Chapter 9 Political Parties Swings in recent elections Democratic success in 2006 midterm congressional elections after years of Republican success. Republican success in 2002 and 2008 2006 election swing was a result of a general desire for change rather than agreement with either party If anything, studies have shown that the relevance of political parties is declining—a serious problem for our representative democracy….WHY???

Parties here and abroad The American Context A party is a group that seeks to elect candidates to public office by supplying them with a label American parties: historical development American parties are the oldest in the world New parties come and go, but two dominate the process Do not matter as much as they once did They used to mobilize voters Identification used to involve a serious commitment In European countries they do a much better job in mobilization and hold events for members.

Why the decline? Laws and rules have taken away much of the party power. Voters have lost a sense of commitment and rather not discuss their affiliation as a whole. Decentralization has made the weakening uneven in some areas party affiliation is still strong i.e. Massachusetts—Democrats Texas---Republicans

Relevant Arenas A label in the minds of the voters notice the graph on page 192 and the stagnation of party identification of the major parties but the uptick of the independent label. Set of leaders in government Congressional setup is still controlled by the parties. Control of committees as well as agendas. Organization recruiting and campaigning Across the board parties have lost control of whoever gets nominated for office. Think Trump.

American parties have become weaker in all three arenas. WHY??? As labels: More and more call themselves more independents As organizations: Much weaker since the 1960’s As sets of leaders: The organization of Congress is less under their control

Reasons for differences from European parties Federal System decentralizes power Early on most people with political jobs worked for state and local governments National parties were coalitions of local parties As political power becomes more centralized parties become weaker still Parties closely regulated by state and federal laws Candidates are chosen through primaries not by party leaders President elected separately from Congress Political Culture Parties unimportant in life: No dues required Parties separate from other aspects of life

The rise and fall of the political party The Founding until 1820’s Founders disliked of factions (political science) Emergence of Republicans, Federalists: Jefferson versus Hamilton Loose caucuses of political notables Republicans’ success and Federalists demise No representatives of clear economic interests Considered the father of American parties, Jefferson actually wrote in 1801 “the greatest good we can do our country is to heal its party divisions an make them one people.” He even criticized Andrew Jackson (much like a Trump today) ‘I feel much alarmed at the

The Jacksonians to the Civil War Political participation a mass phenomenon More voters to reach Party built from the bottom up Abandonment of presidential caucuses Beginning of national conventions to allow local control

Civil War and Sectionalism Jacksonian system unable to survive slavery New Republicans become dominant Civil War---Retribution Bryan’s alienation of Northern Democrats in 1896 Parties dominant within states have two factions Party professionals---”Stalwarts” “Mugwumps” “Progressives” or “reformers” Balance of power at first Diminished role later Where are you seeing these references TODAY????

The Era of Reform Progressive push measures to curtail parties Primary elections (conventions at the hand of party bosses) Nonpartisan elections No party-business alliances Strict voter registration requirements (reduce voter fraud but also willing participants) Civil service reform (jobs based on skills rather than patronage) Initiative and referendum elections California then Wisconsin Side NOTE: T. Roosevelt is often credited with being very progressive however, he brought forth only 54 anti-trust proceedings in his 7 years as President when Taft had 90 in only 4 years. What were the effects? Reduction in worst forms of political corruption Weakening of all political parties

Civil Service Reform Pendleton Act 1883 Result of Garfield’s assassination by Charles Guiteau disgruntled because of no appointment. Act calls for merit based appointments for federal positions.

The Weakening of all Political Parties Party Realignments A. Definition: sharp, lasting shift in the popular coalition supporting one or both parties. B. Occurrences: Changes in issues 1800: Jeffersonians defeated Federalists 1828: Jacksonian Democrats came to power 1860: Whigs collapsed; Republicans emerge 1896: Republicans defeated Bryan 1932: FDR Democrats came to power

C. Kinds of realignments Major party disappears and is replaced (1800, 1860) Voters shift from one party to another (1896, 1932) D. Clearest cases 1860: slavery 1896: Economics (Gold Standard) 1932: Depression E. 1980 NOT a realignment Expressed dissatisfaction with Carter Left Congress in the hands of Democrats

1972-1988 Shift in presidential voting patterns in the South Fewer Democrats, more Republicans and Independents Independents in South tend to vote Republican Now close to an even split among the parties Party dealignment not necessarily realignment Party Decline???What is the evidence???? Fewer people identifying with either party Increase in ticket splitting

National party structure today Parties are very similar on paper National convention ultimate power; nominates presidential candidate National committee composed of delegates from states Congressional campaign committees National chair manages the daily workload

Party structure diverges in the late 1960’s RNC moves to a bureaucratic structure; a well financed party devoted to electing its candidates (THINK KARL ROVE) Democrats move to factionalized structure to distribute power RNC uses computerized mailing lists to raise money Money used to run political consulting firm Legal and financial advice, issue research, provide information on voting trends, conduct advertising campaigns, etc. Democrats copied Republican system and set new records for fund raising There is now a fierce competition for soft money and record spending.

National Conventions National committee sets time and place; issues call setting number of delegates per state Formulas used to allocate delegates Democrats shift the formula away from the South to the North and West Republicans shift the formula away from the East to the South and Southwest Result Democrats moved left and Republicans moved right

Democratic formula rewards large states; Republican-loyal states Democrats set new rules In the 1970’s the rules changed to weaken party leaders and increase the influence of special interests Hunt comparison in 1981 reverses 1970’s rules by increasing the influence of elected officials and by making convention more deliberative Consequences of reforms: parties represent different set of upper-middle class voters Republicans represent traditional middle class Democrats represent “new class” Democrats are hurt because traditional middle class is more representative of most citizens and their beliefs

To become more competitive, Democrats adopt rule changes 1988 the number of super delegates increased and special interests decreased 1992 three rules; winner-reward system, proportional representation, and states that violate the rules are penalized Conventions today ratify choices made in primaries

State and Local Parties The Machine Recruitment via tangible incentives High degree of leadership control Abuses Gradually controlled by reforms Machines continued Both self serving and public Winning above all else

Ideological parties Principle above all else Usually outside of Democrats and Republicans Some local reform clubs Reform clubs replaced by social movements

Solidary groups Most common form of party organization Members motivated by solidary incentives Advantage:neither corrupt nor inflexible Disadvantage: not very hard working

Sponsored parties Created or sustained by another organization Example: Detroit Democrats controlled by UAW Not very common