As the Republican Party chooses a candidate to run in the fall Presidential Election, they have had a number of debates. Although it seems that even the candidates themselves are tiring of this format, should they decide to hold further debates, you may choose to write a 2-3 page analysis of the debate, paying particular attention to the issues the candidates argue over. If you missed the debate, you can watch at least the first part of last night's debate below.
Alternatively (or, in case they stop having debates altogether), you may turn in a paper that analyzes the effects of the debate format as an electoral tool, paying particular attention to the strengths and weaknesses of the formate.
This assignment(s) may be turned in at any time before the end of the term.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Written Assignment 8
Scholars like to theorize about what they call “critical periods,” when, they argue, political parties are realigned. From your reading of the textbook, and the material presented during the lecture in class, do you think that there is such a thing as a critical period for a political party? Why, or why not? Your answer should fill at least two full, double-spaced 8x10 pages of paper, and is due at the beginning of class the Thursday after we return from spring break, March 15.
Campaigns and Elections
I. Campaigns
A. Political Participation
1. Forms of Participation
a. Political activists—individuals actively interested in politics, campaigns, and political parties enough to donate money and/or time to helping candidates and parties run election campaigns.
b. Voting—most people participate in elections by voting for specific candidates
c. Non-participants—participation in elections is largely defined by income levels—the more money one has, the more likely one is to donate a portion of that money to specific campaigns or to political parties (see Koch Brothers, etc.).
2. Why People Participate—Americans participate largely from a sense of civic duty; most Americans, when asked, feel that they should vote, even when they do not. The difficulty Americans face in actually casting a vote (even before the passage of the numerous “anti-fraud” voter identification laws) is unprecedented in democratic governments.
3. Who Participates?—participation in elections is largely determined by education levels (the more education one has, the more likely it is that one will vote in a given election); income level is also a factor, although less of a factor than education level.
B. Historical Voting Patterns—It is ironic that among the largest democratic countries the United States is near the bottom in participation among those eligible, because the United States was among the first to create universal (white) suffrage.
1. The Rise of the American Electorate—at the time the Constitution was ratified, voting was restricted to taxpayers or property owners. By the time of the election of Andrew Jackson, voting rights had been extended to all white men. Voting rights were extended to black men with the passage of the 15th Amendment in 1870, although those rights were scaled back with the passage of literacy tests, poll taxes, and the “grandfather clause” that many Southern states resorted to restrict these rights for African Americans; for many, these rights were not regained until the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965. Woman, of course, did not get the right to vote in national elections until passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, and 18-year-olds were given the right to vote with the passage of the 26th Amendment.
2. Voting Turnout—despite the legal safeguards extended to voters during the 20th century, the percentage of voting-age participation has actually decreased from its 19th century highs. Scholars argue about its causes—or if it even really exists, given the likely levels of election fraud in the 19th century—but at least part of the explanation should include the realization that American elections are largely non-ideological, with both major political parties campaigning from the center, where they can appeal to the greatest share of the electorate.
3. Explaining—and Improving—Turnout—in other democracies around the world, when you become old enough to vote, you are automatically registered to vote. In the United States, the burden of registering to vote falls completely on the voter, who must find out the whole process themselves.
4. Modern-Day Vote “Fraud”—for nearly as long as there have been elections, there have been attempts to steal elections. While allegations of fraud undermine public confidence in electoral outcomes, how real is this threat?
a. Ballot-stuffing—much more prevalent during the 19th century, but practically non-existent today—although the danger exists that computer hackers could change results in many electronic systems in use among local election commissions today.
b. “Ghost” or “Cemetery” Voting—while urban machines may have been able to round up enough people to take around to various polling stations to swing an election in the 19th and early 20th centuries, that threat is non-existent today.
c. Voter “Caging” and the Suppression—many of the fears of non-existent voter fraud are used to attempt to suppress votes from minorities and poor people through voter “caging” operations, where votes individuals cast are challenged by allegations of ineligibility or fraud.
C. Political Campaigns—are largely run by personal followers of a candidate (or a team s/he hires), rather than by a political party, which had been the case in the past. The turn to the primary election has probably been the greatest contributor to this trend.
