{"id":38,"date":"2020-02-14T15:38:25","date_gmt":"2020-02-14T15:38:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/?p=38"},"modified":"2020-12-03T00:51:12","modified_gmt":"2020-12-03T00:51:12","slug":"welcome-and-introduction-to-from-the-field","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/2020\/02\/14\/welcome-and-introduction-to-from-the-field\/","title":{"rendered":"Welcome and Introduction to From the Field"},"content":{"rendered":"

Welcome to From The Field<\/em>!\u00a0 This blog series will feature student posts from the field of Political Science, during their \u201cfieldwork\u201d in their Politics classes and experiences at Messiah.<\/p>\n

From the Field Spring 2020<\/em><\/p>\n

This spring, From the Field<\/em> will highlight student posts that share findings from their research on US party system realignment, including its present-day relevance, in the department\u2019s Parties and Elections class, which ran last fall. Each month the series will feature a post on one of the historical party eras in America.<\/p>\n

Under its relatively new constitution, the United States spawned one of the earliest modern party systems, with party labels first appearing on the ballot in the election of 1800.\u00a0 Over the course of history, the American political system has had six party systems that have generally been dominated by two key competitors in each era, which centered on issues and groups in the electorate that fed the pattern of competition. (Though political scientists do quibble about the exact beginning and end of some the eras.)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
System<\/strong><\/td>\nPeriod<\/strong><\/td>\nParties<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First<\/td>\n1800-1828<\/td>\nDemocratic-Republican & Federalist<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Second<\/td>\n1828-1860<\/td>\nDemocratic & Whig<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Third<\/td>\n1860-1896<\/td>\nDemocratic & Republican<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fourth<\/td>\n1896-1932<\/td>\nDemocratic & Republican<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fifth<\/td>\n1932-1968<\/td>\nDemocratic & Republican<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Sixth<\/td>\n1968-?<\/td>\nDemocratic & Republican<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n

Often, people ask why, in comparison to other longstanding democracies, the United States has fewer parties.\u00a0 The electoral system \u2013 or the decision rule for determining how elections are decided \u2013 makes a difference.<\/p>\n

Maurice Duverger[1]<\/a>, a French political scientist, made the claim that the type of electoral system (means for making decisions based on votes) impacts the number of parties that effectively gain office and influence policy.\u00a0 Single-member systems – also known as \u201cfirst past the post\u201d \u2013 give constituents the vote for one representative that serves a specific group of citizens; unless parties have concentrations in different regions of a system, the top two parties tend to get the votes.\u00a0 Without votes, and thus seats, smaller parties do not get to be part of the formal lawmaking process.\u00a0 Proportional representation systems, in which the percentage of votes translates into a percentage of legislative seats for parties meeting a certain minimum threshold of the vote, tend to produce a greater variety of parties; the result sometimes requires parties to form a coalition to have a majority for passing legislation.<\/p>\n

The United States has a single-member system for its national and state legislatures.\u00a0 With a single-member system \u2013 in which most contests are often decided by candidates gaining a plurality of (the most) votes \u2013 it can be difficult for additional parties to gain enough support to win office, especially at the national level.\u00a0 Although other factors can also influence outcomes, this element has a significant influence.\u00a0 In addition, the way that major parties respond to newer and smaller parties also inhibits the chance for multiple parties to win office.<\/p>\n

As chronicled in James Sundquist\u2019s influential work Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties<\/a>,<\/em> when third parties have sprung up \u2013 such as the Farmer or Populist parties in the late 1800s \u2013 they have not been able to gain enough traction to win office.\u00a0 Sometimes these parties agreed to be part of a fusion ticket with major parties, in which both party names appeared for the candidates, which ultimately benefited the major part.\u00a0 In other cases, the major parties saw the value of some or all of the minor party\u2019s platform and co-opted it, taking the steam out of the support for the alternate group; however, those parties still play a role in shifting the focus of the larger system.\u00a0 The last time a new party came on the scene and had a national impact by winning seats in Congress, the Republican Party simply displaced the Whigs as the second contender in the system.\u00a0 But the lack of shifting parties does not mean that the system stays stagnant.<\/p>\n

