University:
California State University, Northridge
Course:
POLS 155 | American Political Institutions
Academic year:

2024
Views:

306

Pages:

32
Author:

Emily Clayton

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT Chapter 11: Political Parties What Do Political Parties Do? Political parties seek to control the government by electing their members to office and thus by controlling the personnel of government. Parties:  facilitate collective action in the electoral process  help resolve collective choice in the policy-making process  regulate career advancement of politicians and thus deal with the potential threat of individual political ambitions Political parties perform multiple functions to accomplish these aims. Parties:  recruit candidates  nominate candidates  work to get out the vote  facilitate mass electoral choice  influence and coordinate the activities of the national government Parties on California Ballot As of April 2009  American Independent  Democratic  Green  Libertarian  Peace and Freedom  Republican Party Development in Early America The formation of political parties was a development unanticipated by the framers of the Constitution.   Framers such as Hamilton, Washington, and Jefferson regarded parties as divisive and potentially detrimental to the republic. Despite their antipathy toward parties, deep divisions over the future of the republic led Hamilton and Jefferson to lead the formation of the first American parties. The Two-Party System Though the framers of the Constitution did not anticipate nor want parties, America has a stable two-party system that first emerged in the late 18th century as a conflict between Federalists (led by Alexander Hamilton) and the Republicans (led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison). Democrats The modern Democratic party emerged out of the party established by Thomas Jefferson in the late 18th century and revitalized by Andrew Jackson in the 1820s. Republicans The modern Republican party emerged in the 1850s as an antislavery party out of the remnants of the Whig party. At various points in American history, a new party supplants the ruling party becoming in turn the dominant political force; scholars call these enduring changes in party strength electoral realignments. Realignments tend to involve:    a large number of voters changing their party allegiance a great deal of voter participation in an election a stable change in the party controlling the government Realignments: 1800  Democratic Republicans dominate 1828  Jacksonian Democrats “democratize” American politics 1860  The emergence of Republicans (and their victory in the Civil War) yields to postReconstruction competitive balance between Democrats and Republicans 1896  Republicans reassert their dominance 1932  Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal produce an extraordinary era of Democratic dominance 1968  Richard Nixon’s victory and the demise of the Democrats’ “Solid South” produces a highly competitive era of divided party control of government Although electoral realignments represent a shift in the balance of power between the two political parties and involve significant changes in American politics, America’s two-party system has proven remarkably stable over time. Third parties tend to compete (if weakly) against the two major parties in America, as they did in 2004. On occasion, third-party candidates can have a great deal of influence over ideas and electoral outcomes. (Perot ‘92 or Nader ‘00) TRADITIONAL ROUTE PRIMARY ROUTE FIGURE 11.1 Types of Nominating Processes INDEPENDENT ROUTE Although many movements have produced third parties throughout American history, third parties tend to be short-lived because    one of the two major parties adopts their issues; the single-member plurality electoral system limits their opportunities for electoral success; the periods of flux, the crises, and the uncertainties that produce them subside or are addressed by public policies. 50 ANALYZING THE EV DENCE In 1952, Democrats outnumbered Republicans nearly two to one. Today, the two parties appear to have nearly equal numbers of loyalists. What factors might account for this partisan transformation? u z 40 u. IUJ C V, < 30 V, UJ > UJ ...J UJ V, u < z IUJ u � c.. 20 UJ I I- 10 0----------------------------------1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 YEAR SOURCE: Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2001-2002 (Washington, DC; Congressional Quarterly Press, 2001), p. 115; Americn Na tional Elecion Studies, the ANES Guide to Public Opinion and Electoral Behavior ( www.election-studies.org). *Includes independents who report "leaning" toward one of the parties. FIGURE 11.2 Americans' Party Identification An average of 36% of Americans identified themselves as Democrats and 28% as Republicans in 2008. That eight-point advantage is the largest for the Democratic Party since Gallup began regularly conducting its polls by telephone in 1988. Party Decline According to political scientist V.O. Key, there are three key aspects of political parties:    party-in-the-electorate party-as-organization party-in-government Party-in-the-electorate refers to voters’ attachments to and identifications with political parties. SEX 29% 37% AGE %�--18-29 Ff,.��r�,-----=4-=6°= _____:3:..:7....:%.:..o __ 30-49 6l��- ��.!l..._ ° %::....._ 50-64 ��- -"'�---=3.::.8 � 7 65 and over IL.....2::1!::i!�iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii�---:: ::_: 2 ::.._:% o� RACE AND RELIGION RACE OR ETHNICITY White Black Hispanic American 29% 65% 40% lii,,,,o.,=;aa= Republican __! Independent FIGURE 11.3 Party Identification by Social Groups (top) - Democrat EDUCATION INCOME IDEOLOGY ]- Conservative oderatc ��...:LL ----�� o Liberal -.arMIL______:4:..:1�%,:_ Republican __! Independent - Democrat SOURCE: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, "Democrats Gain Edge in Party Identification," 26 July 2004 (people-press.org/commentary/pdf/95.pdf). FIGURE 11.3 Party Identification by Social Groups (bottom) 22% 36% 5 0% Party-as-organization refers to the formal party organizations and processes and to those aspects of political parties that assist and direct candidates seeking to win office in elections. Nominate party's candidate for president and write party rules and platform Elect delegates Elect Elect delegates Elect delegates Elect delegates Elect Elect Party voters FIGURE 11.5 How American Parties Are Organized Elect delegates For much of the 20th century, party-as-organization declined.   