1. Strategy—because state parties want to increase their influence in which candidate becomes the candidate of their party, the dates for primary elections (and caucuses, for that matter), are mostly front-loaded at the beginning of an elections year. This means that candidates have to begin campaigning earlier and earlier (witness the ongoing Republican Party primary campaign, which began in earnest more than a year before the party holds its next convention). Candidates (or at least, their campaign staff) must also be aware of the intricacies of each of the state primaries and caucuses (whether they are winner-take-all, or proportional—failure to realize this cost Hilary Clinton the victory in the 2008 Democratic primaries).
2. Using Television—There are two ways of using television: by running paid advertisements; or by getting on nightly newscasts. To get on newscasts, candidates must plan “events” that will attract cameras, and be early enough in the day to make the evening news.
a. Social media—while some candidates are more adept at using social media than others, nearly every candidate today has a “presence” on a variety of social media sites, especially Facebook and Twitter.
D. The Effects of Campaigns—No one knows for sure how effective campaigns are in convincing voters to back a specific candidate (analysis of campaigns always comes after the fact, and consists mostly of suppositions of what strategies actually worked, without any hard data to actually back those suppositions up).
1. Party loyalty—although throughout the 20th century there were more people who claimed to be Democrats than Republicans, Republicans tend to display greater party loyalty, and are less prone to “crossover” and vote for the candidate of another party (there are very few “Obama Republicans,” for instance, than there were “Reagan Democrats”).
2. “It’s the Economy, Stupid”—James Carvelle’s famous edict is perhaps one of the most profound insights into the American electorate. If the economy is doing well, the American people tend to be content with how things are being run; if the economy is not doing well, there tends to be demands for change.
3. Single-issue political groups—while scholars are still unsure of the impact that single-issue groups have during a general campaign, they do have a significant impact during primary campaigns, where their number of committed voters and money have a much greater effect.
E. How to Win the Election—the victor in most elections usually only has to convince 20 percent of the voters, because 80 percent have already made up their minds based on party affiliation. Running against an incumbent during a bad economy also increases one’s chances immensely—or one who has been accused of some kind of personal indiscretion. Voters may also be divided between those who are retrospective voters (who look to what previous candidates of a particular party have done) and those who are prospective voters (who wonder what effect the proposed policies of a particular candidate will have in the future).
F. Election Outcomes-the only outcome that matters, of course, is who wins, but scholars often look for patterns that they think signal “party realignments.”
1. Party Realignments—so-called “critical elections” (the defeat of the Federalists by the Jeffersonians in 1800, the rise of Jacksonian Democrats in 1828, the collapse of the Whig party between 1856 and 1860, the 1896 triumph over William Jennings Bryan, the 1932 New Deal coalition, the rise of Ronald Reagan)—is this a pattern, or happenstance?
2. Party Decline—with more voters having a less-defined identification with a particular political party, more voters “split” their ballots—that is, vote for candidates from both major parties
3. Winning coalition—The waning strength of parties to deliver voters ironically makes them more reliant upon those voting blocs that traditionally vote for party candidates.
G. Modern Technology and Political Campaigns
1. Television, Radio, and Newspapers—the traditional sources of information have lost much of their appeal to today’s voters. Radio, in particular, broadcasts largely to a self-selected audience (are there any left-wing radio shows?), so any efforts there are merely preaching to the choir. Most television today can largely be viewed without bothering to watch commercials, and is also largely narrowcast to a select audience.
2. Direct mail and the Internet—both are still useful for fundraising, although direct mail, the method used to reinvigorate the political right, has been superseded by use of the internet (witness Obama’s fundraising this past month).
H. Elections and Money—“Money is the mother’s milk of politics.”
1. The Impact of Money—Generally, the candidate who has the most money to spend is generally the most successful.
2. Where Does the Money Come From?
a. Individuals/Corporations—now that the Supreme Court has decided that corporations are people, too …
b. Political Actions Committees (PACs)—special interest groups like labor unions and business groups raise money to contribute to candidates, as well
c. “Soft Money” and 527s—attempts to regulate political contributions (largely thrown out by the recent Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court) created a loophole, whereby restrictions on contributions to candidates were gotten around by contributing money to “independent” groups who advocated on behalf of a party or candidate, but did not “coordinate” those efforts with the party or individual.
d. Citizens United and Super PACs
d. Citizens United and Super PACs
I. The Effects of Elections on Policy—although we cynically think that elections have no effect on our day-to-day lives, they do sometimes effect great changes (ending slavery, the New Deal, etc.). Our election system today rewards those who can portray themselves as “outsiders”—even if they have been intimately connected with the political system all their lives—and are willing to devote three-to-four (or six-to-eight, in some cases) years of their lives to campaigning for office.
