The Two-Party System – Let’s Think Again
So, what’s wrong with the two-party system? Answer: plenty. It puts power into the hands of irrational partisans. What follows are major problems and concerns.
Federalists and Anti-Federalists were the first two political parties in the United States – evolving from the differences between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson during George Washington’s first administration.
It was a topic discussed at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 but the majority of the founding fathers frowned on the prospect of political parties and refused to put any reference to them in the Constitution. The framers thought political parties would threaten the unity of the republic. As we look at the partisan, political landscape today, they couldn’t have been more correct.
The two major parties we have now first developed when in 1824 President Andrew Jackson created the Democratic Party from the Democratic-Republicans –and in 1854 when the Republican Party took over from the Whigs. President Lincoln was a Republican.
There are dozens of political parties in the United States, but other parties have never won or even come close to winning in US history. The Democratic and Republican parties dominate our political landscape.
Getting on the Ballot
Candidates of the Democratic and Republican parties automatically qualify to appear on a ballot. Dependent on the State, other parties go through hoops like filing a petition, limiting candidates by a specific office or by winning a certain percentage of voters, or registering a certain number of voters to qualify to get printed on election ballots. This obviously limits the candidate field. Realistically, a candidate must be affiliated with one or the other major party to get elected.
Drawing the Congressional Districts
After the census every ten years, states relook and if necessary, redraw the boundaries of their congressional and state legislative districts. In some 30+ States, the Legislature has the first and last responsibility. 8 states have advisory groups or commissions, appointed by politicians, that make recommendations to the legislature. Only 4 have independent commissions that draw the maps.
With few exceptions, whichever political party has the majority in a state legislature assumes control of drawing the district maps from which candidates for the state legislature and US Congress run to represent.
This political party control often results in gerrymandering to put precincts with homogenous voting histories together to enhance party success – but follow no ‘community’ guidelines. Cities, counties, and towns are split into zig-sawed pieces based on previous voter inclinations by precinct for one party or the other.
These districts often bear no resemblance to a natural civil jurisdiction and frankly, result in most of the public’s ignorance of what district – and therefore what representative – represents them.
Once the elections are over, the majority party then names all the chairs and leaders of various committees and other legislative activities. Speakers of the House and Senate leaders most often decide what legislative proposals will be voted on at all – without a vote by the chamber itself on what might deserve consideration.
These leaders put pressure on members to ‘tow the party line’ or face ‘Party’ consequences – whether it be money or serving on considered important committees.
Money
A major consequence for representatives is the potential loss of financial support for their elections – whether it’s first time or reelection. The political parties have state and national committees that set the party’s platform and raise money themselves for distribution to candidates who may face a difficult election, despite the gerrymandering cited earlier. That activity and support makes representatives more loyal party members.
Publicly we hear candidates who say they will oppose influence by special interest groups in their official roles, but privately they take all the special interest money they can get. That in turn has created a huge industry called ‘lobbying.’ Washington D.C. is full of lobbyists whose sole purpose is to influence legislation and regulation, many working for multiple companies/entities. Even countries hire them to influence foreign policy. Currently there are 12,000+ lobbyists in Washington – most working for some 300 firms. Many former elected and appointed officials now serve as lobbyists. The concentration of power into two political parties – that operate the way they do – makes lobbying work easier and more productive. If lobbying didn’t work as well as it does, there would be much less of it.
Finally, let’s review the electorate.
The number of registered “independents” has substantially grown since 2000, now representing 38% of registered voters nationally. That compares with 31% registered as Democrat and 26% registered Republican. Most new registrants and younger people register as Independent.
Presidential elections are now won and lost by the number of voters deliberately unaffiliated with either party. Yet for practical purposes, like getting on the ballot in the first place, independent voters are left with a choice between the candidates of the two political parties.
That brings up the primary elections. Only eleven states allow what’s called an open primary. In the vast majority of states only people who are registered as Democrat or Republican can vote in a primary – and then are limited to a party ballot. Independents can’t vote, even though they now represent more voters than either of the two dominate political parties.
There’s something wrong with the picture when people can’t vote in an election that chooses for them the choices they ultimately have.
It puts a face on the ultimate power now wielded by the two political parties.
If primaries were open, we’d experience many more people voting in the general elections.
I’d also speculate that political partisanship and divisiveness would also ebb if primaries were open.
And isn’t the opportunity for participation by all the people what democracy is about?
For many voters a specific candidate on the ballot does not involve enthusiastic support but ‘the lesser of two evils’ – so many don’t vote at all – exacerbating a less than desired partisan result and low voter turnout.
Think about it. If voters had a real choice(s) other than Biden or Trump for president in 2020, do you think either of them would have won?
We have the two-party system to thank for electing too often less than desired officials both in the States and nationally.
We need to address and change the power that’s been given to two political parties – neither of which represent most of the people anymore.
***************
Have a great and prosperous week.
Hug somebody.
References:
https://www.debate.org/debates/The-Two-Party-System-Doesnt-Work/1/
SPIDER Bites
On Christmas day, NASA’s new James Webb telescope was perfectly launched from the European Spaceport located near Kourou, French Guiana – in concert with the European and Canadian space agencies. The folded-up for launch telescope will deploy on its 30-day, million-mile journey out to the second Lagrange point (L2). BTW, the five Lagrange Points are locations in space where the gravitational pull of the Sun and another large mass – in this case the earth – precisely equals the centripetal force required for a small object to move with them, aka, enhanced regions of attraction and repulsion. It will circle the Sun in lockstep with the Earth. These points are ideal for satellites because few if any corrections need be made to keep them in stable orbit. Costing $10B, the Webb telescope is the most expensive probe ever launched. The expectations for our understanding our Milky Way galaxy and beyond surpass Hubble’s contributions by some yet unknown multiple – as it is 100 times more powerful. NASA’s director is quoted after the launch as saying: “It’s a time machine, it’s going to take us back to the very beginnings of the universe.” Absolutely fascinating stuff pulled off by STEM savvy pros.
Having won the presidency by promising to shut down the virus, the US set a record last week for the number of new cases. Meanwhile, after a meeting with governors President Biden announced the federal government can’t eliminate COVID. Welcome to reality. But he hasn’t rescinded any of the federal mandates supposedly to shut down the virus. No wonder the unpopular polls. We have non-science supported “mandate fatigue.”
At last, this administration has the answer to the roaring crime wave. The IRS just announced a requirement that income generated from drug deals, bribes, stolen goods, prostitution, or other illegal activity must be reported on Schedule 1 (Form 1040). This new regulation will certainly make criminals think twice before stealing anything. It’s bureaucratic brilliance! Why didn’t we think of that?
This assessment/quote by Richard Muller, Prof. Physics at UC Berkely regarding NOAA’s change of their data source for ocean temperatures: The issue has to do with the fact that temperatures in the oceans used to be measured by intakes in ships, and most of that has now been replaced with automatic buoys. When they made that change, the extra warming that took place inside the ship was no longer affecting the measurement. The correction done by NOAA wound up reducing the average global warming over the past 100 years. What they did was correct, and necessary. The change has been criticized by climate change alarmists. Like a lot of things these days, it makes us stop and use our brains and common sense – and realize how “science” can be manipulated.
Here’s a suggested New Year’s Resolution. “Skeptic” and “Denier” have been regularly conflated. Proper skepticism is part of the scientific method and promotes scientific inquiry. Denial, on the other hand, is the rejection of ideas without objective consideration. Let’s resolve to be rational skeptics when any ‘expert’ tries to tell us to do something based on “the science” – like it’s all done and settled. Science is rarely settled: consensus is not science.