As Sundquist and others note, realignments in party systems occur when there is a change in the parties regularly competing for and winning office.\u00a0 This change can result from several factors.\u00a0 Most obviously, realignment occurs when one party replaces another.\u00a0 However, realignment can also occur, as it has since 1860, by changes in the parties\u2019 issue stances, or in the groups of voters that align with the parties.\u00a0 Moreover, the change can focus on a specific election \u2013 a \u201ccritical election\u201d such as 1932 \u2013 or happen more gradually in a \u201csecular\u201d realignment.\u00a0 This spring\u2019s arc of From the Field<\/em> will explore not only the contours of the American party systems but also their insights for the current state of party politics.<\/p>\n

Looking at the timeline, it is clear that the current party system, which launched in the late 60s, before suffering a decline in the 80s<\/a> and then a resurgence in the 90s, has been the longest-lived; but one might wonder whether it has outlived its effectiveness.\u00a0 As scholar Morris Fiorina, one of the most influential American electoral scholars has noted in his writings, neither party has been able to gain and sustain a majority over the last 25 years<\/a>.\u00a0 (For further details on electoral trends, Change and Continuity in the 2016 and 2018 Elections<\/a><\/em>, as well as editions for prior elections, offers a wealth of data and analysis.)<\/p>\n

The parties have compounded their problems by legislating towards their base, despite the fact that marginal supporters\/independents and moderates compose at least as large,<\/a> if not a greater, portion of the public than those groups that solidly support one of the two major parties.\u00a0 This \u201coverreach<\/a>\u201d \u2013 as Fiorina calls it \u2013 has resulted in a lot more instability of voting blocs within the public. \u00a0Fiorina sketches the reasons for this trend in this video from PolicyEd<\/a>, a series produced by the Hoover Institute at Stanford University,<\/p>\n

With a two-party system, in order to represent enough of the public in order to govern with legitimacy, parties typically must be what Otto Kirchheimer[2]<\/a> called \u201ccatch-all parties\u201d that appeal to broader groups.\u00a0 If they fail to do so, not only can it produce political instability, but also seriously undermine the representative function of political parties, which, in turn, can lead more and more voters to question the legitimacy of the system. \u00a0However, as noted by historian David Moss in this episode of the Hidden Brain<\/em> podcast<\/a>, situations such as these can end constructively.\u00a0 \u00a0How \u2013 and to what extent \u2013 does examining realignments of past systems help us understand the possible developments of the present? Read on and see\u2026<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

About the\u00a0From the Field blog editor\u00a0(Dr. Robin Lauermann): \u00a0I currently serve as a Professor of Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations, which hosts this blog site. I have specific expertise in two sub-fields.\u00a0 Within American politics, I teach and research on topics related to political institutions, public policy, and political behavior, with special consideration as to how they impact the functioning of our political system.\u00a0 Within Comparative Politics, I look at many of the same themes, but within the regional areas of Latin America and Europe.\u00a0 Above all, my passion and work focus on empowering people \u2013 students, colleagues, and citizens \u2013 to be able to better understand our political system in order to navigate it and evaluate it constructively.\u00a0 With this series, I hope to provide such a forum, which can serve as a resource for citizens in evaluating policy, candidates and our system.<\/p>\n

Check out the prior department blog,<\/a> written by now-alumna, Casey Daggett.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Duverger, Maurice.\u00a0Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State<\/em>. Methuen, 1959.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Kirchheimer, Otto. “The Transformation of the Western European Party Systems.”\u00a0Political Parties and Political Development\u00a06 (1966): 177-200.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Welcome to From The Field!\u00a0 This blog series will feature student posts from the field of Political Science, during their \u201cfieldwork\u201d in their Politics classes and experiences at Messiah. From the Field Spring 2020 This spring, From the Field will highlight student posts that share findings from their research on US party system realignment, including […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":58,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12096,12736],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-38","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-from-the-field","category-political-parties-in-america"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/58"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":68,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38\/revisions\/68"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.messiah.edu\/politicsinternationalrelations\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}