Government assignment

Political parties

Article 1:

1. Describe the origins of political parties and explain the persistence of the two-party system.

2. Discuss the functions political parties perform and compare the relative importance of these functions in the present day.

3. Distinguish among the three major forms that political parties assume.

4. Identify key party realignments and explain why such realignments occur.

5. Assess the role that third parties play in American politics.

Introduction

American politics are incomprehensible without understanding the contribution of political parties. Yet political parties were not explicitly mentioned in or anticipated by the US Constitution. Many of the Constitution's framers feared the rise of political parties. But the First Amendment's guarantee of the right to peaceably assemble has allowed political organizations whose primary goals are to win elections—parties—to flourish. Political parties provide the context for elections and campaigns. They allow large numbers of individuals and groups to coordinate support for political candidates and they provide a more permanent and meaningful way of linking ordinary voters to their government. The labels that political parties provide, which typically stand for a distinct cluster of policy positions or political values also provide a useful shortcut for voters who may not have time to research all or even most of the candidates in an election. While the fortunes of the major parties have declined over the last several decades, they remain a crucial organizing force in American politics. This lesson explores the origins of modern party politics and the role political parties play in the American political system.

Study Questions

1. What is a political party? How do political parties differ from interest groups?

2. Distinguish among the three different roles of political parties:

a. Party in Government

b. Organizational Party

c. Party in the Electorate

3. What is the "responsible party model"? How well does the American party system fit this model?

4. Why does the United States have weak political parties relative to its counterparts in other mature democracies?

5. What factors have contributed to the decline of strong American political parties from their peak strength in the years 1874 to 1912?

6. Describe the structure of party organization at the national, state, and local levels.

7. How do political parties contribute to the electoral success of political candidates?

8. Identify factors predicting party identification. Consider the following:

a. Age

b. Religion

c. Income

d. Gender

e. Race and Ethnicity

f. Geographic Region

9. What is the state of party identification today? What evidence supports the conclusion that there has been a process of dealignment over the last fifty years?

10. What are "realignments" in American politics? What role do "critical elections" play?

11. Summarize the issues and events that birthed the present-day Democratic and Republican parties. How have the identities of these two parties evolved, respectively, over time?

12. Identify several key differences between the Democratic and Republican party platforms.

13. Why does the two-party system persist in American politics? Why is this unlikely to change anytime soon?

14. Discuss four different types of third parties.

15. Evaluate the following statement: "Third parties don't make a difference in our political system."

Report an Online Access

Article 2:

Functions of Political Parties

ADA Text Version

Political scientists frequently distinguish between the roles political parties play in three distinct dimensions. The party in government refers to members of a political party who hold political office and how they organize themselves to pursue policies in government. The party organization describes the employees and volunteers of the party who are actively engaged in party activities and play a crucial role in organizing and contesting elections. The party in the electorate consists of voters who tend to identify with a particular political party. This latter category is of particular interest to political scientists who follow trends in party identification (or lack thereof) carefully in the hopes of understanding the outcomes of past and present elections, and predicting the results of future ones. We can assess the relative appeal of political parties by measuring party identification, the tendency of individuals to identify with a particular political party.

Mobilizing Support and Electioneering

Political parties represent a coalition of different societal groups who have allied themselves around shared themes and issues. One of their most important functions is mobilizing voters to participate in elections and vote for their preferred candidates. They play an important role in organizing elections and monitoring them for fairness.

A Force for Stability and Moderation

This points to another significant contribution that political parties make in any democratic system: they channel political conflict among competing interests into peaceful competition at the ballot box. The stabilizing effect that political parties have on our political system, particularly since it is a two-party system, is profound.

Linkage and Accountability

Parties also serve an important function as linkage institutions, connecting citizens to their government in a more permanent and effective way than merely voting in periodic elections. By organizing campaigns and influencing the positions of candidates and officeholders, they communicate policy preferences and hold government accountable.

