Amid alarm over presidential elections in the United States, a key concern has been the role of Congress in certifying presidential election results, which has been presumed to invite disaster. This article investigates the politics of congressional resolution of crises following close, competitive presidential elections. It argues that it is in legislators’ self-interest to prevent a crisis from reaching a breaking point: legislatures frequently do not survive coups or the outbreak of civil war. Offering a theoretical model supported by historical case studies from the United States, Chile, and Peru, this study shows that defeated presidential candidates find it effectively impossible to hold their parties together, even when partisan allies control legislative majorities. Legislators have strong political incentives to cooperate and to break partisan ranks to resolve a presidential election crisis decisively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniel Larsen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: