Party System in the United States - Case Study Example

Party system in the United s Partisan politics in the United s was never intended to be the mode of politics inthis nation by its founding fathers and the development of this system came about because of the differences in opinion concerning various issues. The two party system of the United States began to emerge during the 1790s and this was mainly due to the opposing opinions about the powers which had been given to the federal government by the various states. The consequence of the beginnings of the two-party system was the formation of two early parties, mainly the Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party. While this was the case, a consensus between these two parties led to an end, for a while at least, of the partisan politics that had began to emerge, leading to a period that has come to be known as the Era of Good Feelings. However, this era did not last for too long as partisan politics was later revived in the late 1820s when there was a split in the Democratic-Republican Party into the Jacksonian Democrats, and the Whig Party. While the Jacksonian Democrats became the predecessors of the modern Democratic Party and the Whig Party evolved into the Republican Party; these becoming the two main, and most dominant, parties in the United States (Gustafson 433). These two parties have become completely dominant in the politics of the United States, having developed and run a system that has come to be termed as a duopoly, since they have carved up almost all the political power in the country. Despite the fact that the political landscape is dominated by only two parties, with others having negligible following within the population, most Americans have been found to be in favor of the two-party system. This is mainly because these two parties have dominated the politics of the entire nation for a long time, and as such, have come to be an essential part of the American political system. This has created a situation where any other parties that have attempted to join the political scene have has a difficult time because in the minds of most Americans, they do not have the political legitimacy that the Democrats and Republicans have. The current political system can be considered to be self-perpetuating and this is mainly because of the fact that as most individuals grow up, they come to identify with one of the two dominant parties, since most often follow the political views and ideas of their parents. One of the reasons why the two-party system came to develop in the United States is because of the diverse polarizing issues that have developed throughout American history, since these have often caused division among the electorate. When an issue develops, it has become common for the Republicans and Democrats to take different sides of the issues involved and this has ensured that the current system is maintained; killing any opportunity for a strong bipartisan relationship to develop. Thus, as the two parties vie with each other on almost every issue, they end up ensuring that the system is perpetuated while the opportunity for newer parties to come to the fore is minimized (Anzia 25). The earliest history of the two-party system of the United States began during the formulation of the constitution as well as immediately after independence when there was contention concerning the kind of powers that the federal government was to have. As a result of this point of contention, there developed two factions in the American political systems which can be considered to be the precursors of the two-party system in the country. These factions were named the Federalists, who were for the implementation of the constitution, and the Anti-federalists, who felt that the constitution had given the federal government too much power that was legally supposed to remain with the state. These two proto-parties had extremely different views concerning the future of the United States and these views were, in most circumstances, often dominated by the background of the contenders in the two groups. The Federalists, on one hand, were comprised of people who were quite well educated and resided in the regions alongside the eastern coastline. Moreover, they were also quite wealthy, and it is possible that their main motivation was to protect their newfound leadership of the federation at all costs (Appleby 15). The Anti-federalists, on the other hand, represented the people who were not so well off as well as those who lived in those states which were not along the eastern seaboard and these campaigned for the ascendancy of the individual states over the federal administration. In the beginning of the divisions between the two factions, as the American Constitution was being drafted, the Federalists were of the belief that the power of the confederation was too weak to function effectively either domestically or when dealing with foreign powers. It was their opinion, led by John Adams and Alexander Hamilton that a strong federal government would be able to take care of the needs of all the states in matters of foreign policy and would also be able to control the states from taking measures which were deemed to be excessive. Such excessive measures by the states, it was suggested, included matters such as declaring war on each other in case of the development of any serious disputes between them. The proposal for a strong federal government was vehemently opposed by the Anti-federalists, who rallied behind Thomas Jefferson and believed that