Parliamentary governments rely on coalitions, but policy choices can't align perfectly with all partners' preferences.

This study delves into whose interests end up in coalition policies by analyzing over 1,000 bills from three parliamentary democracies using legislative history data.

Our findings reveal a clear pattern: despite ministerial proposals and median party positions being considered, the actual policy compromise reflects a genuine middle ground negotiated between coalition partners.

This discovery challenges long-held assumptions about how multiparty governments operate politically - suggesting that effective governance requires more than simply averaging preferences but finding strategic consensus points.

Implications for political science research challenge theories built around individual ministerial influence versus collective bargaining dynamics.