Policy Formulation and Party Cues

Once in office, members of political parties attempt to agree upon a policy agenda, which, if successful, can be judged by voters in the next election. Finally, party labels aid voters by providing powerful cues about candidates' positions on particular issues. The number of candidates for which citizens are expected to choose among in our country's frequent elections can be overwhelming. Ordinary citizens do not have the time to research the positions of each and every candidate on issues about which he or she may care. Labels such as "Democrat" or "Republican" provide an effective shortcut that allows voters to make assumptions about what particular candidates will do once in office and upon which they may make an informed vote.

The Responsible Party Model

Political scientists frequently compare political parties in the United States to their counterparts in other democracies. The benchmark for this comparison is the responsible party model. According to this model, responsible parties are political parties that recruit candidates to run for office on a very clear policy agenda. This is known as a party platform, and is a list of general principles and party positions on important policy issues. Once their members are elected, such parties have strong leaderships that are able to hold their party members responsible for implementing that agenda. When in government, responsible parties show very high rates of voting cohesion, the tendency of party members to vote together on specific legislation. Most political parties in parliamentary democracies, such as Britain or Germany, more or less conform to the responsible party model.

Parties in the United States are not responsible parties by comparison to those in other democracies. There are a couple of important reasons for this. First, because of our federal system, political parties in the United States are highly decentralized. While national party organizations do exist, candidates are not recruited by or under the control of national party leaderships. Highly independent local and state party organizations play a much larger role. Geographic and cultural diversity in the United States means that party members from the southern states, for example, may represent regional and ideological interests quite different from members of the same party in northern states. Because members of the House of Representatives and the Senate are elected from congressional districts and states, respectively, they are mainly accountable to the people of those units, not the national party leadership.

Second, American parties no longer play a dominant role in recruiting candidates to run for public office. Candidates typically self-select and use personal campaign organizations. Parties play a supportive role in campaign support and fundraising and thus exert more limited influence on candidates both in and out of office. As a result, members of American political parties demonstrate lower levels of party discipline in government. This can be observed in the comparatively low rate of voting cohesion within political parties in Congress. Their members vote together as a unified bloc at rates notably lower than party members in other democracies.

 

Article 3:

Organization of Political Parties

ADA Text Version

The major political parties are loosely organized coalitions whose structures reflect the federal system. Party organization corresponds to ever-larger geographic areas within which committees recruit members, organize election activity, and mobilize resources and voter turnout for campaigns.

Local and State Committees

At the lowest level are the precinct committees. Precincts consist of a contiguous group of neighborhoods comprising a voting area, and their committees are the workhorses of the political parties. Moving from smaller to larger geographic jurisdictions are committees representing wards, cities, counties, and states. With the important exception of campaign finance, regulation of political party activity is the responsibility of the states. The state party organization is typically headed by a central or executive committee. With the exception of the national presidential convention and the seating of delegates, these committees coordinate and make rules (subject to state law) governing the political party in their states.

National Committees

National party committees receive greater publicity despite the larger and more active role played by local and state organizations in campaigns and elections. The chief officer of the national parties is the national committee chair, who is typically a very well-known and powerful player in party politics. A national chairperson may even be a former presidential candidate such as Howard Dean, who enjoyed tenure as the Democratic Party's national chair after losing his party's nomination process.

Party Platform

The national party committees have two important functions beyond fundraising and coordinating campaign support activities. One is the development of an official national party platform, or list of principles and policies to which the party is committed. While party members who are candidates for local, state, and federal office may not subscribe to every statement within the platform, it provides a broad overview of what the party and its members "stand for." Crafted by party leaders and members who are more ideologically motivated, the Republican and Democratic platforms present clear differences, differences that may be clearer than those found between competing Republican and Democratic candidates.

National Convention

The national party committee's other responsibility is planning the national convention which takes place every four years. The national convention is held in the run-up to the presidential election and is held for the purpose of nominating the party's presidential and vice presidential candidates, as well as adopting the party platform.