the Federalists wanted to monopolize power over the new nation. Instead, they proposed that the power of the federal government over the states be kept weak and that state power remain supreme. While this may have been the case in the early American republic, the two political divisions did not end with the resolution of their concerns but instead remained active, although neither of them had the cohesion to be a political party in the modern sense (Waldstreicher 674). With the election of Thomas Jefferson to the American presidency, the Federalists ceased to be a serious political threat and a majority of the Americans of the time came to identify themselves as Democratic Republicans. This ended any of the previous political divisions between them and as a result, the Era of Good Feeling was ushered, where there were debates by the public on a diverse number of issues yet they were not addressed through political parties. The first real political party in the United States that was created in the United States was the Democratic Party, which was created by the supporters of Andrew Jackson after losing the elections of 1824. This party was formed mainly for the purpose of creating an opposition against the government of John Quincy Adams, who had won a majority of the electoral votes but not the popular vote. The strength of this new political party was seen four years later when Jackson was elected president, having developed a system where it gained most of its support from the grassroots. As a result, there developed the Whig Party, which was a loose coalition of those individuals who were against the policies pursued by President Jackson (Riley 501). The next few decades saw the continued development of these two parties from loose coalitions to formidable opponents in a diverse number of issues which involved the American society at the time. One of the most polarizing issues between the two parties was that concerning slavery and out of this contention, the Republican Party was formed in the 1840s out of those individuals among the Democrats and the Whigs who supported the abolition (Kaba 183). The rise of the Republican Party came about mainly because of the fact that neither the Democrats nor the Whigs had been in a position to adequately address the issue of slavery. The Republican Party was dominant in the mainly abolitionist north while the Democratic Party dominated the anti-abolitionist south and the rivalry between the two parties continued even after the Civil War. For a brief period after the war, African Americans were allowed to vote and these mostly voted Republican because of their suspicions concerning the Democrats, who were often associated with slavery. This resolve among the African Americans was made firmer with the continued Democratic attempts to discourage them to vote (Carmichael 805). The United States is a nation that has a well developed two-party system which is founded on the basis of a winner takes all philosophy. Because of this, there has developed a sophisticated system between the Republicans and the Democrats which encourages them to be as large as possible so that they can be dominant in the political space. These parties have put measures in place to ensure that there is a smoothing of the differences that might occur not only between the various candidates within the party, but also within their voter bases as well. Because of the stability established through this system, it is normally extremely difficult for a third party to make it through the political landscape of the United States (Andersen 299). Such parties might receive some popular votes, but when it comes to the electoral votes, this is normally not the case because these votes are often reserved for the two dominant political parties. While no individual or organization within the United States has the right to prevent the formation of parties other than the two dominant ones, it has become the trend for most of the new parties formed to fail and this has been mainly because of the creation of an environment which is not favorable to them. Thus, while there is the freedom for the formation of other parties in America, the system that has been established, while being plural, also tends to hinder the efforts by these parties to win votes in almost all the elections. The winner takes all system that has developed in the United States has made it extremely difficult for there to be any meaningful political party that might cause both the Republicans and Democrats difficulties in their dominance of the political arena. Unlike in some countries where smaller parties are given representation according to the percentage of votes that they received, the system in the United States can be considered hostile to those parties that come in second because they are not represented in the legislature. The electoral system of the United States tends to be among the biggest propagators of the two-party system which ensures that the Democrats and Republicans remain dominant at the expense of smaller parties. The Electoral College, for example, has created a situation where in all but two states, the individual who wins the popular vote takes all the electoral votes of that state; this is highly detrimental to other parties which may receive a large percentage of the popular vote yet end up missing any representation. Those individuals who belong to parties that are outside the two most popular and accepted ones, despite being able to do well against them tend not to receive any electoral votes, meaning