In some, if not most, of my previous posts I have been very disparaging of partisan politics. I would like to take a step back from that, for fear that some may infer that I have a fundamental problem with the party system. While I feel that excessive partisanship, specifically the fringe politics of late, is bad for our government, I do not want to suggest that partisanship as a whole is wrong. When, in fact, political parties are a necessity for a healthy democracy. Both our electoral system and our government could not function properly without strong parties behind it. It is parties that drive interest for elections, provide a clear message for voters to get behind and facilitate our public policy debates. Democracy certainly requires a party system, what is important is that it may not need them to the extent that they are today.
America has primarily operated under a two party system, as we can see from today’s Republican and Democratic parties. In a representative system like ours the goal is to elect someone who matches our own ideologies and goals for the country but finding the right match becomes confusing in a society as heterogeneous as our own. “Political parties provide a structure for aggregating these interests, packaging them, and presenting them to voters. Parties articulate interests in their platforms, their election communications, and the campaigns of their candidates,” (Wayne). The party system makes the seemingly unmanageable task of picking our ideal candidate easy. By laying out a platform that clearly states the stance of the party on all of the major issues, voters can go to the polls with the confidence to make their choice; red or blue.
The issue arises when you consider that the statement, “you only have to choose between two parties,” has a vastly different meaning than the statement, “you only have two parties to choose from”. On the one hand, it can make choosing between candidates much easier but on the other, what do you do if you do not fit neatly into one of these categories? The answer is: you still have to choose. Some experts believe that a very polarized political climate promotes, “a decrease in the representation of people with moderate views. They perceive government as being increasingly responsive to its core supporters and special interests instead of to the general public,” (Wayne). Although parties are essential to running a campaign, parties in their current form tend to discourage the participation of moderates in favor of the most loyal party members.
In government parties are crucial for their ability to main a proper separation of power. Institutionally, this system ensures not only that one branch does not gain too much power but, also, that the minority group is not drowned out. If we take this positive aspect and look at it under our current party structure, it becomes a major negative. This is one of the root causes of the sky high disapproval ratings that our government is currently facing. “When government is divided, unity, flamed by ideology, discourages compromise and can result in a political and institutional stalemate,” (Wayne). Once again what began as a positive, the need for compromise, has become a negative. In such a polarized system compromise is not accepted and so, nothing is done.
Political Parties are a fundamental requirement to facilitate a representative democracy. There was never any laws written to create them, they simple formed out of necessity to support our political process. After two hundred years of bulking up, political parties have past the point where they were most helpful and reached a place where they have started to become counter productive. The American electoral system will never work without partisan politics but it could certainly work better with less of it.
Wayne, Stephen J. "Are American Parties Still Representative?" In Is This Any Way to Run a Democratic Election?, 144-167. Fifth ed. Washington DC: CQ Press, 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment