Comparison of Republican and Democratic Parties - Report Example

Comparison of Republican and Democratic Parties Introduction When voters go for election, they need to have an idea aboutwhat the predominant parties in the election stands for as this will guide their choices. Republicans and Democratic parties have been the predominant ones in the United States, as they have existed since the country’s humble beginnings. Ideas and philosophies held by the parties often dictate the laws and legislations that get passed, so these should be fully understood by the electorate. Significant differences exist between the two groups because of their understanding of the purpose of government; this lays out the battleground. History The history of the Democratic Party can be traced to 1792 when Thomas Jefferson formed it; his intention was to create a stable government that would meet citizens’ needs. Several other parties were present during the 1800s but the Democratic Party defeated them in terms of popularity and following. It eventually came to be known as the sponsoring party for a series of presidents like John Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt as well as Woodrow Wilson. One of the party’s key influences is in the 1960s when it contributed to the civil rights movement; John F. Kennedy was particularly instrumental in its reinforcement and so was Lyndon Johnson (Gerring, 1998). In present day, the Democratic Party is the sponsoring party for the current president and has the largest numbers of representation in the Senate and House of representatives. The Republic party began in 1854 but was able to sponsor its first president some years later through Abraham Lincoln’s support. Its key ideology during formation and present day is that the government should not meddle in things that the people can do for themselves. This party has held office for longer than the Democratic Party as it boasts of 6 decades in the oval office while its opponents have only have five. Influential Republican presidents include Ronald Reagan who played a key role in getting the country back on its feet after an economic recession. In addition, he led people to have confidence in the country’s economic fundamentals particularly with tax reductions as well as his methodology towards foreign policy (Hacker & Pierson, 2010). View point regarding key issues Democrats and Republicans have distinct party ideologies; their perspectives on certain issues like the role of government, immigration, human rights and minority rights are divergent. However, this does not imply that members within these camps tend to agree on all the issues held as party positions since disagreements often arise internally. Overall, Republicans’ key principle is that people should take personal responsibility for their lives so a minimalist role ought to be played by government. For this reason, they uphold neoliberal values that tend to support market economics as well as big business; Republicans also affirm that the government should not try to control people’s access to health, education or unemployment, as these are personal choices (Ellis & Stimson, 2012). The party advocates for the protection of people’s freedoms, dignity, responsibility and access to justice; on the other hand, these rights must not come at the expense of traditional values. Republicans have also been regarded as a conservative lot that believes in having a moral society, so it has supported conservative views on certain issues. Conversely, the Democratic Party’s main principle is liberal philosophy; here the government’s key part in managing and controlling the economy. Members of the party also affirm that wealth redistribution is a government mandate that ought to be done in order to safeguard the needs of the disadvantaged in society. While Republicans claim that the government should not take care of people’s personal needs, Democrats affirm that it is the government’s responsibility to provide welfare, health care, education opportunities as well as food stamps to its people. Providing a social safety net through taxes, welfare and other alternatives is a key pillar for the Democratic Party throughout history. Given the above differences in principles, it is not surprising that the two parties often take different positions with regard to a number of economic, social and political issues. In the area of Healthcare, Democrats are highly committed to the provision of a healthcare system that is acceptable and wide reaching for all citizens in the country. It is believed that the use of health care insurance financed by the government is one way of achieving this goal. Additionally, in the field of healthcare, Democrats claim that medical research and findings in stem cells should be supported and encouraged. Conversely, Republicans hold that healthcare should become more affordable to the American public through reduced taxes for healthcare purchasers. However, they are against provision of the same service through Medicaid to those on welfare as this minimizes other individuals’ ability to get the same coverage (Martin et. al., 2012). In the area of education, the Democratic Party expands its primary principle of providing government support to citizens by stating that educational opportunities should be available to all children. They believe that student loan rates are not practical and should be reduced while college tuition should become a tax-deductible fee. Conversely, their Republican counterparts hold that making such a move would be tantamount to government interference and would be an attempt to redistribute wealth. They claim that the process of running schools should be left to local and federal states; however, at least scholastic achievement should be a sought after trait for them. Children in the entire country need to be proficient in English as this prepares them for entrance into tertiary education as well as the workplace. Accountability within the education system should be instated through standardized testing, as this will ensure that schools create the desired results. However, management and methods of working in these establishments should be a matter managed and handled by the authorities mandated to carry out those responsibilities. Democrats affirm that tests are problematic to teachers as they do not get to students’ actual problems and may sometimes be used to lock out learners from certain opportunities. The latter group also argues that local parent-teacher associations may not have the capacity to define literacy, and this should be a task carried out by school unions. This willingness to get involved in the running of schools is also in line with their attitude concerning those children who fail at basic skills; democrats support their forced stay in schools (Shively, 2011). Immigration is yet another matter that the two parties do not agree on as their ideas reflect party ideologies held over the years. Republicans claim that illegal immigrants have no place in the country because they come to minimize opportunities available to actual US citizens. They also explain that such immigrants enter the country because of slackened border security and thus lead to increased crime levels within the country. Increased presence of narcotics, gang violence, human rights abuses among children and women as well as modern day slavery are all consequences of failed border security according to them. On the other hand, their colleagues in the Democratic Party claim that even though illegal immigrants should not be in the country, those who are already present