Written Assignment 7
Political parties have traditionally played an important role in American politics. How has that role changed over the years? Is there still a place for political parties in today’s political world? Why—or, why not? This Assignment should take the form of a 2-3 page paper, double spaced with conventional 1 inch margins, and is due at the time of the mid-term exam, March 1.
Political Parties and Interest Groups
I. Political Parties—Here and Abroad
A. Political Parties—are groups that seek to elect candidates to political office by supplying them with a label—a party identification—by which they become known to the public. A political party exists as a label in the minds of voters, as an organization that recruits and campaigns for candidates, and as a set of leaders who try to organize and control the legislative and executive branches of government
1. Political parties abroad—behave slightly differently than in the United States. Political parties in other countries more actively recruit candidates, and would not allow an unauthorized person to call themselves or identify themselves with the party. The parties run the campaigns, not the candidates themselves, and voters in fact vote for the party, rather than for the candidate. In return, elected party members are expected to follow the party line on all issues.
2. Political parties in the United States—like the government structure itself, the party structure in this country is much more decentralized than in Europe.
B. The First Party System
1. Federalists—were an organized faction, originally coalescing around the effort to pass the Constitution. Most Federalists believed in a strong central government—although even this belief there was a range of advocacy, from Alexander Hamilton, who at times advocated for a restoration of a monarchy, to James Madison, who eventually moved closer to Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican movement.
2. Anti-Federalists—were a less organized faction, coalescing around their opposition to passing the Constitution. The passage of the document, of course, effectively ended the reason for this “party,” which then dissolved until the Federalists were perceived to have become too heavy-handed with their critics over a series of relatively minor provocations (including the passage of the Alien and Sedition Act in 1798).
3. Emergence of the Democratic-Republicans—opposition to the Federalist rule coalesced around Thomas Jefferson in the late 1790s. With Jefferson’s narrow victory in the election of 1800, the Federalists were never able to muster a response to the Democratic-Republican victory, and by 1815 or so (after several members had participated in the secessionist Hartford Convention), the party simply faded away. With no opposition party to animate national politics, by 1820 the Democratic-Republican party began to dissolve, as well, and the nation entered the “Era of Good Feelings.”
C. The Second Party System—emerged with the first Andrew Jackson campaign for President, and remained in place until the eve of the Civil War. The Democrats, as they now called themselves, rallied around Jackson, who viewed himself—and was viewed by others—as an advocate for the “common man.” Those who opposed Jackson called themselves Whigs, after the opposition party to the royalist Tories in Great Britain.
1. Ideological divisions—the Democrats and the Whigs were somewhat divided over ideology; Democrats advocated for smaller government and low taxes, while the Whigs advocated government involvement in internal improvements (best exemplified by Henry Clay’s American Plan), and an appropriate level of taxation to achieve that. Positions on these issued crossed sectional lines, and allowed the Democrats and Whigs to remain national parties.
2. Popular Politics—it was during this time period that white universal manhood suffrage occurred, and property qualifications for voting disappeared. To attract voters, parties developed “professional” office holders, engaged in the “spoils system,” and developed the party nominating convention to allow for some local control of the presidential nominating system.
3. Civil War—the emergence of a regional anti-slavery party—the Republicans—spelled the end of the Second Party System. The Republican Party dominated politics in the United States for most of the next 70 years.
D. The Modern Party System—both the Republicans and the Democratic Party emerged from the trials of the Civil War to create the modern party system. While Democrats were competitive in Congressional races soon after the end of the Civil War, Democratic candidates only held the office of the President for 16 years between 1861 and 1933 (two non-consecutive terms for Grover Cleveland, and Woodrow Wilson’s term from 1913-1921). Since the four terms that Franklin Delano Roosevelt served, the campaign for the presidency has been very competitive.
1. Reforms—the monolithic nature of political parties in the modern era has led to attempts at political reform by members of the dominant party who found themselves shut out of the power structure of their party.
a. Progressives—largely Republican (although there were Democrats who identified themselves Progressives, as well) who looked to reform the excesses (or what they perceived as excesses) of modern society.
