Why does America have a Two-Party System - Essay Example

Why America has a Two Party system Introduction In any democratic nation, there is a system where political parties get to compare their science of different ways of government. These parties get to control the government by the massive support they get from nominations (Siaroff 2009). The classification of the party system is on the grounds of the number of relevant parties and the amount of fragmentation that is seen in the governing bodies (McKeever and Davies 2012). A two-party system is seen where two major political parties are at the time dominating the votes. Within the two-party system, one of the parties gets to hold the majority in the legislation (Bailey et al 2010). The United States is noted to have started the system of having two parties in its governance. There are many reasons as to why it does continue to have its system like that (McKeever and Davies 2012). When the history of the United States is considered, it is found out that its roots are based on the two-party system itself. This force behind the form of tradition, where that the state itself began with, has become very important to the Americans. It has had a lot of influence on the American government (Gerring 2001). Other nations have numerous political parties whereby the candidates get to be elected to the offices, and when the data is analyzed, minority parties give out great contribution to this. Over the course of political history in the United States, minor third parties have come up several times (Bibby and Maisel 2003). For example, the Poor Man’s party, the liberty party, and the free soil party have come up within the American history and get to influence the politics of America slightly. But, the worst part is that the names of most of them get forgotten easily and very quickly (Bibby and Maisel 2003). Two-party system is the only system where the county gets to have ideological parties with broad political beliefs and good values that can see the country forward to a better stand (Herrnson and Green 2002). The minor parties only tend to be economic protests, and this is not what the nation needs at the moment (Campbell 2006). It needs to see progress from one stage to another in terms of a better solution to the problems and matters they are facing (Bibby and Maisel 2003). The minor parties do act as splinter parties in most situations. This paper is going to analyze the reasons why United States of America still has two party systems. Historical influence When the past political system is reviewed, the progressive party of 1912 splinted from the republicans gaining 88 electoral votes. Later on the same progressive party of 1924 gained 13 votes after splinting from the republicans (McSweene and Zvesper 1991). These groups always do not take up the goal of winning the election and transforming the nation, but conversely, they concentrate on changing the view of the current state of the electoral votes (Bowles 1993). One of the major reason as to why United States of America still continues to engage in the Two-party system is due to the reason of the great force of historical tradition (Sundquist 1983; Smith 2003). For a very long time, since the nation started with the Two-party system, the anti- federalists and the federalists have become used to the system so much that they cannot let go of it (Milkis and Rhodes 2007). When this system is trace, it is found that there have been five distinct party systems. These are: first party system, which was during 1796 to 1816: federalists and Jeffersonian republicans; second party system, which was during 1840 to 1896: democrats and Whigs; third party system, which was during 1860 to 1896; democrats and republicans; the fourth party system occurred during 1896 to 1932: republicans and democrats, and finally the fifth party system includes the democrats and the republicans: from 1932 to date (Sartori and Mair 2005). American political Beliefs and Values One of the other factors which have greatly inclined the two party systems in the United States is the form of sharing principles and ideals of the American individuals (McSweene and Zvesper 1991). The range of belief is very great in other states, and the kind of disagreements they come across run deep. For instance, France has a communist party that even though its week than it was earlier, it still can receive a considerable amount of support (McSweene and Zvesper 1991). Another example is seen in Nigeria where for the past many years, it has been in a continuous disagreement over who should be able to control the policy. Either the military or the proponents of Democratic system can take up the control (Miller and Schofield 2003). According to Schmidt et al 2010, these two sides only represent different sets of belief and are trying to bring over their view up to the top by leading the country only by their belief system. The United States does not conform to this (Singh 2003). Its main aim is to encourage nations to have two large parties with overlapping points, but their main focus is to make sure that their manifestos are issues based (Miller and Schofield 2003). The many features that stand out in the United States electoral system supports the existence of the two major parties in the country: the Republicans and the Democrats (Schaffner 2012). The Americans are ideologically people of homogeneous nature. Over the periods, they have been sharing so many of the same ideals, same pattern of belief, and also the same basic principles (Miller and Schofield 2003). It is also apparent that Americans possess several similar traits in relation to their beliefs and values (Lowi and Romance 1998). However, this does not imply that they are all alike. The vision of their country is primarily considered as a point of focus by many Americans. Development agendas are main issues addressed by both the democrats and republicans. Unlike in many multiparty democracies where propaganda and setting scores amongst candidates, Americans have developed a system of focusing on the issue based politics. The major issues that Americas want parties to focus on include socioeconomic and political ideologies. In addition, it is believed that, since the United States has members of various ethnics, racial, religious, including other social groups, the political space is wide as each of the groups try to make sure that their voices are heard and addressed both at the national level and at the local level (Lowi and Romance 1998). With many deliberations having been on how to address every group, many people believe in having politics that can create harmony in all groups. Therefore, both the democrats and republicans try to include views of all groups in their manifestos in order to win the support of the majority of the Americans (Lowi and Romance 1998). Winner’s ability to take control of the whole system The other important reason that the country still uses the Two-party system is the capability of one of the parties to take everything in terms of power after it has won the election, instead of proportional representation (Miller and Schofield 2003). When the elections are held, the winner at the local level is the one who gains the highest number of the votes (McKay 2009). They do not need to receive more than 50% of the votes to be able to be the winner, but they only need to have one vote above their opponent (Nagel 1989). The national state elections that are held for the representatives of the states are at most based on single member district (Bardes et al 2008). Only one person gets to represent other people from the area within the country. It does not matter how many individuals get to run, but only person who succeeds to gain many votes gets to become the winner (Bardes et al 2008). This has encouraged the parties to try every means they can to become widely spread and big enough to be able to get more voters (Aldrich 1995). If