ought to be accorded the opportunity to work and pay taxes just like other Americans. This view is in line with their party ideology of being liberal and willing to embrace minorities in order to expand their support base. However, they still believe that borders should be made secure; it is what the government does with the immigrants already in the country that causes a rift with the Republicans. Democrats argue that such an attitude should come from the government because it is the only superpower; therefore, it needs to demonstrate unconditional acceptance to others by offering them help or amnesty when they enter the country. This party also supports the provision of legal channels of identification for foreigners within the country; non-emergency care ought to be extended to all who enter the country regardless of their citizenship status. Job creation and management of the economy have attracted contrary opinions from both sides of the divide with the Republicans upholding their support for market economics. Members of this party believe that the government should exercise restraint in expenditure, so tax reforms should be enacted in order to reduce taxes. These ideas should be held in place even during periods when the economy is weak; Republicans believe that the market has the capacity to correct itself. Therefore, if the country wants to enjoy economic growth and more jobs, then players should be granted as much freedom as possible through favorable tax and limited government interference. Democrats hold that taxes for high-income earners should be increases in order to minimize the national debt and to support fair trade. The party believes that markets fail as was seen through the 2007 and 2008 economic crisis, so government should play a part in the recovery of those individuals from economic turmoil (Noel, 2013). Overall, Democrats say that the economy may be too complicated for people to navigate on their own, so they require guidance from government officials. This is the reason why labor unions have historically flourished under Democratic leadership and deteriorated during Republican reign. Such a mentality has led to increased federal presence in state-run affairs as they believe that local councils cannot do this job as well as they can. Security issues also reflect party ideologies with Republicans supporting decreased presence at home and increased presence globally while Democrats support increased homeland security. Concerning the issue of Iraq, Democrats believe that the government should heighten its withdrawal from Iraq, since the liberal philosophy holds that the country should have less of a presence in the international environment, but should be more concerned with matters at home. They believe that if the government were to reduce its military expenditure, it could use it in more pressing security concerns at home. They claim that the best tactic is to negotiate with perceived adversaries as this could result in peaceful outcomes and wins for both sides. Republicans affirm that America should be protected both at home and in the military; therefore, they call for a repair of the military and also support the war against terrorism currently taking place globally and more so at home. Republicans claim that the US needs to develop its own oil reserves in order to minimize dependence on foreign oil from conflict-prone regions. They believe that the United States military should only leave Iraq after recording success in the nation, which is a consistent idea with its ideology on heightening America’s presence in international matters. Members of this party affirm that the United States is the only super power and should not be afraid of acting decisively in international matters even if this means that it must sometimes act alone (Appleby, 2005). Current Issue The divide between the Democrats and the Republics has recently led to a clash over the presence of a safety net in the budget; the Obama-led Democrats believe that social spending ought to be increased while the Republicans claim that the budget deficit can be reduced by minimizing social spending. In April 2014, the Republican side, through Representative Paul Ryan, raised a proposal in which the next budget would contain sliced social expenditure. However, this plan also supported an increase in the provision of military defense programs, yet it targeted several social programs like housing vouchers, national parks as well as environmental regulation. The upcoming November election will lead to continued features of this same proposal in the future; the budget committee will not be making any decisions yet until it gets to the end of the year. Republican house members will be required to support the Ryan budget because by the time Democrat incumbents enter, the proposal will already have gone through. The above plan was quite different from what President Obama had in mind when he gave his proposal for the year 2015 in March 2014. He stated that he wanted to boost spending allocated to low income families; further, he felt that infrastructure projects should be given a priority and so should spending allocated to college students. This plan was also in line with the request to be made to high-income earners to pay their fair share of tax; a polar opposite of the Republican position. The White house attacked Ryan’s proposal by affirming that it would increase taxes for the middle class by as much as $2,000 in order to provide a tax haven for those who earn $1 million and above (Bishop, 2014). Sharp differences arose between the two parties because of their ideological position; Democrats said that Ryan was after benefits for the elderly since his budget involved reducing aid to the poor and the elderly in Medicare, repealing Obama’s signature legislation on healthcare, and doing away with state-controlled food stamps. These differences arose owing to divergent opinions on safety nets, as Republicans believe that the war on poverty cannot be won through government involvement while Democrats think that this is the way to go. The matter is yet to be decided on but it illustrates how these various teams approach major issues concerning their nations; their ideologies dictate their actions. Conclusion From the analysis above, Republicans firmly believe in the prevalence of small government; they also uphold principles of cultural traditionalism. Therefore, they are hostile towards social support policies, illegal immigration, and higher taxes by government. Conversely, Democrats affirm that government should secure people’s right to have education, health and freedom, so they are liberal in nature. For this reason, they support increased amnesty to foreigners, social support and healthcare, education reform and US presence in Iraq. References Appleby, J. (2005). The American Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bishop, B. (2014). Federal complexity and perception of state party ideology. Illinois: Northern Illinois Press Ellis, C. & Stimson, J. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gerring, J. (1998). Party ideologies in America, 1828-1996. NY: Cambridge University Press. Hacker, J. & Pierson, P. (2010). Winner take-all politics. NY: Simon and Schuster. Martin, K., Cohen, M., Karol, D., Masket, S., Noel, H. & Zaller, J. (2012). A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics. Perspectives on Politics 10(3), 571-597. Noel, H. (2013). Political Ideologies and Political Parties in America. Cambridge: Bawn, Shively, P. (2011). Power and choice: An introduction to political science. NY: McGraw-Hill. Read More