I. National Party Structure Today
A. National Parties—Both the Republican and Democratic Parties exist at the national, state, and local levels, but control of the parties are much decentralized.
1. National Convention—held every four years to coincide with the presidential election. Besides nominating the party’s candidate for president, these conventions also vote on the party’s “platform”—the programs they party pledges to carry out.
2. National Committee—between convention party affairs are managed by a national committee made up of delegates from each state and territory.
3. Congressional Campaign Committee—in both the House and the Senate campaign committees help members who are running for re-election or would-be members who are running against members of the opposing party.
4. National Chair—a full-time, paid position, and elected to the position by the national committee. Before modern reforms, the chair also helped to decide who among the party faithful would get federal jobs.
5. Party Reforms—beginning in the late 1960s and 1970s, both parties made important internal reforms in their party structure.
a. Republicans—throughout the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and into the 1980s, the Republican Party was seemingly the permanent minority party. In response, they converted the national party into a well-financed, highly staffed organization (assisted by the proliferation of conservative think-tanks) devoted to finding and electing Republicans—especially to Congress. This began to pay dividends by the late 1980s and 1990s.
b. Democrats—While the Republicans worked to identify electable candidates, the Democratic Party, after divisive conventions in both 1964 and 1968, made a series of reforms that removed most of the power to name delegates from local parties, and spent the conventions in the 1970s and 1980s becoming increasingly factionalized.
B. National Conventions—The national committees select the time and the place of the convention, and also set the number of and rules for selecting delegates. Beginning in the early 1970s, primary elections (with some important exceptions for those states holding caucuses) have become the common means of selecting delegates, but often the delegates are apportioned to runners-up candidates, rather than winner-take-all.
II. State and Local Parties
A. Political Machines—a “political machine” is a party organization that recruits its members by the use of tangible incentives—political jobs, an opportunity to get favors from government. At one time, around the turn of the 20th century, many local party organizations were machines. The Progressive movement was animated by what they perceived were the excesses of these political machines, and the reforms they proposed were aimed at limiting the power of these machine politicians.
B. Ideological Parties—while political machines were animated by the need to win elections (in order to dispense favors, and win more elections), ideological parties are fired by their ideological purity. This can mean the creation of so-called “third parties” like the Prohibition Party or the Socialist Party, in the modern era the most influential ideological parties operate inside the two main parties. This is particularly true with the Republican party, where evangelical Christian groups have emerged to control many local Republican parties
C. Solidary Groups—are built among sociability networks (which is different from today’s social networks)—they are roughly akin to bowling leagues and bridge clubs. While they are less prone to ideological splits, they also often do not work very hard for party candidates.
D. Sponsored Parties—Sometimes a relatively strong party organization can be created among volunteers without heavy reliance on money or ideology and without depending entirely on people finding the work fun. This occurs when another organization exists in the community that can create, or at least sponsor, a local party structure.
E. Personal Followings—Because in most areas candidates can no longer count on the backing of a machine, because issue-oriented clubs are limited to upper-level middle-class members and sponsored parties to a few unionized areas, and because solidary groups are not always productive, a person wanting to win an election will usually try to form a personal following.
III. The Two-Party System
A. The Two-Party System and Electoral Law—the winner-take-all nature of most American politics inhibits the success of more than two parties in the American system. In countries with proportional representation (that is, when representatives in a legislature are chosen according to the proportion of all votes they (or their party) actually won. Without actual success now and then, it is difficult for a political party to remain viable.
B. The Two-Party System and Public Opinion—the aversion of most American to political conflict, and the desire for consensus, have helped to limit political participation in the country to two parties at a time.
IV. Nominating a President
A. Are Delegates Representative of the Voters?—Delegates to conventions are party activists, animated be a cause or an attachment to a particular candidate. Since most candidates have ensured their nomination before the convention meets, most delegates are more concerned with the development of the party’s platform—and the party candidates adherence to that platform—than they are concerned with the candidate themselves.
B. Who Votes in Primaries and Caucuses?—Primarily party activists, or people who pay a lot of attention to politics
V. Interest Groups
A. The Proliferation of Interest Groups
B. The Birth of Interest Groups
VI. Kinds of Organizations
A. Institutional Interests
B. Membership Interests
C. The Influence of Staff
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)