Elections

While some elections, particularly local elections, are nonpartisan, most elections are partisan, meaning that candidates run under party labels such as Democratic or Republican. Parties play a vital role in organizing both primary and general elections. Primary elections are elections held within a political party to select candidates who will run in the general election. In general, they may be either closed or open. A closed primary is one in which voters must declare their affiliation with a particular party before the election and can only vote in their own party's primary. An open primary is one in which voters may choose to vote in any party's primary regardless of party affiliation, though they may only vote in one party's primary. Some states provide for runoff primary elections when no candidate is able to secure a majority of the vote. In this case, the two candidates who received the highest percentages of votes face off against each other in a follow-up election. Primary elections are followed by general elections in which candidates from various parties (and occasionally independents) compete for the votes of all eligible voters to determine which candidates will actually hold public office.

The Declining Role of Political Parties

While political parties are still an essential component of our political process, they are no longer as strong as they once were, particularly in the late 19th and most of the 20th century. This is one reason that potential voters no longer identify as strongly with political parties as they once did. A variety of factors have contributed to party decline. Some are institutional. Progressive-inspired reforms that led to the use of direct primaries, elections within a party to nominate candidates for the general election, undermined the control of the leadership over candidates and candidate selection. Likewise, changes and political reforms leading to decline of urban political machines, such as civil service laws, eliminated the ability of party leaders to tightly control members and inspire their loyalty through the dispensation of jobs and other benefits.

Strong party identification also mapped stronger class identity among voters during the 1930s through 1960s. During the past several decades, class-based politics has been increasingly eclipsed by issue-based politics that cuts across party lines. Yet another factor is the combination of media and primaries in contributing to the rise of candidate-based politics, with self-financed candidates recruiting themselves to run for office, and leaving them more independent of party organizations than in the past.

Finally, campaign finance reform has cut into the parties' traditional role as treasure chests for successful campaigns. Before 2002, there were no limits on the amount of  soft money , money raised by political parties and spent on behalf of candidates in the form of issue ads or get-out-the-vote drives. Soft money was banned in 2002 with the passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, or BCRA. Political parties still raise enormous sums of money during campaign season, and as of 2008 the Democrats managed to raise more money than the traditionally well-heeled Republicans. But they are no longer as crucial to most candidates' fundraising efforts as they used to be.

 

 CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

 

Additional Resource

Websites

Democratic National Committee Offers daily news updates, policy analysis, links, email updates and opportunities to participate in the political process.

Republican National Committee Official source for the "Grand Old Party," includes historical information, press releases, and opportunities for employment.

OpenSecrets.org The Center for Responsive Politics maintains this website to track the influence of money on US politics, including contributions to political parties and candidates.

Article 4:

History of Political Parties

ADA Text Version

In the beginning, there were no political parties in the new nation. For the first eight years of the nation's existence, George Washington moderated the rivalry between two members of his administration: Thomas Jefferson, who supported states' rights and small landowners and Alexander Hamilton, who promoted a strong national government and commercial interests. The next president however, was unable to restrain these factions. The factions eventually organized into distinct political parties in order to gain power by being elected to public office. 

1796

Federalists

The Federalist Party, formed by Alexander Hamilton, was comprised of individuals favorable to his fiscal policies. The Federalists tended to represent merchants, manufacturers, and shippers located in New York and New England. They favored a strong centralized government, advancement of industries, and establishment of a well-ordered society. In 1796, the Federalists nominated John Adams to run for president. Adams narrowly defeated Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson. When Adams lost to Jefferson in the 1800 presidential election, the Federalists never regained the presidency or control of Congress.

Anti-Federalists: The Democratic-Republican Party

In the early to mid-1790s, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison organized factions opposing Alexander Hamilton's fiscal policies into a political party. The ideology of this new party favored agricultural interests, a strict interpretation of the Constitution, and a weaker federal government. From 1796 to 1824, Democratic-Republicans Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe served as presidents. The Democratic-Republicans led the Era of Good Feeling; a period of peace and prosperity combined with the illusion that party politics had ended with the demise of the Federalist Party.

