12.1: The Powers of the Presidency

12.1.1: Expressed Powers

Learning Objective

Discuss the expressed powers of the President in the Constitution of the United States

Key Points

• Article Two of the United States Constitution creates the executive branch of the government, consisting of the President, the Vice President, and other executive officers chosen by the President.
• Perhaps the most important of all presidential powers is command of the United States Armed Forces as commander-in-chief. While the power to declare war is constitutionally vested in Congress, the president commands and directs the military and is responsible for planning military strategy.
• Along with the armed forces, the president also directs U.S. foreign policy. Through the Department of State and the Department of Defense, the president is responsible for the protection of Americans abroad and of foreign nationals in the United States.
• The president decides whether to recognize new nations and new governments, and negotiates treaties with other nations, which become binding on the United States when approved by two-thirds vote of the Senate.
• The president also has the power to nominate federal judges, including members of the United States courts of appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States.
• The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the President from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress.

Key Terms

senatorial courtesy

an unwritten political custom (or constitutional convention) in the United States whereby the president consults the senior U.S. Senator of his political party of a given state before nominating any person to a federal vacancy within that Senator’s state

war powers resolution

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)[1] is a federal law intended to check the President’s power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. “

twenty-third amendment

Under the Twenty-third Amendment, the District of Columbia may choose no more electors than the state with the lowest number of electoral votes. No Senators, Representatives or federal officers may become Electors.

ineligibility clause

The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the president from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress.

Example

• While historically presidents initiated the process for going to war, critics have charged that there have been several conflicts in which presidents did not get official declarations, including Theodore Roosevelt’s military move into Panama in 1903, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the invasions of Grenada in 1983 and Panama in 1990.

The expressed powers of the President are those expressed in the Constitution of the United States.

President and Vice President

Article Two of the United States Constitution creates the executive branch of the government, consisting of the president, the vice president, and other executive officers chosen by the president. Clause 1 states that “the executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows. ” Clause one is a “vesting clause,” similar to other clauses in Articles 1 and 3, but it vests the power to execute the instructions of Congress, which has the exclusive power to make laws.

Clause 2 states the method for choosing electors in the Electoral College. Under the U.S. Constitution the president and vice president are chosen by electors, under a constitutional grant of authority delegated to the legislatures of the states and the District of Columbia. In other words, the constitution lets the state legislatures decide how electors are created. It does not define or delimit what process a state legislature may use to create its state’s college of electors. In practice, since the 1820s, state legislatures have generally chosen to create electors through an indirect popular vote. Each state chooses as many electors as it has Representatives and Senators in Congress. Under the Twenty-third Amendment, the District of Columbia may choose no more electors than the state with the lowest number of electoral votes. Senators, Representatives, or federal officers may not become electors.

Presidential Powers

Perhaps the most important of all presidential powers is commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. While the power to declare war is constitutionally vested in Congress, the president commands and directs the military and is responsible for planning military strategy. Congress, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, must authorize any troop deployments longer than 60 days, although that process relies on triggering mechanisms that never have been employed, rendering it ineffectual. Additionally, Congress provides a check on presidential military power through its control over military spending and regulation. While historically presidents initiated the process for going to war, critics have charged that there have been several conflicts in which presidents did not get official declarations, including Theodore Roosevelt’s military move into Panama in 1903, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the invasions of Grenada in 1983 and Panama in 1990. The “wars” waged in Iran (2001) and Afghanistan since (2003) are officially called “military engagements” authorized by Congress. Officially, the U.S. was not at war with the governments of those nations, but fought non-government terrorist groups.

Along with the armed forces, the president also directs U.S. foreign policy . Through the Department of State and the Department of Defense, the president is responsible for the protection of Americans abroad and of foreign nationals in the United States. The president decides whether to recognize new nations and new governments, and negotiates treaties with other nations, which become binding on the United States when approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate .

President Barack Obama meets Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, with Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada.

