Super Majoritarianism and the Endowment Effect
Theory and Decision 55 (3):181-207 (2003)
| Abstract | The American and some other constitutions entrench property rights by requiring super majoritarian voting as a condition for amending or revoking their own provisions. Following Buchanan and Tullock [The Calculus of Consent, Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor), 1962], this paper analyzes individuals' interests behind a veil of ignorance, and shows that under some standard assumptions, a (simple) majoritarian rule should be adopted. This result changes if one assumes that preferences are consistent with the behavioral phenomenon known as the endowment effect. It then follows that (at least some) property rights are best defended by super majoritarian protection. The paper then shows that its theoretical results are consistent with a number of doctrines underlying American Constitutional Law | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesVictor Allis & Teun Koetsier (1995). On Some Paradoxes of the Infinite II. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (2):235-247.
Dean J. Machin (2013). Political Inequality and the 'Super-Rich': Their Money or (Some of) Their Political Rights. Res Publica 19 (2):121-139.
Gilles Dowek & Olivier Hermant (2012). A Simple Proof That Super-Consistency Implies Cut Elimination. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 53 (4):439-456.
Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan (2011). Condorcet Vs. Borda in Light of a Dual Majoritarian Approach. Theory and Decision 71 (2):151-162.
Victor Allis & Teunis Koetsier (1991). On Some Paradoxes of the Infinite. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42 (2):187-194.
Alfred F. Mackay (1973). A Simplified Proof of an Impossibility Theorem. Philosophy of Science 40 (2):175-177.
Steve Torrance (2012). Super-Intelligence and (Super-)Consciousness. International Journal of Machine Consciousness 4 (02):483-501.
Charles-Maxime Panaccio (2010). Professor Waldron Goes to Canada (One More Time): The Canadian Charter and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty. Common Law World Review 39:100.
Paul Corazza (1999). Laver Sequences for Extendible and Super-Almost-Huge Cardinals. Journal of Symbolic Logic 64 (3):963-983.
Matt Leonard (2012). Burge's Contextual Theory of Truth and the Super-Liar Paradox. In Michal Pelis Vit Puncochar (ed.), The Logica Yearbook 2011. College Publications.
Jeffrey E. Foss (1989). On the Logic of What It is Like to Be a Conscious Subject. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 67 (June):305-320.
David H. Saford (1976). Competing Semantics of Vagueness: Many Values Versus Super-Truth. Synthese 33 (2-4):195--210.
Rudolf Schübler (1986). Nachwuchs für den Lügner: Vom Lügner Und Verstärkten Lügner Zum Super-Lügner. Erkenntnis 24 (2):219 - 234.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2010-09-02Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