a party does not get many voters to support them, then their hope of being the winner is diminished (Bardes et al 2008). In the past years, as the United States has been growing, it has been noted that, the third parties have been incapable of matching the capabilities of the major parties (Disch 2002). This comes in terms of raising money and winning the elections. Congress has fully been aware of the way of life of the American society (Lowi and Romance 1998). The congress has provided full funding to the major parties while to the other parties; only a small percentage is entitled to them (Lowi and Romance 1998). There are so many factors within the American system that may end up hindering the minor parties. The greatest reason as to why the Two-party system is found in the country is because of the ideological consensus (Lowi and Romance 1998). Some few policies may make them disagree, but when the vast majority is considered, they agree on the major details. For example, very few individuals do question the fundamental premises of the free market economy and the importance of maintaining a very powerful national defense (Bibby and Maisel 2002). Within the political arena of the American administration, very many people get to agree that the task of the federal government is to address the economy and natural crises, and further more to address the natural crises in terms of security (Bibby and Maisel 2002). Advantages of the Two-party System in America Two –party system is much more stable than the multiparty systems (Ray 1999). Its principles and a way of conducting their functions is much straighter and of a focused view in order to able to benefit the economy and develop the country in various aspects (Wilson 2009). For the Americans, having to choose between two parties is much easy. Its simplicity is much of an advantage, due to the harmony and less unruliness (Janda, Berry and Goldman 2012; Welch et al 2010). This system is much self perpetuating as it is viewed from the children who grow up identifying themselves with one of the two parties (Janda, Berry and Goldman 2012). As it has been observed, with a multiparty, a candidate gets to win the election, but with a very small number of votes. It does not give a better chance to the majority to have a better selection of the best laid system (Maisel and Brewer 2010). To this mode of authority, the two parties tend to have a better view of great support and become moderated politically, and are able to rule effectively (Maisel and Brewer 2010). The inequities of splitting votes is so much avoided in all manners, this makes the two parties to be able to cooperate in terms of ideas and issues that face the nation (Duverger 1963). Conclusion Most Americans look favorably on the Two-party system due to the fact that it has dominated the politics in United States for a very long time. It is clearly seen that the republican and the democrats have been in existence for more than 150 years. This kind of history does offer them legitimacy that multiparty and third party systems do not have. As it has been put to the common system in America, a candidate gets to win an election by being able to gain more votes than the other candidates. This kind of system is named as a winner-take – all system because there is no better reward or anything for the candidates who come second. For this reason, the parties aim to have as many supporters as possible. There is good reason to set up a party that shall get the votes, but not be able to win the election. As a result, the two political parties get to dominate the plural electoral system. This is clearly seen with the republican and the democrats who dominate the American system of politics. Over the years, this system has been laid to better suit the American people and their way of life. This has been the reason as to why the Americans have the Two-party system. Bibliography: Aldrich, J., 1995. Why parties? : The origin and transformation of political parties in America. Chicago [u.a.]: Univ. of Chicago Press.  Bailey, A., et al., 2010. The American pageant: a history of the American people. Vol. I, To 1877 Boston. MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning publishers. Bardes, B., et al., 2008. American Government & Politics Today 2009-2010 Edition: Cengage Learning publisher. Bibby, J and Maisel, L., 2002. Two parties-or more? : The American party system. Boulder, Co.: Westview Press. Bibby, J. and Maisel, L., 2003. Two Parties or More? The American Party System, 2nd edn. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Bowles, N., 1993. The government and politics of the United States. New York: St. Martins Press. Campbell, J., 2006. Party Systems and Realignments in the United States. Journal of Social Science History, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 359-386 Disch, J., 2002. The tyranny of the two-party system New York: Columbia Univ. Press. Duverger, M., 1963. Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Taylor & Francis publishers. Gerring, J., 2001. Party ideologies in America, 1828 – 1996. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press. Herrnson, P. and Green, J., 2002. Multiparty politics in America: prospects and performance. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield publishers. Janda, k., Berry, M. and Goldman, J., 2012. The challenge of democracy: American government in global politics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth publishers. Lowi, T and romance J., 1998. Debating the two-party system. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Maisel, S. and Brewer, D., 2010. Parties and elections in America: the electoral process. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield publishers. McKay, D., 2009. American politics and society. Chichester, U.K.; Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. McKeever, R. and Davies, P., 2012. Politics USA, 3rd edn. London; United Kingdom: Pearson publisher. McSweeney, D. and Zvesper, J., 1991. American Political Parties: The Formation, Decline and Reform of the American Political System. London; United Kingdom: Routledge publisher. Milkis, S. and Rhodes, J., 2007. George W. Bush, the Republican Party, and the American Party System Perspectives. Journal on Politics, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 461-488. Miller, G. and Schofield, N., 2003. Activists and Partisan Realignment in the United States. Journal of American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 245-260 Nagel, S., 1989. Higher goals for America: doing better than the best. Lanham: University Press of America. Ray, S., 1999. Modern comparative politics: approaches, methods and issues. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India publishers. Sartori, G. and Mair., 2005. Parties and party systems: a framework for analysis. Colchester: ECPR publishers. Schaffner, B., 2012. Politics, parties, and elections in America. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning publishers. Schmidt, W., et al., 2010. American government & politics today: Texas edition. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage learning publishers. Siaroff, A., 2009. Comparing political regimes: a thematic introduction to comparative politics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Singh, R., 2003. Governing America: the politics of a divided democracy. Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press Smith, R., 2003. Encyclopedia of African American politics. New York, NY: Facts On File publishers. Sundquist, J., 1983. Dynamics of the party system: alignment and realignment of political parties in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution publishers. Welch, S., et al., 2010.Understanding American government. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage learning publishers. Wilson, Q., 2009. American government: brief version. Boston: Wadsworth publishers. Read More