Parliamentary voting order materially shapes which outcomes can be coerced

Evidence

Rules that permit a president to veto an appropriation bill only in its entirety, or that require each amendment to be voted before the original act is voted on, or a priority system accorded to different kinds of motions, substantially alter the incentives that are brought to bear on each action. One who might be pressured into choosing second best is relieved of his vulnerability if he can vote earlier to eliminate that possibility, thereby leaving only first and third choices about which his preference is known to be so strong that no threat will be made. — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 91

Categorization

• XREF: Illuminates the Corleone strategy of controlling timing and agenda — when to call in a favour, and how to sequence commitments to eliminate intermediate options. — connects to: Nomadic clan voting procedures enabled vote manipulation — I.M. Lewis, I. M. Lewis, A Modern History of the Somali_ Nation…, 389; Procedural norms substitute for substantive control when outcomes are hard to specify. — Shapiro, Susan P., The Social Control of Impersonal Trust, 62

Broader Connections

• Nomadic clan voting procedures enabled vote manipulation #exemplifies (0.82) — I.M. Lewis, I. M. Lewis, A Modern History of the Somali_ Nation…, 389