34
POLITICAL POLITICAL PARTIES PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING? NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

POLITICAL POLITICAL PARTIESPARTIES

DANGERS OF FACTIONS?DANGERS OF FACTIONS?

OR,OR,

NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

Page 2: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Madison’s Federalist 10 warned about inevitable factions.

• Parties have become necessary to get things done in government. They seek to unify government in order to overcome the systems of separation of powers and check and balances that divide government.

Page 3: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

PARTY SYMBOLSPARTY SYMBOLSAND THOMAS NASTAND THOMAS NAST

Page 4: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

SIX PARTY SYSTEMS IN SIX PARTY SYSTEMS IN AMERICAAMERICA

• 1796-1824: the 1st party system--Federalists v. Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans

• Jeffersonian Republicans are the forerunners of today’s Democrat Party.

• Jefferson ‘triangulates’ by saying, “we are all Republicans, we are all Federalists”.

• Federalists disappear in national elections and we have a de facto one-party system until 1824.

Page 5: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• 1828-1856: The 2nd party system. • Jacksonian Democrats v. Whigs• Voter turnout sky-rockets.• Congressional caucuses go and the

party convention is born. Reaction to Jackson being denied Presidency in 1824, despite winning popular vote--the “corrupt bargain” (see next slide).

• “King” Jackson (12 vetoes, more than previous presidents combined) and nullification, slavery and Indian removal.

• Whigs were a party opposed to Jacksonian Democrats. Leaders were Henry Clay, Zachary Taylor, William Henry Harrison, and Daniel Webster, as well as a guy in Illinois named Lincoln.

Page 6: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

Corrupt BargainCorrupt Bargain

Electoral College, 1824Voting by state in House, 1825. Note all

of Clay’s states voted for Adams.

Page 7: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• 1860-1892: The 3rd party system. Republican Party emerges as the party against slavery and the party that saved the Union. Began as a 3rd party and will dominate for 75 years.

• 1896-1928: The 4th party system. Second period of Republican dominance with coalition of big business and working classes against Democratic rural interests.

• North vs. South and 1-party states.

• Factions within GOP--Old Guard vs. Progressives (Mugwumps)

Page 8: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• 1932-1964: The 5th party system.

• Democratic dominance begun under FDR and the New Deal. FDR’s grand coalition of urban dwellers, labor unions, Catholics, Jews, the poor, Southern Whites, Northern Blacks, and farmers.

• Enough benefits to keep everyone in the coalition happy.

Page 9: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

1968-Present: The 6th party 1968-Present: The 6th party system: Era of Divided Govsystem: Era of Divided Gov’’tt

• Increased split ticket voting

• Presidents of one party with Congresses of the opposite party.

• De-alignment to independents.

• Nixon, Reagan, and Bush (41) built coalition of disenchanted white suburban middle class voters, Southern white Protestants, “hard hats”, and big business.

Page 10: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Clinton won twice due to his reclaiming of FDR’s grand coalition, especially Southern middle class moderates (“Reagan Democrats”).

• 1994’s Contract with America takeover of the Congress by the GOP ensures divided government, though Clinton was shrewd to move to the middle (ex.-welfare reform).

Page 11: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Election of 2000 gave us a GOP president who won only a minority of popular votes (not to mention the necessity of a Supreme Court decision to help determine the outcome), a 50-50 Senate (which became 50-49-1 Democratic Senate after Jeffords defection), and a House with a narrow GOP majority.

Page 12: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• The historic 2008 election saw the nation choose an African-American Democrat as president and establish the Democrats as the majority party in both the House and Senate. However, the 2010 midterm election restored GOP control of the House.

Page 13: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

RealignmentRealignment

Page 14: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

More and Maybe?More and Maybe?

Page 15: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

CURRENT GOVERNMENTCURRENT GOVERNMENT

• President: Democrat Barack Obama• http://www.whitehouse.gov/administrat

ion/president_obama/• House: 242 GOP., 192 Dem, 1 Vacant

(112th Congress, 1st Session)• Senate: 51 Dem., 47 GOP, 2 Ind.

