POLSC232: American Government

3a. Explain the roles, functions and structure of political parties

• What is a political party?
• What role do political parties play in a democracy?
• What are the major political parties in the United States?
• How does the U.S. party system compare with other democracies around the world?

Political parties are organizations that support different political issues and agendas. Members of the same party tend to share similar beliefs about the role government should play in public life. The parties usually endorse and support candidates who share their political beliefs and work on their behalf.

We call the United States a two-party system because it has two main political parties: the Democrats and the Republicans. In some regions, the Green, Libertarian, and Constitution parties are fairly active. Some candidates declare themselves independent if they do not have ties with either major party. Many democracies, especially those with a parliamentary system, have many more political parties.

Political parties serve several functions in a democracy. They provide political candidates with financial and other resources, such as additional publicity, volunteers, and recognition from party leaders, to help them succeed. Many voters appreciate knowing which candidates support the political platform of their chosen political party, especially if they do not wish to research the positions a given candidate has taken on specific issues.

For example, many Democrats believe government should actively address inequality issues, while many Republicans believe government involvement should be small, outside federal security services. These ideological differences can give voters a sense of the candidates they may want to support.

We describe the voting system in the United States as "winner takes all" or first past the post since the one candidate who obtains the majority of votes wins the electoral contest, while the loser does not receive any representation. Note states have different rules on whether candidates must win an absolute majority (more than 50 percent of the vote) to win and whether they need to call a new election if one candidate does not win a majority or only wins by a small percentage.

Many democracies have a parliamentary system where representation in parliament, or the number of seats each party enjoys, depends on the overall number of votes the party received in the general election. When one party does not win a majority of seats, they must create a coalition government with another party to obtain a majority of seats necessary to govern. This can cause problems when a smaller party, which knows it is in high demand from the larger parties, makes many major demands before joining a coalition. Some argue this gives too much power to a minority segment of the population. While these types of party coalitions are unnecessary in the United States, the minority party is always forced to wait until the next election to enter government, which can also hurt. No system is perfect!

To review, see What Are Parties and How Did They Form?, The Two-Party System, Shape of Modern Political Parties, and Divided Government and Partisan Polarization.

3b. Discuss the historical evolution of political parties and the advantages and disadvantages of the U.S. two-party system

• How did the Framers perceive political parties or factions?
• When and why did political parties first begin to develop?
• How have U.S. political parties changed since colonial times?
• What are candidate-centered politics?
• Why does the U.S. have a two-party system?
• What are some advantages and disadvantages of a two-party system? How do they compare to other types of democracies?

Although they were initially concerned that political factions or parties might cause too much conflict, the Framers soon realized a formal way was needed to organize elected officials and political candidates who held similar political beliefs. For example, when government became more routine in post-revolutionary America, citizens began to coalesce around key political ideas to promote their views. By 1828, Americans adopted a two-party system, although their precise makeup and belief systems would continue to evolve.

In the 1800s, slavery was a defining issue. After the Civil War (1861–1865), party machines – authoritarian party structures that depended on loyalty and group identity rather than strong political values – dominated the political landscape. The system frequently led to accusations of patronage and corruption since the party controlled political appointments and access to privileges. During the 1900s, a series of reforms transformed the parties beyond recognition. Several states introduced primary elections to give voters more say over choosing each party's candidate. This led to a shift toward candidate-centered politics when people voted to elect a specific politician rather than to support party loyalty.

In a two-party system, most elected officials belong to one of two major parties. Again, we describe the voting system in the United States as the winner takes all or first past the post since the one candidate who obtains the majority of votes wins the election contest, while the loser does not receive any representation at all. The candidate who loses must wait for two, four, or six years to run again, depending on the term of office for the position opening. Most democracies have multi-party systems, so several minority parties can remain competitive even if they only win a few seats in Parliament.

American political parties tend to be more flexible in their ideologies than in other countries. For example, what it means to be a Democrat or Republican can vary from state to state and district to district. While party leaders adopt a party platform every year to express commonly-held views on public policy, individual politicians frequently adapt these ideals to create their own policy goals to better reflect the interests and opinions of the constituents in their region. Americans are not required to pay dues to join a political party as in many other countries, where party leaders are free to expel candidates and members who fail to toe (follow) the party line.

Supporters of the two-party system say it has a moderating effect on politics. They argue that having too many parties can be destabilizing, confuse voters, and allow extremists to gain an inordinate amount of political power. Others argue that a two-party system limits voter choice and discourages eligible voters from participating in government because they may feel the two main parties do not reflect their political beliefs.