1824

National Republicans

The 1824 presidential election was not an amicable affair. With the collapse of the Federalist Party, all candidates for the 1824 election were from the Democratic-Republican Party. Members within the party started to gravitate towards their favorite candidate. Many newly enfranchised voters were drawn to Andrew Jackson's charismatic style. Those against Jackson included New England businessmen and manufacturers as well as farmers and workers from other areas of the country. The anti-Jackson foes started to call themselves the "National Republicans" and nominated John Quincy Adams to run against Jackson in the 1824 presidential election. Adams won the election. However in the 1828 presidential election, the National Republicans faced Andrew Jackson again, this time with his newly formed Democratic Party.  The National Republicans lost this election as well as the presidential election in 1831. By 1836, the National Republicans had combined with other groups opposed to Jackson to form the Whig party.

1828

Democratic Party

Andrew Jackson's loss in the 1824 presidential election spurred him to take action. Votes tallied from the 1824 election showed that Jackson led both in the popular vote and the Electoral College vote. However, he did not have the required number of electoral votes for outright victory. Therefore, as dictated by the 12th Amendment, the House of Representatives had to choose a president from the top three electoral vote getters: Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, and William Crawford. Henry Clay, who also ran in the election and was Speaker of the House, used his influence to sway the vote to Adams with whom he shared a common political philosophy. Jackson was outraged by these antics and led his followers in establishing a new party, the Democratic Party. The party organized support for Jackson's 1828 presidential bid and succeeded in ousting President Adams. Jackson served as president from 1829 to 1837 and ushered in the era of Jacksonian democracy. Jacksonian democracy focused on the common man, shunning wealth and aristocracy in favor of humble origins, log cabins, and frontier ruggedness.

1834

Whigs

When President Jackson dismantled the Bank of the United States, Henry Clay and Daniel Webster believed Jackson had violated the constitution and introduced a motion to censure the president. Other politicians agreed and joined Clay and Webster in forming a political party called the Whigs. The Whigs were against Jackson and in favor of progressive social reforms, better education, improvements to the country's infrastructure, and limits on westward expansion. They also embraced the transition to a market economy, thereby winning support from wealthy manufacturers in the North and cotton-growing plantation owners in the South.

1849

Know-Nothings

The Know-Nothing Party emerged from secret societies opposed to immigrants coming to America. Leaders of these secret organizations did not publicly reveal themselves and members, when asked about the organizations, were instructed to answer, "I know nothing." As its membership and importance grew in the 1850s, the group became the American Party. At its 1856 convention, the party split over the slavery issue. Proslavery advocates left to join the Democrats and antislavery adherents joined the Republicans. By 1859 the party's influence was limited to the border states.

1854

Republicans

The Republican Party was formed in protest against the expansion of slavery into the western territories. It replaced the Whigs as the opposition to Democrats.

1860

Republicans

Republicans nominated Abraham Lincoln for president in the 1860 election. With four candidates splitting the votes, Lincoln won with only 39.8 percent of the popular vote. By rejecting slavery, the Republicans became a sectional party, representing the North and West. For 25 years after 1860, Republican strength grew, and it became known as the Grand Old Party (GOP). Today's Republican Party claim Lincoln's presidency as its political foundation.

Democrats

The issue of slavery divided the Democrats so badly that northern and southern wings of the party each nominated separate candidates for president. Democrats came to be associated with the South, slavery, secession, and defeat.

Constitutional Union

This short–lived party strongly supported the Union and the Constitution. Nominating their candidate to run against Lincoln divided the votes four ways and ensured Lincoln's victory.

Southern Democrats

These Southerners broke from the Democratic Party, nominating their own candidate for president and supporting slavery.

1869

Prohibition Party

The Prohibition Party was established in response to a growing concern among Americans that the sale and consumption of liquor contributed to crime and immorality. The party maintained that the best way to reduce social ills was to eliminate alcoholic consumption. Although the Prohibition Party never received a large percentage of the national vote, its influence on policymakers was demonstrated with the passage of the Eighteenth Amendment. The Prohibition Party has survived into the 21st century; its agenda still calling for a conservative approach to most public policy.

1892

Populist Party

The Populist Party was established when the Knights of Labor and Farmers' Alliance joined forces. The party focused on the issues facing farmers and laborers in the 1890s. They advocated the public ownership of the railroads, steamship lines, and telephone and telegraph systems. They also supported the free and unlimited coinage of silver, the abolition of national banks, and the direct election of U.S. Senators.

