the first stage parties coordinate, reducing
the choices open to voters.

21. Pre-Electoral coordination reduces the number of parties
Presidential Election (1989 - 2010)
The figure shows the distribution of the effective number of parties that
contested presidential elections by state and year between 1989 and 2010

22. Pre-Electoral coordination reduces the number of parties
Gubernatorial Election (2010)
The figure shows the frequency of the effective number of parties that
contested gubernatorial elections by state in 2010

23. Pre-Electoral coordination reduces the number of parties
Municipal Elections (1996 - 2008)
The figure shows the distribution of the effective number of parties that
contested municipal elections by municipality and year between 1996 and 2008

24. Size of Coalitions has a positive impact on the probability of a candidate being elected
Municipal Elections (2012)
The figure shows the probability of a candidate being elected (horizontal axis)
as a function of the proportion of parties in her coalition (horizontal axis)
in the municipal elections of 2012.

25. ● The probability of winning an election in Brazil
increases if parties are successful in forming
broad coalitions.
● Broad coalitions (with more than 60% of parties)
were present in 1/3 of the municipalities in the
2012 elections
● Broad coalitions (with more than 60% of parties)
never occurred in presidential elections.

26. What about legislative elections?
Coalitions create a small party bias: parties with small vote
share that are in coalitions gain more seats than parties
that run alone.
Relationship between vote share and seat share in the Lower House elections
between 1994 and 2010. Each point is a political party in a given election.
The horizontal axis shows the share of party vote. The vertical axis shows
the share of party seats. The diagonal line represents the points where votes
are perfectly translated into seats.
(Calvo, Limongi e Guarnieri, forthcomming)

27. ● Pre-electoral coordination in legislative
elections helps to explain why the Brazilian
party system is so fragmented.
● This fragmentation is what makes pre-electoral
coordination strategies possible. Parties in
executive elections will try to defeat their
opponents by forming broad coalitions - what is
only possible if there are many parties.

28. ● We know that the number of candidates depends
on the interplay between voters preferences and
electoral rules.
● We know less about the factors that explain the
success of pre-electoral coordination.
● One factor is the balance of power inside parties:
The more autonomous regional party leaders are
the less successful pre-electoral coordination will
be.

29. The figure shows the probability of a party running a candidate in an election as
a function centralization of power held by the party leaderships, measured by the
number of provisional committees at sub-national levels. Municipal elections 2008.
Only the seven biggest parties at the time were considered.
(Guarnieri, 2012)

33. ● Conclusion:
– Elections occur in two stages. First stage is as
important as the second.
– Pre-electoral coordination gives order to what appears
to be chaos (fragmentation of party system)
– Pre-electoral coordination makes the political system
more stable and predictable.
– We should pay more attention to political parties'
internal politics because they are an important key to
understanding the pre-electoral coordination process.

34. Brazilian Politics: between chaos and stagnation
Fernando Guarnieri
fhguarnieri@gmail.com
Center for Metropolitan Studies – CEM/CEBRAP
Thanks!