Elections and Voting Behavior. How American elections work Three kinds of elections: 1. Primary...
of 34/34
Elections and Voting Behavio
Elections and Voting Behavior. How American elections work Three kinds of elections: 1. Primary elections: voters select party nominees 2. General elections:
Text of Elections and Voting Behavior. How American elections work Three kinds of elections: 1. Primary...
Slide 1
Elections and Voting Behavior
Slide 2
How American elections work Three kinds of elections: 1.
Primary elections: voters select party nominees 2. General
elections: contested between nominees of each party 3. Elections on
specific policy questions for legislation recently become more
common in some states Two ways for public to pass legislation
directly: Referendum Whereby voters are given the opportunity to
approve or disapprove some legislative act Initiative Petition
Requires gaining signatures on a proposed law equal to 10% of the
number of voters in the previous election (24 states do this: AZ,
SD, CA, OR, CO, etc.)
Slide 3
Voter Qualifications Constitution does note give the Federal
Government the power to set suffrage qualifications (left to the
states) but does put four restrictions on how states use that
power: 1.15 th Amendment: RACE 2.19 th Amendment: GENDER 3.24 th
Amendment: MONEY 4.26 th Amendment: AGE
Whether to Vote: A Citizens First Choice From Government in
America, 13th edition.
Slide 6
Whether to Vote: A Citizens First Choice U.S. has low voter
turnout Downs Theory argues that it is rational not to vote: Those
who see clear differences between parties are likely to vote. If
indifferent, then one may rationally abstain from voting. Political
Efficacy: the belief that ones political participation really
matters Civic Duty: the belief that in order to support democratic
government, a citizen should always vote
Slide 7
Who Votes? Based on: Education Age Race Gender (gender gap)
Marital status Mobility Union membership
http://www.usatoday.com/interactiv
es/news/politics/how-the-race-was- won
Slide 8
Whether to Vote: A Citizens First Choice Who Votes? Marital
Status: Married = more likely to vote Union Membership: Union
member = more likely to vote Traits are cumulativepossessing
several adds up
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/08/six-take-aways-
from-the-census-bureaus-voting-report/
Slide 9
How Americans Vote: Explaining Citizens Decisions Policy Voting
Basing your vote choice on issue preferences and where the
candidates stand on policy issues Policy voting may occur if :
Voters know where they and the candidates stand on issues and see
differences between candidates Unlikely to occur because:
Candidates can be ambiguous on the issues. Media tend to focus on
the horse race not issues: who is winning not what the issues are
Today candidates are forced to take a clear stand in the party
primaries increasing chances for policy voting.
Slide 10
How Americans Vote: Explaining Citizens Decisions Mandate
theory of elections: The idea that the winning candidate has a
mandate from the people to carry out his or her platform and
politics Party identification How Americans see the candidates
Policy voting: When people base their choices in an election on
their own issue preferences
Slide 11
Whether to Vote: A Citizens First Choice
Slide 12
Changing Patterns in Voting Behavior: 1960 and 2008
compared
Slide 13
Nominations and Campaigns for presidential candidates
Nomination: partys official endorsement of a candidate for office
(requires money, media attention, and momentum) Campaign strategy:
Way in which candidates attempt to manipulate each of these
elements to achieve nomination National Party Convention: Functions
to select presidential and vice presidential candidate and write a
party platform
Slide 14
The Nomination Game Competing for Delegates Nomination game is
an elimination contest Goal is to win a majority of delegates
support at the national party convention, or the supreme power
within each of the parties The convention meets every four years to
nominate the partys presidential and vice-presidential candidates.
Conventions are but a formality today.
Slide 15
The Nomination Game The Caucus Road Caucus: Meeting where they
select their delegates to the national convention (Iowa 1 st )
Although most states hold primaries, caucuses are another way
political parties nominate candidates for election. Caucuses are a
series of meetings held across a state. At these meetings, party
members discuss the candidates, and then openly vote for state
delegates who represent the candidate they support. Those state
delegates, in turn, choose delegates to attend the national
convention, where they are expected to support the candidate whom
they had pledged to support. Organized like a pyramid from local
precincts to the states convention The Iowa caucus is first and
most important.
http://magazines.scholastic.com/Election-2012/faqs-primary#caucus
Slide 16
The Nomination Game The Primary Road Primary: elections in
which voters in a state vote for a nominee (or delegates pledged to
the nominee) Began at turn of 20 th century by progressive
reformers New Hampshire is the first primary McGovern-Fraser
Commission led to selection of delegates through primary elections
Most delegates are chosen through primaries. Superdelegates:
democratic leaders who automatically get a delegate slot
Frontloading is the tendency of states to hold primaries early to
capitalize on media attention. New Hampshire is first. Generally
primaries serve as elimination contests.
Slide 17
The Nomination Game Competing for Delegates Evaluating the
Primary and Caucus System Disproportionate attention to early ones
Prominent politicians do not run. Money plays too big a role.