1901

Socialist Party of America

The Socialist Party of America began in 1901 with the merger of the Social Democratic Party of America and the Socialist Labor Party. The purpose of the party was to promote the public control of the means of production and distribution. The Socialist Party did not show much electoral strength until 1910 and 1911, when its candidates won numerous state and local elections. When Eugene V. Debs ran as the party's presidential candidate in 1912, he received nearly 900,000 votes (6 percent of the votes cast). The party also reached its peak membership the same year. Shortly thereafter, the party started to decline. While a majority of the party opposed America entering into World War I, a small group of members disagreed with this position and left the party in 1917. A schism also occurred when the Russians were successful in overthrowing the Tsarist autocracy during the Russian Revolution. Buoyed by the Russians' success, a substantial faction within the Socialist Party advocated for the immediate overthrow of the capitalist system. Not everyone agreed, and when this faction withdrew from the party in 1919, the Socialist Party of America was considerably weakened. By the 1930s, the party lost much of its support when the New Deal came into effect and implemented many programs the Socialists had long demanded. Since then the party's influence has steadily declined.

1912

Bull Moose Progressive

The Bull Moose Party grew out of former President Theodore Roosevelt's attempt to lead the Republican Party in a more progressive direction. This split in the Republican Party allowed Democrat Woodrow Wilson to win the 1912 election.

1932

Democrats, the Party of Big Government

The election of Franklin D. Roosevelt began over thirty years of Democratic prominence. Roosevelt's New Deal was a response to the Great Depression and led to a dramatic expansion of the welfare state and regulation of the economy. Democrats became known as the party favoring big government while Republicans were identified with limited government.

1948

Dixiecrats

At the 1948 Democratic National Convention, a group of Democrats proposed new civil rights policies supporting racial integration and a reversal of Jim Crow laws be included in the party platform. When the party adopted these policies, 35 southern Democrats expressed their displeasure by forming the States' Rights Democratic Party, also known as the Dixiecrats. The Dixiecrats nominated Strom Thurmond of South Carolina as their presidential candidate. Thurmond lost the election and by 1952 the Dixiecrats returned to the Democratic Party. When Republican Barry Goldwater ran for president in 1964 he ran a conservative campaign that emphasized states' rights. He also believed the 1964 Civil Rights Act was an intrusion of the federal government into states' affairs. This appealed to white southern Democrats and former Dixiecrats. Goldwater was the first Republican to win the electoral votes of southern states such as Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi. The Democrats were beginning to lose their grip on the South.

1968

American Independent

Alabama Governor George Wallace established the American Independent Party in 1968. Wallace was considered a leading advocate of racial segregation. His party drew support mainly from southern states.

Southern Strategy

Further erosion of the Democrats' stronghold on the South occurred when Richard Nixon used the "Southern Strategy" during his run for presidency in 1968. To attract white southern voters, Nixon and the Republican Party exploited the racial and cultural resentments of southern whites by supporting their opposition to desegregation. The Republican Party evolved a sort of political code, in which opposition to welfare programs and advocacy of "states' rights" covered up their defense of white supremacy. The strategy worked. The southern states voted solidly for Nixon. In 1980, Republican presidential nominee Ronald Reagan proclaimed support for "states' rights" at his first campaign stop in Mississippi. Reagan won about 54 percent of the popular vote in the South, while Jimmy Carter, the Democratic nominee, averaged only 42 percent. Today, the South has become the most Republican region of the country when voting for presidents.

1971

Libertarian

The Libertarian Party was founded in 1971 and is the third largest US political party. Libertarians believe in the freedom of individuals to pursue their lives as they see fit with minimal governmental interference, as long as they cause no harm to others. Libertarianism encompasses strong support for individual civil liberties, social tolerance, and private property, a belief in the positive powers of the free market, and an endorsement of a constitutionally limited and greatly reduced government.

1992

Independent

Over the course of history, several candidates have run for president as independents. In 1992, Ross Perot invested over $63 million of his own money in his independent campaign for president. He won 19 percent of the popular vote.

