• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

'Parties do not matter anymore.' Discuss.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

'Parties do not matter anymore.' Discuss. Some, such as political commentator David Broder in his book The Party's Over: The Failure of Politics in America, would argue that parties certainly don't matter any more in American politics. Many of the parties' traditional roles or functions have been assumed by pressure groups or the mass media, and clear party loyalties are less apparent now than fifty years ago. However, others would argue that the decline of parties has been vastly exaggerated and that parties still have an important and significant role in American politics. This essay will consider these two arguments and in doing so, establish whether parties really do matter anymore. One aspect of American politics where it could certainly be argued that parties do not matter any more is in elections. The rise of primaries and caucuses, in the aftermath of the publication of the Commission on Party Structure and Delegate's report - Mandate for Change(1970), has put the power or selection in the hands of the people, and not in the hands of the party, thereby reducing the significance of the parties. Moreover, they have led to candidate-centred, rather than party-centred, forms of politics, because those who are electorally victorious owe their success to the campaign organisations that they established during the primaries rather than to the party apparatus. ...read more.

Middle

Despite dealignment, almost two-thirds of Americans still identify with one of the principal parties. Furthermore, although the proportion of 'independents' has grown, many of these 'independents' lean towards either the Democrats or the Republicans. This is reflected by the extent to which politics is still dominated by the two main parties. In 2000, only two seats in Congress and two state governorships were not controlled by the two main parties. Moreover, many would argue that voting loyalties in Congress - although weak in comparison with the UK - are stronger than ever If parties were declining in importance, a decline in partisanship could be anticipated. in 1995, recorded votes in the Senate and in the House showed the highest levels of partisanship since 1922 and 1920 respectively. The trial of President Clinton and Bush v. Gore (2000) have only served to further heighten this partisanship. One could perhaps credit this mini party revival with the modernisation of the party organisations over the last twenty years. In the Republican party, the Brock reforms (1977 - 1981) have strengthened the position of the Republican National Committee, which is the central party organisation. It gained a permanent head-quarters a block away from Capitol Hill, and by 1984 the number of staff it employed reached six hundred, a threefold increase from 1976. ...read more.

Conclusion

This means that what we really see in America is fifty Democratic and fifty Republican parties, and not two strong national party organisations. Similarly the dispersal of power in the US federal system makes it very difficult for parties to establish a consistent party platform. How can a central party organisation for example, ensure elected state officials in Kentucky vote the same as their counterparts in Massachusetts. The diminished role of the parties in election, the theories of regionalism, federalism and of the separation of powers means that party discipline in very weak in Congress. Candidates are not reliant on their parties for re-election, this is in the 'gift of the folks back home,' - with pressure group help - and the party leadership in Congress is unable to offer any significant promotion because the executive and legislative branches are not fused, and so, legislators are under less pressure to toe the party line, and thus more receptive to outside influence. Although the general trend has seen the traditional roles of the parties farmed out to other organisations, to say that parties do not mater anymore would a vast oversimplification. Parties do still matter in American politics, and many would argue that the extent to which they matter has somewhat increased over the past twenty years. What is perhaps a more accurate conclusion is that parties, because of regionalism, federalism and the separation of powers, always have, and probably always will be somewhat insignificant, particularly in comparison with their UK counterparts. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Political Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Political Philosophy essays

  1. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the system of choosing presidential candidates.

    The parties' reduced power of nomination on the other hand, has allowed candidates who might not have been chosen the chance to stand, as candidacy no longer relies on a contender's loyalty, rank or service within a party. President Clinton, considered a Washington outsider, would have not been able to stand had it not been for the primary system.

  2. Accounts for the changes in voting behaviour in the last 30 years in UK ...

    the issue concerned, he or she must have some attitude towards or opinion about the issue, different parties must be perceived as having different policies on the issue and the elector must vote for the party whose position on the issue is, or is perceived to be, closest to that of the voter concerned.

  1. Socialist uses of workers' inquiry

    But what effect do these conditions, which are inseparable from the growth of productive capital, have upon the determination of wages? The greater division of labor enables one laborer to accomplish the work of five, 10, or 20 laborers; it therefore increases competition among the laborers fivefold, tenfold, or twentyfold.

  2. Russia's Political Party System as an Obstacle to Democratization

    ability to attract strong candidates who would be beholden to the party. But this incentive is undercut by the deposit method, resorted to by 860 single-member district candidates comprising more than a third of the total, which fosters ties to the wealthy and powerful-either by encouraging prospective candidates to court

  1. To what extent do recent elections in the UK and the USA support the ...

    (E.C Ladd, 1997: 15) While in America the situation is mirrored, in 1996, "29% of voters strongly identified with Republican or Democrats." While in 1964 this figure was 38% (D. McKay, 2002: 35) "Voters are becoming more ambivalent towards their parties."

  2. Explain why the Liberals were electorally so successful so often, 1868-85?

    of Liberal policy as a comfort; the National Education League were similarly pleased at the plans for a free and equal state education; and the Liberal Society itself followed the Victorian nonconformist ideals of Church disestablishment just as the party did.7 The Liberals also drew their popular support from areas

  1. "Ideology played relatively small role in the revolutions of 1848" Discuss.

    At the beginning of the revolutions 1848, the ideology was extremely important. All social classes were in misery, because the outcome of economic changes. Everybody, from peasants to bourgeoisie, believed that liberal reforms will bring changes for better. Without the ideology, the hope for a different life, the revolutions would

  2. Nationalism is inherently expansionist and destructive - discuss

    In addition the formation of the independent, liberal, democratic Czech Republic during the collapse of the Soviet Union shows indisputable strong liberal nationalist feelings. Liberal nationalism therefore remains a significant strand of nationalism and is neither expansionist nor destructive by nature, but instead respects and regards each individual nation.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work