To review, see What Are Parties and How Did They Form? and The Two-Party System.

3c. Explain voter turnout and the importance of party identification on voter preferences

• How do party identification and voter preference influence each other?

Party identification and voter preference influence the likelihood of a person's participation in politics. People who have a strong sense of party identification or feel passionate about an issue are more likely to turn out to vote and engage in other civic activities, such as volunteering, donating to a campaign, talking about politics with friends and family, and spreading awareness about an issue on social media.

Party identification can help voters identify the candidates who reflect their preferences when they are unfamiliar with the candidates they see listed on the ballot. For example, when a voter who tends to support the Republican party sees that a candidate is a Republican, they may vote for them even though they do not know exactly how the politician stands on an issue they care about. For this reason, a candidate running for office may decide to toe the party line on issues they do not feel strongly about since it may help them get elected.

To review, see Party Identification, Voter Registration, and Voter Turnout.

3d. Explain the nominating system and the differences between primaries and caucuses

• What is the nomination process for presidential candidates?
• What are primaries and caucuses?
• How are presidential candidates chosen in the United States?

U.S. presidential candidates compete in primaries or caucuses, depending on the system a state prefers, so each political party chooses only one candidate to run in the general election. Each state determines the rules the candidates should follow to win the primary in their state.

Primaries tend to allow more voters to participate in the selection process, while caucuses tend to restrict participation to party members who have been more active in the party. But, again, the rules vary from state to state.

For example, open primaries allow all registered voters to choose a candidate regardless of their chosen party affiliation. In closed primaries, you can only vote for candidates who share your party affiliation. For example, only registered Democrats can vote in the Democratic primary to choose the Democratic candidate. In a blanket primary, candidates from the same and different parties compete against each other in a primary election for the same office.

The rules for caucuses can be complicated and vary from state to state. They typically involve lengthy meetings where longstanding party activists debate, vote, and choose the individual delegates who will attend the party's nominating convention. Traditionally, the most famous and earliest caucus takes place in Iowa.

Each state will choose a slate of delegates who will represent them at the national convention that is held for each party to formally nominate the candidate who has won the most votes at the primary and caucus level. The party delegates also approve the final party platform or official position it will take on a range of political issues and policy-making concerns.

While these events used to be fairly raucous affairs with plenty of public debate and last-minute decision-making, today's conventions tend to be staged political events where party leaders finalize and announce their chosen nominee based on how the candidates performed during the state primaries and caucuses. The presidential candidate usually announces who they have chosen to serve as their vice presidential running mate.

To review, see Elections.

3e. Assess the role of redistricting, incumbency, and money in elections

• What are redistricting and gerrymandering?
• How does the U.S. redistricting process support incumbent versus new candidates?
• What are some advantages incumbents hold over other candidates in elections?
• What role does money play in American elections?
• What is a political action committee (PAC)?
• What are hard money and soft money?
• What have been some attempts at campaign finance reform in the United States?
• How can public funding work in U.S. political campaigns?

Each state receives a specific number of representatives in Congress based on its population. Every ten years, the Constitution requires the government to take an accurate count of the population via a national census. When the census shows the district's population has changed, state lawmakers must redraw the district lines or voter boundaries to ensure the population within each district in the state is equal. This process is known as redistricting.

During redistricting, the party that controls the state legislature can shape each district to protect their incumbent politicians (those who hold the current seat and may be up for re-election) and increase the number of congressional representatives affiliated with their party.

For example, you might draw the boundaries so all of your party supporters are in one district to create a safe district that will elect a candidate from your party. Alternatively, you might draw the district boundaries to divide neighborhoods that include groups of members from the opposing party to dilute their votes among districts that have a majority of your party supporters. We call the process of drawing district lines to advantage one party over the other gerrymandering.

Incumbents are the politicians who currently hold office and are seeking reelection. An open seat means that there are no incumbents. The previous occupant may have retired, stepped down, or choose not to run again because they fear they may lose.

Incumbents have several advantages over their challengers. For example, since they have experienced winning a campaign in the district, their staff may be more organized than their opponent. They probably have greater name recognition among voters and have established relationships with donors and party activists. They know who to contact for help in fundraising events and may even have some money left over from previous campaigns. This campaign war chest they have amassed will help pay for future campaign expenses, such as advertising and travel. Meanwhile, the media often gives the current officeholder free publicity with news stories about how the incumbent candidate is executing their job responsibilities, representing their constituents, and working on popular projects in the community.