1996

Reform

Ross Perot ran for president again in 1996 on the Reform Party ticket, advocating a balanced budget, reducing the national debt, and campaign finance reform. This time, Perot accepted $29 million in federal campaign funds.

2001

Green Party

The Green Party of the United States is a political party formed in 2001 from the Association of State Green Parties. The party was created on a grassroots level in response to the perception that politics in the United States was becoming the domain of big business and corporate money. The Green Party espouses pro-environmentalism, participatory democracy, non-violence, human rights, individual freedom, social justice, and grassroots organizing. The party does not have the same clout as the Democratic or Republican parties, but it does influence elections. For example, many Democrats blame Ralph Nader, a Green Party presidential candidate, for taking away votes from Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election.

The Evolution of Political Parties

In the beginning, there were no political parties in the new nation. But by the end of George Washington’s presidency, political factions had organized into distinct political parties in order to gain power and win elections. This activity focuses on the evolution of political parties in the United States from the 1700s to today.

Article 5:

Party Identification

ADA Text Version

Political parties would not thrive were they unable to draw diverse groups under their banners and mobilize their members. Parties thrive to the extent that they are able to convince large numbers of voters that they can best represent their interests and values. Because the United States has only two main parties, sometimes referred to as catchall parties, they must appeal to a wide range of individuals and therefore cannot, if they wish to be electorally successful, swing too far to the left or right of the political spectrum. At the same time they must successfully differentiate themselves from each other and cannot afford to alienate their core members who are typically more ideologically extreme than the average voter. This balancing act can prove difficult at times. One measure of party strength is party identification, the tendency of voters to identify with a particular political party. When party identification is high, parties and party labels have a greater impact on electoral politics.

Realignment

Exciting and important changes in American political life often occur when voting behavior demonstrates that realignment has occurred. Realignment is a major and long-term shift in party identification from one party to another. It involves a change in the coalition of voting groups supporting a particular party and must last several elections to constitute a true realignment. The most dramatic example of realignment at the national level is the presidential election of 1932. In that election, an overwhelming majority of voters, including union members, African Americans, Catholics and urban immigrant groups, threw their support behind Democratic candidate Franklin D. Roosevelt in the midst of the Great Depression. From this election until the late 1960s, the Democratic Party dominated both Congress and the presidency.

A second example is the slower process of realignment in the southern states, which transformed solidly "blue" and Democratic southern voters unhappy with desegregation and liberal national policies into solidly "red" Republican voters by the 1990s. Voter realignment is typically precipitated by what have been termed critical elections, elections that witness a dramatic shift in the issues voters care about and resulting in a change in the nature of the coalitions supporting the major political parties.

Dealignment

However, a different type of alignment demonstrates that political parties are no longer the robust entities they once were. Dealignment is the decreasing tendency of potential voters to identify with any political party, many of whom prefer to self-identify as "independents." Fewer eligible voters than in past decades claim allegiance to either the Republican or Democratic parties. More tangible evidence of dealignment can be found in the increased prevalence of ticket-splitting, the practice of casting votes for candidates of different political parties in different races during the same election. A few phenomena, related to factors mentioned, help explain these changed attitudes. The role of the media and party rules in making way for a more candidate-centered and personality-based politics explains some of the change.

Feelings of partisanship have also weakened as an issue-oriented politics implicating controversies such as abortion, gun ownership rights, same-sex marriage, and prayer in school has undermined the more class-based politics that characterized the 1930s through the 1960s. The long-term trend of dealignment in the United States also tracks the growth over time of Americans who seem to feel alienated, disaffected, and disappointed from government. Though political parties are not dying by any stretch of the imagination, their diminished ability to appeal to voters is worrisome to many observers who recognize the historical importance of political parties in engaging citizens with their government.

Realigning the Electorate and the Political Parties

This activity focuses on shifts in party preferences and political parties that drastically alter the political landscape.

