This study examines how French citizens hold powerful prime ministers accountable beyond policy results.
Using survey experiments across several countries, we find a clear tension executives face when they use procedural force during legislative battles.
Key Findings:
- Ordinary people evaluate leaders based on both outcomes and processes.
- Executives who encounter significant parliamentary opposition must choose between accepting policy failure or facing public backlash for using procedural power.
- The effectiveness of accountability mechanisms like confidence votes varies by context.
These findings suggest modest gains in executive approval through specific process victories, while highlighting situations where avoiding the legislative conflict may be strategically better. Executives face trade-offs: they can accept outcome losses but must weigh against potential damage from procedural force.