U.S. Foreign Policy Structure

The task of making foreign policy in the United States, according to the United States Constitution, is divided among different branches of government, with the executive branch having much of the decision-making authority, while the Senate ratifies treaties (2/3 vote needed to pass) and the Supreme Court rules on how to interpret treaties. Congress has a role in controlling appropriations for military expenditures.

The president is the head of the executive branch of the federal government and is constitutionally obligated to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed. ” Generally, a president may remove purely executive officials at his discretion. However, Congress can curtail and constrain a president’s authority to fire commissioners of independent regulatory agencies and certain inferior executive officers by statute. To manage the growing federal bureaucracy, presidents have gradually surrounded themselves with many layers of staff who were eventually organized into the Executive Office of the President of the United States.

The president also has the power to nominate federal judges, including members of the United States courts of appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States. However, these nominations require Senate confirmation. Securing Senate approval can provide a major obstacle for presidents who wish to orient the federal judiciary toward a particular ideological stance. When nominating judges to U.S. district courts, presidents often respect the long-standing tradition of Senatorial courtesy.

The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the president from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress. However, the president can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in one or both houses of Congress. For example, the president or other officials of the executive branch may draft legislation and then ask senators or representatives to introduce these drafts into Congress. The president can further influence the legislative branch through constitutionally mandated, periodic reports to Congress. These reports may be either written or oral, but today are given as the State of the Union address, which often outlines the president’s legislative proposals for the coming year.

12.1.2: Delegated Powers

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the “strict constructionists” and “loose constructionists” schools of thought of the Constitution

Key Points

• Many presidential powers are delegated powers that Congress has accorded presidents to exercise on its behalf, and that it can cut back or rescind.
• The delegated powers are a list of items found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of Congress. In summary, Congress may exercise the powers that the Constitution grants it.
• Strict constructionism refers to a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation. The phrase is also commonly used more loosely as a generic term for conservatism among the judiciary.
• Loose constructionists provide a wider and broader reading of the Constitution and amendments passed historically.
• The Enumerated Powers Act is a proposed law that would require all bills introduced in the U.S. Congress to include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which each bill is being enacted.

Key Terms

Enumerated Powers Act

a proposed bill in the United States House of Representatives which requires legislation passed by Congress cite those provisions of the Constitution that give them the power to pass such legislation. The bill has been proposed by Congressman John Shadegg in every Congress since the 104th, and frequently draws many co-sponsors. It has never been passed. However, at the beginning of the 105th Congress, significant portions of the bill were adopted into House rule

strict constructionism

a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation (the phrase is also commonly used more loosely as a generic term for conservatism among the judiciary)

delegated powers

The delegated powers – also called enumerated powers – are a list of items found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of Congress.

Introduction

Almost all presidential powers rely on what Congress does or does not do. Presidential executive orders implement the law, but Congress can overrule such orders by changing the law. And many presidential powers are delegated powers that Congress has accorded presidents to exercise on its behalf and that it can cut back or rescind.

Delegated Powers

The delegated powers, also called enumerated powers, are a list of items found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of Congress. In summary, Congress may exercise the powers that the Constitution grants it, subject to explicit restrictions in the Bill of Rights and other protections in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. ” Historically, Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States have broadly interpreted these provisions.

The list of enumerated powers includes the following: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;” “To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;” “to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;” and “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

Political Interpretation

There is a difference of opinion in the political arena on whether current interpretation of enumerated powers, as exercised by Congress, is constitutionally sound. One school of thought is called “strict constructionism.” Strict constructionists often reference a statement on the enumerated powers set forth by Chief Justice Marshall in the case McCulloch v. Maryland. Strict constructionism refers to a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation. The phrase is also commonly used more loosely as a generic term for conservatism among the judiciary.

Another school of thought is referred to as “loose constructionism.” Loose constructionists provide a wider and broader reading of the Constitution and amendments passed historically.