Participation in primaries and caucuses is low and
unrepresentative; 20 percent vote in primaries. The system gives
too much power to the media. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republ
ican_Party_presidential_primaries, _2012
Slide 18
Republican Primaries by month
Slide 19
The Nomination Game The Convention Send-off National
conventions once provided great drama, but now are a formality,
which means less TV time. Significant rallying point for parties
Key note speaker on first day of Convention Party platform:
statement of a partys goals and policies for next four years
Debated on the second day of the Convention Formal nomination of
president and vice-president candidates on third and fourth
days
Slide 20
Superdelegates: Democratic Party Superdelegates: Politicians
who are awarded convention seats on the basis of their
position
Slide 21
Candidate (Party)Amount raisedAmount spentVotes Average spent
per vote Barack Obama (D)D$778,642,962$760,370,19569,498,516$10.94
John McCain (R)R$379,006,485$346,666,42259,948,323$5.78 Ralph Nader
(I)$4,496,180$4,187,628739,034$5.67 Bob Barr
(L)L$1,383,681$1,345,202523,715$2.57 Chuck Baldwin
(C)C$261,673$234,309199,750$1.17 Cynthia McKinney (G)G
$240,130$238,968161,797$1.48 Excludes spending by independent
expenditure concerns. Source: Federal Election Commission [176]
[176]
Slide 22
The Maze of Campaign Finance Reforms Soft Money: political
contributions (not subject to contribution limits) earmarked for
party-building expenses or generic party advertising The
McCain-Feingold Act (2002) banned soft money, increased amount of
individual contributions, and limited issue ads. 527s: independent
groups that seek to influence political process but are not subject
to contribution restricts because they do not directly seek
election of particular candidates
Slide 23
Money and Campaigning The Maze of Campaign Finance Reforms
Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) Created the Federal Election
Commission (FEC) to administer campaign finance laws for federal
elections Created the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Provided
partial public financing for presidential primaries Matching funds:
Contributions of up to $250 are matched for candidates who meet
conditions, such as limiting spending. Provided full public
financing for major party candidates in the general election
Required full disclosure and limited contributions
Slide 24
Money and Campaigning The Proliferation of PACs Political
Action Committees (PACs): created by law in 1974 to allow
corporations, labor unions and other interest groups to donate
money to campaigns; PACs are registered with and monitored by the
FEC. As of 2006 there were 4,217 PACs. PACs contributed over $372.1
million to congressional candidates in 2006. PACs donate to
candidates who support their issue. PACs do not buy candidates, but
give to candidates who support them in the first place.
Slide 25
Campaign Finance Reform Federal Election Campaign Act: 1.
Tightened reporting requirements for contributions 2. Limited
overall expenditures Challenged in 1976 in Buckley V. Valeo Supreme
Court struck down as a violation of free speech, the portion of the
act that limited the amount individuals could contribute to their
own campaigns Soft Money: money raised for campaigns (not subject
to any contribution limits)
Slide 26
McCain-Feingold Act 1.Banned soft money contributions
2.Increased amount that individuals could give to candidates from
$1000 to $2000 and can rise with inflation 3.Barred groups from
running issue ads within 60 days of a general election if they
refer to a federal candidate and are not funded by a PAC
Slide 27
Money and Campaigning The Proliferation of PACs Political
Action Committees (PACs): created by law in 1974 to allow
corporations, labor unions and other interest groups to donate
money to campaigns; PACs are registered with and monitored by the
FEC. As of 2006 there were 4,217 PACs. PACs contributed over $372.1
million to congressional candidates in 2006. PACs donate to
candidates who support their issue. PACs do not buy candidates, but
give to candidates who support them in the first place.
Slide 28
Political Action Committees Loopholes with PACs Any interest
group can now get into the act by forming its own PAC to directly
channel contributions of up to $5000 per candidate in both the
primary and general election
Slide 29
SUPER PACs
Slide 30
Super PACs Super PACs are a new kind of political action
committee created in July 2010 following the outcome of a federal
court case known as SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission.
Technically known as independent expenditure-only committees, Super
PACs may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions,
associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly
advocate for or against political candidates. Super PACs must,
however, report their donors to the Federal Election Commission on
a monthly or quarterly basis -- the Super PAC's choice -- as a
traditional PAC would. Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs are
prohibited from donating money directly to political candidates. As
of April 09, 2014, 991 groups organized as Super PACs have reported
total receipts of $149,876,153 and total independent expenditures
of $31,418,312 in the 2014 cycle.
Slide 31
Money and Campaigning
Slide 32
Buckley V. Valeo Extends right of free speech to PACs and can
now spend unlimited amounts indirectly, that is, if such activists
are not coordinated with the campaign Plays a major role in paying
for expensive campaigns
Slide 33
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission By a 5-to-4 vote
along ideological lines, the majority held that under the First
Amendment corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in
candidate elections cannot be limited. The majority maintained that
political speech is indispensable to a democracy, which is no less
true because the speech comes from a corporation.
Slide 34
McCutcheon V. F.E.C., 2013 No longer cap on spending limit..
The earlier decision threw out limits on what any individual can
give to federal candidates over a two-year election cycle.
Wednesdays majority opinion, by Chief Justice John Roberts, said
those caps infringe on free- speech rights and are not justified by
a governmental interest in combating political corruption. Justice
Stephen Breyers dissent, joined by the rest of the liberal wing,
said the aggregate cap fights corruption.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/tag/mccutcheon-v-federal-
election-commission
/http://blogs.wsj.com/law/tag/mccutcheon-v-federal-
election-commission /