ABSTRACT
The article seeks to explore why a high formal hurdle for constitutional amendments (constitutional rigidity) as it is present in Germany does not automatically lead to a lower number of amendments when compared with low rigidity countries and why Germany's amendment rate is so much higher than that of some other federations. It theorizes that the frequency of interactions between stable, interdependent actors influences their willingness to compromise. Thus analyses of constitutional politics must expand the focus to longer time-horizons and to the parliamentary and federal context. Case studies on constitutional politics in two parliamentary federations, Germany and Canada, confirm that actors cope differently with the problem of multiple veto players in constitutional politics. In the long run, two distinct patterns of constitutional politics have emerged.
