The Campaign Process Chapter 13 American Government 2006 Edition (to accompany Comprehensive, Alternate, Texas, and Essentials Editions) O’Connor and Sabato Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Purposes of Elections Regular free elections guarantee mass political action enable citizens to influence the actions of their government Popular election confers on a government the legitimacy that it can achieve no other way. Regular elections also ensure that government is accountable to the people it serves. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Purposes of Elections Electorate Mandate: Citizens eligible to vote A command, indicated by an electorate’s voters, for the elected officials to carry out their platforms. Sometimes the claim of a mandate is suspect because voters are not so much endorsing one candidate as rejecting the other. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Purposes of Elections Retrospective judgment Prospective judgment A voter’s evaluation of the performance of the party in power Prospective judgment A voter’s evaluation of a candidate based on what he or she pledges to do about an issue if elected Three requirements for prospective voting: Voters must have an opinion on an issue Voters must have an idea of what action, if any, the government is taking on the issue Voters must see a difference between the two parties on the issue. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Kinds of Elections Primary Elections: Election in which voters decide which of the candidates within a party will represent the party in the general election. Closed primary: a primary election in which only a party’s registered voters are eligible to vote. Open primary: a primary in which party members, independents, and sometimes members of the other party are allowed to vote. Crossover voting: participation in the primary of a party with which the voter is not affiliated. Raiding: An organized attempt by voters of one party to influence the primary results of the other party. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

General Elections General elections are those in which voters decide which candidates will actually fill elective public offices. In presidential elections voters look for: Leadership and character. Base their judgments on foreign policy and defense issues that do not arise in state and local elections. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Initiative, Referendum, and Recall An election that allows citizens to propose legislation and submit it to the state electorate for popular vote 24 states and D.C. use the initiative Referendum An election whereby the state legislature submits proposed legislation to the state’s voters for approval Recall Voters can remove an incumbent from office by popular vote. Are very rare Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Presidential Elections Primary elections or caucuses are used to elect national convention delegates which choose the nominee. Winner-take-all primary Proportional representation primary Proportional representation with bonus delegates primary; beauty contest with separate delegate selection; delegate selection with no beauty contest Caucus Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Primaries v. Caucuses Over years, trend has been to use primaries rather than caucuses to choose delegates. Caucus is the oldest, most party-oriented method of choosing delegates to the national conventions. Arguments for primaries More democratic More representative A rigorous test for the candidate Arguments for caucuses Caucus participants more informed; more interactive and informative Frontloading (being first) gives some primary states an advantage Frontloading is the tendency to choose an early date on the primary schedule Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Party Conventions Out-of-power party holds its convention first, in late July, followed in mid-August by party holding the presidency. Conventions were decision-making body in the 19th century. Today the convention is fundamentally different. Nominations settled well in advance of the convention. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Historic Moments for Women at the Conventions Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

National Convention: Delegate Selections Unit Rule A traditional party practice under which the majority of a state delegation can fore the minority to vote for its candidate Abolished by the Democrats New Democratic party rule decrees that state’s delegates be chosen in proportion to the voters cast in its primary or caucus. (30% of votes = 30% delegates from that state) – proportional allocation Superdelegates Delegate slot to the Democratic Party’s national convention that is reserved for an elected party official Some rules originating in Democratic Party have been enacted as state laws thus applying them to the Republican Party as well. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

National Convention: National Candidates and Issues Political perceptions and loyalties of voters are not influenced largely by national candidates and issues. Diminished the power of state and local party leaders at the convention. Issues are more important to the new, issue-oriented party activists than to the party professionals. Party professionals no longer have monopoly on managing party affairs. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