Money can play a critical role in financing American political campaigns. The Wall Street Journal reported that the presidential and congressional contests cost $5.3 billion in 2008. Roughly 60 percent of political spending was spent on media costs, such as television advertising. Campaigns also spend money on travel, administration, event planning, payroll, technology, printing, and direct mail.

Since politicians raise and spend so much money to run a political campaign, accusations of bribery, corruption, and other scandals abound. Congress periodically passes campaign finance reform laws to raise awareness about the need to follow ethical standards and limit corruption.

For example, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) limited the amount individuals, political parties, and other political groups could contribute to campaigns and how candidates could spend these contributions. Campaigns were obligated to disclose their financial information to the recently established Federal Elections Commission (FEC), which was responsible for publicizing the information.

Opponents argued these laws unfairly limited political expression. Proponents believed fair elections would help ensure candidates listen to the concerns of their constituents rather than solely respond to the demands of their more wealthy campaign donors.

Enforcement from the Federal Elections Commission led politicians and donors to differentiate how they handled money for different purposes. For example, to limit fraud, the FECA imposed strict regulations and record-keeping requirements on hard money or contributions that support a particular political campaign or candidate. The FECA imposed much less scrutiny on soft money, which supports general get-out-the-vote drives, party-building activities, issue-based advertising, and general campaigning which did not advocate for or against a specific candidate. Politicians realize that these financial sources are equally important to their election.

Some support public funding of election campaigns as an alternative, where presidential candidates can elect to receive the public funds taxpayers approve when they check a designated box on their annual income tax forms. To be eligible, candidates must raise $100,000 in contributions of $250 or less, with at least $5,000 coming from 20 different states. The government matches the first $250 of every individual contribution with public funds. Today, many candidates opt out of this funding mechanism since, although they would appreciate the funds, the system requires them to adhere to strict spending limits that they feel would jeopardize their campaigns.

To review, see Elections and Campaigns and Voting.

3f. Explain how the Electoral College functions as a method of electing the president, including the arguments for and against the current system

• How does the Electoral College work in U.S. presidential elections?
• What are some arguments for and against the Electoral College?

The Electoral College describes the 538 electors who represent each state and meet in December following a presidential election to officially choose the president via a majority vote. The number of electoral votes for each state is calculated by counting one elector for each member of Congress and one for each senator. This means less populous states have an advantage: each state receives two additional electors regardless of the size of its population.

Since the number of electoral votes is based on congressional seats rather than the direct population, and nearly all states have adopted a winner-take-all system to apportion their electoral votes, a president can win enough electoral votes to win but lose the popular vote. This occurred when George W. Bush lost the popular vote to Al Gore in 2000 by nearly 550,000 votes, and Donald J. Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in 2016 by nearly three million votes. Both won the electoral college.

Due to this compromise, the Founders specified in the U.S. Constitution that the president is not chosen by popular vote in the United States.

To review, see Has the Electoral College Outlived Its Usefulness?.

3g. Analyze the purpose, roles, and functions of interest groups and their impact on the electoral process

• What is an interest group? What are some examples of important interest groups in American politics today?
• How do interest groups influence elections?

The Founders called the interest groups "factions" when groups of like-minded citizens join together to support (or oppose) an issue or cause. Interest groups range in size, level of organization, and policy goals. Some focus narrowly on specific issues, such as the American Peanut Council or the National Rifle Association, while others promote a broader agenda, such as the National Organization for Women or the Children's Defense Fund.

Interest groups can be effective advocates for action and can generate a great deal of publicity for the candidates they support. Many meet with their congress members, make financial contributions, and lobby Congress to pass legislation that supports their particular public policy agenda. Interest groups frequently use free or paid media to publicize their cause and educate the public about their position. They frequently endorse (or oppose) politicians from political campaigns that support a favorable (or conflicting) viewpoint.

To review, see Interest Groups Defined, Collective Action and Interest Group Formation, Interest Groups as Political Participation, and Pathways of Interest Group Influence.

Unit 3 Vocabulary

• blanket primary
• campaign finance reform
• campaign war chest
• candidate-centered politics
• caucus
• closed primary
• Electoral College
• Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971
• first past the post
• gerrymandering
• hard money
• incumbent
• interest group
• national convention
• open primary
• party machine
• political party
• primary
• public funding
• soft money
• two-party system