Early in the 20th century, parties lost control over the nomination of candidates as the “direct primary” turned control of nominations over to voters. Throughout the century, parties became less active and effective in running campaigns and mobilizing voters as individual candidates’ campaigns became primarily responsible for these activities. Party-in-government refers to the ability of parties to structure and control the government. In America, party-in-government tends to be weak compared to that of other similar democracies.  Unlike parliamentary systems, in America control of the government can be divided between the two parties, one controlling the Congress and the other the executive.  In the legislative branch, American parties lack the control over the votes of their members that most parties have in parliamentary systems. Party Resurgence In the last decades of the 20th century, there was a resurgence of partisanship in the United States, both in terms of party-as-organization and party-ingovernment. Resurgence of Party-as-Organization  Party organizations have stepped up the campaign and fundraising services they offer their candidates.  Party organizations provide their candidates with a party image or “brand name” on which they can run. Resurgence of Party-in-Government  Partisanship in Congress has been on the rise since the 1980s.  Party politicians are more likely to view themselves as part of a party “team” than they have in the past. Party Competition The notion that parties are “teams” that “market” their brand names to consumers in the electorate leads us to consider how Democrats and Republicans compete to control the government. In An Economic Theory of Democracy, Anthony Downs set forth a theory of party competition:   Because most voters tend to be moderates, parties move to the center to attract the “median voter.” In this way, parties attempt to blur the ideological distinctions between themselves and the opposition. Some argue that this strategy makes it so there is little substantive difference between Democrats and Republicans. Important institutional factors do encourage parties to sharpen rather than blur their differences.   Ideological appeals are more effective than moderation when it comes to fundraising and attracting campaign labor. Competing in primary elections means that candidates must appeal not just to the median voter but also to the party base in order to win. Political scientists worry about party decline because as voters make decisions about candidates rather than parties and as party control of government becomes divided rather than unified, the electorate has few opportunities to hold the government accountable and foster modern democracy. Is Partisanship 1n Decline? Since 1948, researchers at the University of Michigan have collected survey data during election years as part of the American National Election Studies (ANES). The purpose of these surveys is to offer systematic explanations of election outcomes through individual-level surveys of ordinary citizens who participate in these elections. Because these data have been collected over an extended period, they have contributed to a much better understanding of changes in voting behavior over time. Among the survey questions is a measure of how strongly voters and non-voters identify with a particular political party. Rather than using just three broad categories (Democrat, Republican, independent), the ANES uses a seven-point scale to assess partisanship. By separating out "strong" and "weak" partisan identifiers from independent "leaners" and "pure" independents, we gain a more nuanced understanding of trends in partisanship. T But is partisanship really in decline? By 1996, the proportion of citizens strongly identifying with the two major parties was almost as high as it was during the 1950s. When we factor in the proportion of weak identifiers and independent leaners over this entire period, we observe that the aggregate number of Americans identifying with the parties has remained fairly constant since the 1950s, even if the intensity of citizen preferences for the parties has clearly changed over time. Voter Partisanship ANES data --�· "' --- Democrat Strongly Democrat � � Independent ependent s Democrat Pure Independent • .---·,..........• • Interestingly, in the ANES data we observe a sizeable decline in the number of strong partisan identifiers beginning in the 1960s and continuing into the 1970s and 1980s. This trend has been documented elsewhere by scholars, who suggest that large segments of the American public have steadily been drifting away from the major parties since the 1950s.1 �· ' •----.........-•::::::::• • r -• . . .--. • ·-· • • --· Year -• Strong identifiers -• Weak identifiers -• Independent leaners -• Pure independents Source: Bartels, Larry M. 2000. "Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952-1996." AmericonJoumo/ of Politico/ Scienu 44 Uanuary): 35-50; calculated by author. 1 Martin P. Wattenberg. The Decline ofAmerican Political Parties: 1952- 1994. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996). 494 There has not been a marked increase in the number of "pure" independents over this period, suggesting that parties may be as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. The lesson here is how one thinks about the seven-point scale of partisanship affects the types of conclusions one draws about American political behavior. 495

Political Parties

Related Documents

Recommended Documents

Description

Related Documents

Free up your schedule!

Take 5 seconds to unlock