National Conventions: The News Media Changing nature of coverage No prime time coverage on some days Extending coverage on the final day of each convention Reflects change in political culture More interest in the candidates themselves Convention still generates much coverage for the party Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The National Convention: Who are the Delegates? Parties draw delegates from an elite group Higher income and educational levels Differences between parties 40% Democratic delegates were minorities; 50% women (1980 rule requires half state delegation be female) Only 17% Republican delegates were minorities. Up from 9% in 2000. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Figure 13.1 Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Electoral College Representatives of each state who cast the final ballots that actually elect a president Total number of electors for each state equal to the number of senators and representatives that a state has in the U.S. Congress District of Columbia is given 3 electoral votes. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Figure 13.2 Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Electoral College Result of compromise Selection by Congress versus direct popular election Three essentials to understanding the design of the Electoral College: Constructed to work without political parties. Constructed to cover both the nominating and electing phases of presidential selection. Constructed to produce a nonpartisan president. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Electoral College in the 19th Century 12th Amendment (1804) Attempt to remedy the confusion between the selection of vice presidents and presidents that emerged in the election 1800 Provided for separate elections for each office, with each elector having only one vote to cast for each In event of a tie, the election still went to the House. Top three candidates go to House. Each state House delegation casts one vote. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Electoral College Today Apportionment matters. Representation of states in the Electoral College is altered every ten years to reflect population shifts. Recent apportionment has favored the Republicans. With the exception of California, George W. Bush carried all of the states that gained seats in 2000. Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The Electoral College: Three Major Reform Ideas Abolition Congressional District Plan Keep the College, Abolish the Electors Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Patterns of Presidential Elections Party Realignments A shifting of party coalition groupings in the electorate that remains in place for several elections Critical elections An election that signals a party realignment through voter polarization Six party realignments in U.S. history; three associated with tumultuous elections 1860 1890s 1928-1936 Secular Realignments The gradual rearrangement of party coalitions, based more on demographic shifts than on shocks to the political system Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Electoral College Results for Three Realigning Presidential Contests Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Congressional Elections Very different from presidential elections Lesser known candidates, more difficulty getting media attention Incumbency Advantage When incumbents lose it is generally due to: Redistricting Gerrymandering Scandals Coattails Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Figure 13.4 Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Results of Selected Elections, 2004 Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Midterm Congressional Elections Election takes place in the middle of a presidential term President’s party usually loses seats in midterms Tendency for voters to punish the president’s party more severely in the sixth year of an eight year presidency Retrospective voting Senate elections less inclined to the 6th year itch 2002 midterm elections were an exception Bush picked up seats in the House and Senate Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Voting Behavior Patterns in Voter Turnout Turnout: the proportion of the voting-age public that votes 40% of the eligible adult population votes 25% are occasional voters Voters tend to be more educated More voters have higher incomes Younger people vote less Whites vote more regularly than African Americans – related to income and educational differences in the two groups Hispanics vote less than African Americans Have potential to wield much influence given their increasing size Those interested in politics vote more Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

The South Versus the Non-South for Presidential Voter Turnout Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Why Is Voter Turnout So Low? Too Busy Difficulty of Registration Difficulty of Absentee Voting Number of Elections Voter Attitudes Weak Political Parties Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Why People Don’t Vote Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

How Can the United States Improve Voter Turnout? Easier Registration and Absentee Voting Make Election Day a Holiday Strengthen Parties Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

How America Votes Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Does Low Turnout Matter? Some argue it is a not a critical problem Based on belief that preferences of nonvoters are not much different from those who do vote So…results would be the same regardless Nonvoting is voluntary Nonvoting driven by acceptance of the status quo Others believe it is a problem Voters do not represent nonvoters Social make-up and attitudes of nonvoters today are significantly different from those of voters Tend to be low income, younger, blue collar, less educated and more heavily minority Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Patterns in Vote Choice Race and Ethnicity Whites tend to vote Republican African Americans vote overwhelmingly for Democrats Hispanics also tend to identify with and vote for Democrats Kerry 53 percent; Bush 44 percent Women today more likely to support Democratic candidates Poor vote less often and more for Democrats Well-to-do vote more often and for Republicans Ideology related closely to vote choice Conservatives for Republicans Liberals for Democrats Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Ticket-Splitting Voting for candidates of different parties for various offices in the same election From 1960 to 1992 almost 40% of states holding simultaneous presidential and gubernatorial elections recorded split results. 1992 and 1996 went to average of 26% split ticket voting Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006

Reforming the Electoral Process Focus on the Electoral College Other areas Nomination Regional primaries Campaign Finance Internet Voting Standardizing Recounts Ballot Reform Pearson Education, Inc. © 2006