Article 6:

The Two-Party System

ADA Text Version

Single-Member vs. Proportional Representation

Kentucky's Congressional Districts

The study of American political parties begins with recognition of a stark, institutional reality: the United States is a two-party system. The primary reason for this is that the fifty states use the single-member district (SMD), or winner-take-all, system of elections for Congress. In an SMD system such as that used in the states, candidates for Congress and the Senate are elected by specific geographic districts, either congressional districts within a state, or the states themselves. Each district has only one seat in a given election and whichever candidate wins the most votes (a plurality) wins the seat. Because citizens who would vote for third party candidates in such an election seem to be throwing away their votes, the SMD system ruthlessly reinforces the dominance of the two major parties.

Proportional Representation in the 55th British House of Commons

Legend

We can contrast the SMD system with proportional representation (PR) systems, variants of which are used by most current democracies. In a PR electoral system, parties run lists of candidates for a larger geographic area, often the entire country itself. Each party gets a percentage of seats in the legislature roughly equal to the percentage of popular votes it wins in the election. As a result, countries using the PR system tend to have several successful political parties active at the national level. The failure of any one party to win a majority of seats in legislative elections often forces the formation of coalitions between two or more parties.

Which system is superior? That depends. All things being equal, the SMD system of elections, with its strong tendency towards a two party system, provides greater electoral stability. The SMD system is much more likely to produce a clear, governing majority in the legislature. However, it does so at the cost of excluding third parties which would give greater voice to political minorities. The PR system, with its tendency to produce a multiparty system, allows for greater diversity of representation and gives a voice to smaller parties representing political minorities. However, it does so at the cost of electoral stability. So the choice between these two electoral systems comes down to a tradeoff between the values of stability and diversity. Realistically, it is extremely unlikely that the United States would ever transition to a PR system of elections. The federal design of the Constitution, not to mention the self-interest of the Democratic and Republican parties, precludes the possibility.

Democrats and Republicans

The American political system is dominated by two political parties. Since the Civil War, these parties have been the Democrats and the Republicans. Their composition and official policy positions have changed, in some cases dramatically, from 1860 to the 21st century. As also mentioned, it is more difficult to generalize about the Democratic and Republican parties since they do not adhere as closely to the responsible party model as do parties in most other democracies, due to the geographic diversity of the United States.

With that caveat in mind, the Democratic Party has traditionally been the party of modern liberalism and big government. Democrats are more likely to believe that the government should play a very active role in regulating the economy, protecting the environment, providing social safety nets for society's more vulnerable members, and are willing to raise taxes in order to do this. They are more likely to believe, however, that government should stay out of individuals' personal and moral decisions. Thus Democrats are more likely to be pro-choice when it comes to abortion, favor stricter separation of church and state, and believe that criminal laws regulating consensual drug use are too harsh. The influence of the conservative revolution of the 1970s and 1980s, along with the rise of New Democrats such as Bill Clinton in the 1990s, complicated this picture. However, Democrats generally favor a larger role for the national government in our federal system than do Republicans. The typical Democratic voter is more likely to be female, a racial or ethnic minority, northern or northeastern, a union member, or resident of a Rust Belt state than members of the Republican Party.

Conversely, Republicans have traditionally been the party of modern conservatism, promoting limited government and lower taxes. They believe that excessive government regulation of the economy and high tax rates choke the growth of the economy and stymie job creation. They are also less likely to believe that it is the government's role to take care of the poor and vulnerable, embracing instead the importance of individual responsibility and the role of private institutions in performing this function. Republicans are more socially conservative, taking a tougher stance on "law and order" issues and believing that government should play a greater role in promoting morality whether it be limiting abortion rights or allowing prayer in school settings. In striking a balance between the power of the national and state governments, Republicans are typically the defenders of greater state authority. The typical Republican voter is more likely to be male, white, higher income, southern, and an evangelical Christian than members of the Democratic Party.