that they remain in the background of the political scene of the United States. Thus, the rules for elections in the United States tend to be highly hostile to other political parties that are neither Republican nor Democratic, and this has for many decades served, and continues to serve, the perpetuation of the two-party system. Because of the continued perpetuation of the system, it has become virtually impossible for independent candidates to receive any electoral votes with the last winner of such a vote being George Wallace during the election of 1968 (Abramson, et al 495). Since the United States’ two-party system discourages the development of proportional representation, there has developed a system where the diverse political parties are not able to gain any form of representation. As a result, the system in the America is based on the parties’ attempt to gain a majority so that they can remain dominant over the system. In recent years, among the major issues that have come to polarize the political parties of the United States as well as functioned, albeit indirectly, as a means of perpetuating the two-party system has been national security. Some Democrats are of the belief that the policies which have been put in place so far have gone too far and are in fact eroding the freedoms which have been guaranteed to all the citizens and foreigners on American soil. Republicans, on the other hand, believe that what has been done so far is not enough and that more needs to be done to ensure that the nation is in a state of the highest security. The two political parties have remained polarised on this issue because both have very different approaches to national security and each tends to attempt to block the policies that their rivals attempt to put in place simply because they do not agree with them (Bligh 1367). The Democrats’ approach to national security is based on the belief that guaranteeing the freedoms of the people is the best way to ensure their security because if they feel secure in their own country and in their government’s ability to protect them, then the security risk to them would be greatly diminished. The Republicans believe that the best way to deal with matters concerning national security is by taking away some of the freedoms which people enjoy so that the government can have more room to ensure that they are protected in every way. In other words, it can be considered to be the loss of a few freedoms for the good of everyone. Thus, the polarisation of these parties on matters concerning national security among many other issues has created a situation where it is extremely difficult for there to be some consensus that might bring these two parties together and end partisanship. In conclusion, it can be said that the development of the two-party system in the United States, while being divisive in some aspects has also created a stable environment for the politics of this country. This has been mainly because of the fact that while the two parties may have different approaches on how to deal with the diverse issues affecting the nation, both of them have worked hand in hand to ensure the propagation of a kind of balance of power in the American political scene. This has been a source of stability for the United States when compared to other democratic countries where there is often a reliance on coalitions in order for a government to be formed. In such situations, the leaders have to handle the coalitions very carefully because any collapse of the coalition government would mean new elections. This has not been the case in the United States because of the winner takes all policy where there can never be any dispute concerning the leadership of the nation. Therefore, it can be said that the American two-party system has developed to suit the different needs of its people and has developed because of the political environment that has dominated the nation since its independence. Works Cited Abramson, Paul R., et al. "Challenges to the American Two-Party System: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 Presidential Elections." Political Research Quarterly 53.3 (2000): 495-522. Andersen, Lisa. "From Unpopular to Excluded: Prohibitionists and the Ascendancy of a Democratic-Republican System, 1888-1912." Journal of Policy History : JPH 24.2 (2012): 288-318. Anzia, Sarah F. "Partisan Power Play: The Origins of Local Election Timing as an American Political Institution." Studies in American Political Development 26.1 (2012): 24-49. Appleby, Joyce. "The Intellectual Underpinnings of American Democracy." Daedalus 136.3 (2007): 14-23. Bligh, Gur. "Extremism in the Electoral Arena: Challenging the Myth of American Exceptionalism." Brigham Young University Law Review 2008.5 (2008): 1367-440. Carmichael, S. "The Gettysburg Museum of the American Civil War." The Journal of American History 96.3 (2009): 804-8. Gustafson, Sandra M. "The Cosmopolitan Origins of the American Self." Early American Literature 47.2 (2012): 433-41. Kaba, Amadu Jacky. "African American Women Voters: Review Article." Review of Black Political Economy 38.3 (2011): 183-203. Riley, Russell L. "Vindicating Andrew Jackson: The 1828 Election and the Rise of the Two-Party System." The Journal of American History 97.2 (2010): 501-2. Waldstreicher, David. "The Birth of Modern Politics: Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, and the Election of 1828/Vindicating Andrew Jackson: The 1828 Election and the Rise of the Two Party System." Journal of the Early Republic 30.4 (2010): 674-8. Read More