Rewarding Some, But Not All? The Selectoral Consequences of Parliamentary Activity for Newcomers and Experienced MPs in Belgium (1995–2019)

Abstract

This article examines whether political parties reward the parliamentary activity of members of parliament (MPs) through candidate selection processes. Previous research on this question provides mixed evidence. Moreover, studies often disregard potentially unequal effects among different kinds of MPs. Using new data on all members of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives between 1995 and 2019 (N = 1108), this contribution shows that several types of parliamentary activity indeed matter both for MPs’ general renomination as well as for their claim to realistic list positions. Furthermore, our study provides evidence that parliamentary activity matters more for the reselection of newcomers than for experienced MPs.

The why of candidate selection: How party selectors handle trade-offs between party goals

“…While scholars repeatedly stress popularity (Crisp et al, 2013;De Winter and Baudewyns, 2015) and partisanship (Galasso and Nannicini, 2015;Kam, 2009;Schindler, 2021) as critical selection criteria, many undertone the relevance of competence in situations where selectors face trade-offs. Parliamentary effort, for instance, would unevenly matter for reselection (Borghetto and Lisi, 2018;Sheafer and Tzionit, 2006;Put et al, 2022), contrarily to party loyalty in parliamentary voting (Galasso and Nannicini, 2015). 'Experts' could be selected for specific list positions, less safe, but do not form the core of the ideal candidates selectors are looking for (Rehmert, 2021).…”