Of course, the two political parties are coalitions whose very size necessitates the accommodation of diverse viewpoints in order to be politically successful. Many Democrats are economically liberal but socially conservative. Some Republicans are economically conservative but socially liberal. A Democrat from Texas might be more conservative than a Republican from Maine. Moreover, a political party's practice in office may diverge considerably from its principles. A classic example is the 2001 passage by Congress of the No Child Left Behind legislation. Representing a dramatic expansion of federal involvement in the traditionally state-centered area of education, this legislation was the product of cooperation between a Republican president and a Democratic senator. In another example, congressional Republicans departed quite spectacularly from their official position of fiscal austerity, running record budget deficits between 2001 and 2006. Notwithstanding frequent deviations from party platforms and principles, Democrats and Republicans at large are the standard-bearers of liberalism/conservatism, left/right, respectively, in American politics. In fact, one of the more significant trends in party politics is the increasing ideological polarization among members of the United States Congress along conservative and liberal lines over the last two decades.

Political Parties: Can You Tell the Difference?

Is there an essential difference between Democrats and Republicans? This activity focuses on Democratic and Republican ideologies as reflected in their political platforms.

 Virtual Roundtable

Although many of the Constitution's Framers feared the rise of powerful political parties, for much of the nation's history the American political landscape has been dominated by only two parties. Is the dominant two-party system healthy for US democracy?

Article 7:

Third Parties

ADA Text Version

The dominance of the two major parties in the United States is replicated in presidential campaigns and elections. Because presidential elections in all but two states use a winner-take-all method to award electoral votes, third party candidates are effectively shut out, even on rare occasions when they muster an impressive percentage of the popular vote. Third parties and their candidates face additional obstacles to their survival because of state and federal rules that make it more difficult for them to be included on election ballots. Their relative weakness in name recognition, organization, and ability to raise campaign funds conspires against them.

Role of Third Parties

Despite their extremely disadvantaged status in American politics, third parties form for various reasons and play a frequently useful role. Third parties and candidates often emerge to draw attention to issues that the major parties have ignored or been ineffective in addressing, such as presidential candidate Ross Perot's campaign focused on the national debt. Other third parties may be regional in character, such as the pro-Southern and antiintegrationist Dixiecrat and American parties. Other parties have been created as the result of splits within one of the major political parties (Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party) or the dogged pursuit of a single issue (the anti-alcohol Prohibitionist Party). Yet others exist and exhibit considerable staying power because they subscribe to a narrow but ideologically coherent program (the Libertarian and Green parties).

Even when they do not win, third parties may shape American politics and policy. Proposals like the national income tax and direct election of US Senators which eventually became successful constitutional amendments were championed by the Populist Party in the 1890s. Third party ideas often are absorbed by the two major parties into their national platforms. Finally, third parties may profoundly affect election outcomes even in defeat. Without the defection of thousands of potential Democratic voters to the Green Party in Florida in the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore rather than George W. Bush would almost certainly have been the 43rd president of the United States.

Third Parties

From the Greenbacks to the Green Party, from the Bull Moose Party to the Libertarians, third parties have made frequent appearances on national election ballots. But they almost never win. So, why do they exist? Is voting for a third party candidate "throwing away" your vote? This video examines the impact of third parties on American politics and why they struggle against the two-party system.

Video Focus Points

Look for answers to these questions when watching the video:

· What is the single-member district system? Does the single-member district system help or hinder third parties electing members to Congress?

· What role do third parties play in American politics?

· Is the dominance of a two-party system healthy for democracy?

 

 CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING

 

Additional Resource

Websites

Libertarian Party With the motto, "smaller government, lower taxes, more freedom," the national Libertarian party has over 250,000 registered members.

Green Party of the United States A federation of state Green Parties, the Green Party is committed to ecology, social justice, grassroots democracy, and nonviolence.

Reform Party Founded in 1995, the Reform Party is a federally recognized political party composed of former Independents, Democrats and Republicans. It is a mainstream party based around principles for ethics reform and moderate economic and fiscal platforms.

Books

Three’s a Crowd: The Dynamic of Third Parties, Ross Perot, and Republican Resurgence, by Ronald Rapport and Walter Stone.  For those wanting someone to blame for the Republican resurgence that began with the 1994 congressional elections, Rapport and Stone have an answer: blame the third-party presidential candidacies of H. Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996. They argue that successful third parties at the presidential level have the opportunity to substantially change the third-party system.