(Dem. Lieberman, Sanders) http://www.270towin.com/2010_senate_election/

• Governors: 29 GOP, 20 Dems, 1 Independent (as of 2010)

• State Legislatures: Dems control 15 states, GOP controls 26 states, 8 states are split and 1 (Nebraska) is a unicameral nonpartisan state. (2011)

Page 16: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

State LegislaturesState Legislatures• Upper House by

party.• Lower House by

party.• Based on 2010

election.

Page 17: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

GovernorsGovernors

Page 18: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

THIRD PARTIESTHIRD PARTIES

Page 19: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Issue-oriented/strong personality.

• They raise issues the main two won’t address. However, they don’t win.

• Two-party tradition and Electoral College’s winner-take-all system are obstacles. As is lack of money (Perot exception), media coverage, and getting on the ballot.

Page 20: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

IMPACT OF PARTIESIMPACT OF PARTIES

• Congress: The majority party controls the committees, choose the chairmen and key leadership positions, and the “staffers” are partisan.

Page 21: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?
Page 22: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

EXECUTIVE BRANCHEXECUTIVE BRANCH• Nearly all appointments

to the White House Office are partisan.

• Many go to people from election campaigns (patronage).

• The development of the Civil Service System has greatly reduced the party influence over the bureaucracy.

Page 23: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

JUDICIAL BRANCH:JUDICIAL BRANCH:Nearly always partisan.Nearly always partisan.

Page 24: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

STATE/LOCALSTATE/LOCAL

• Most state government positions are partisan.

• Many local government positions are nonpartisan.

Page 25: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

PARTY WEAKNESSESPARTY WEAKNESSES

• Anyone can join/no dues or duties.

• Only active at election time.

• Most Americans are spectators.

• Small percentages of “Strong” Dems/GOP.

• Increase in Independents.

Page 26: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Tensions exist between “party regulars” and issue/purist loyalists.

• Not responsive to social reform/Party “passiveness”.

• Traditional functions weakened: nomination of candidates, funding of campaigns, unifying government, and providing patronage.

• Decentralized: Each is organized along federal model--National Convention-->National Committee-->State Committees-->County Committees.

Page 27: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

• Neither the Democratic National Committee nor the Republican National Committee has true clout over the state and local committees. Neither has any real power to “punish” those who stray from the party line.

Page 28: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

PARTY REFORMPARTY REFORM

• Abuses: Control of nominations by “bosses” like Tweed of Tammany Hall or corruption of “political machines” like Mayor Richard Daley.

• They often excluded the poor, the young, and minorities.

Page 29: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

PROGRESSIVE ERAPROGRESSIVE ERA• Direct Primaries• Nonpartisan elections at

state and local levels.• Civil Service expansion.• Initiative, referendum,

recall.• 17th Amendment• Image at right is of

Lincoln Steffens, the muckraker, fighting Tammany Hall and its election abuses.

Page 30: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

OTHER WEAKENING OTHER WEAKENING FACTORSFACTORS

• Candidate-centered campaigns.

• Rise of campaign consultants--they take over many functions of the party.

• Public disenchantment with politics (Watergate).

• Growth of interest groups and their role in advertising.

• Candidates’ reliance on mass media to get message across.

Page 31: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

PARTY RESURGENCEPARTY RESURGENCE

• National party organizations are better funded than in the past. Soft money donations to national parties, though now banned, were important factors in elections in the 1990’s.

• State parties are making use of soft money.• Both parties, with better funding, hold training

sessions for candidates: how to plan, raise funds, organize.

• Very strong party unity scores within Congress: 70%-80%.

Page 32: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

Party AffiliationParty Affiliation

Page 33: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?

Party IdentificationParty Identification

Page 34: POLITICAL PARTIES DANGERS OF FACTIONS? OR, NECESSITY IN GOVERNING?