John Marshall

John Marshall’s writing about enumerated powers in McCullogh v. Maryland established constitutional proof for strict constructionists.

Interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause has been controversial, especially during the early years of the republic. Strict constructionists interpret the clause to mean that Congress may make a law only if the inability to do so would cripple its ability to apply one of its enumerated powers. Loose constructionists, on the other hand, interpret the Necessary and Proper Clause as expanding the authority of Congress to all areas tangentially related to one of its enumerated powers.

12.1.3: Inherent Powers

Learning Objective

Discuss the source of the inherent powers of the President

Key Points

• The President derives these powers from the loosely worded statements in the Constitution that “the executive Power shall be vested in a President” and that he should “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”; defined through practice rather than through constitutional or statutory law.
• The first three presidents, Washington, Adams, and Jefferson established their importance concerning the inherent powers in different ways.
• Supporters of the unitary executive theory argue that this means that the president’s power, particularly the inherent power that come with being commander in chief, are open ended and cannot be checked by the other two branches.

Key Terms

unitary executive theory

Supporters of the unitary executive theory argue that this means that the president’s power, particularly the inherent power that come with being commander in chief, are open-ended and cannot be checked by the other two branches.

inherent powers

Inherent powers are assumed powers of the president not specifically listed in the Constitution. Inherent powers come from the president’s role as chief executive.

unitary system

a state governed as one single unit in which the central government is supreme and any administrative divisions (subnational units) exercise only powers that their central government chooses to delegate

Inherent Powers

Inherent powers are those powers that a sovereign state holds. In the United States, the President derives these powers from the loosely worded statements in the Constitution that “the executive Power shall be vested in a President” and that the President should “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”; defined through practice rather than through constitutional or statutory law. In other words, Inherent powers are assumed powers of the president not specifically listed in the Constitution. Inherent powers come from the president’s role as chief executive.

The first three presidents, Washington, Adams, and Jefferson established their importance in different ways. First, Washington helped to establish them in the first place, when he wanted to use them as a basis for proclaiming a policy of strict neutrality when the British and French were at war. Then, due to Adams poor leadership skills, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists divisions were heightened and the development of political parties was quickened. Finally, Jefferson used the party system to cement strong ties with Congress and expanded the role of the president in the legislative process. He used the inherent powers to justify the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 which dramatically increased the size of our nation.

Louisiana Purchase

The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 increased the geographical size of the United States significantly.

The question of presidential power is complicated by a key omission in certain Constitutional sentences’ language. As opposed to Article 1, which states that Congress is vested with the legislative powers “herein granted,” Article 2 does not use that language. It says all executive power is vested in the president. Supporters of the unitary executive theory argue that this means that the president’s power, particularly the inherent power that come with being commander in chief, are open ended and cannot be checked by the other two branches.

12.1.4: Emergency Powers

Learning Objective

Explain how states of emergency apply to the Executive Branch of the U.S. government

Key Points

• A state of emergency is a governmental declaration that may suspend some normal functions of the executive, legislative, and judicial powers; alert citizens to change their normal behaviors; or order government agencies to implement emergency preparedness plans.
• At least two constitutional rights are subject to revocation during a state of emergency: The right of habeas corpus, under Article 1, Section 9 and the right to a grand jury for members of the National Guard when in actual service, under the Fifth Amendment.
• The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the U.S. president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection, and rebellion.
• The National Emergencies Act set a limit of two years on emergency declarations unless the president explicitly extends them, and requires the president to specify in advance which legal provisions will be invoked.

Key Terms

insurrection act of 1807

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion.

habeas corpus

A writ to bring a person before a court or a judge, most frequently used to ensure that a person’s imprisonment, detention, or commitment is legal.

state of emergency

A government decree that a particular situation requires the implementation of pre-arranged responses on a large scale.

Example

• The United States has been in a state of national emergency continuously since September 14, 2001, when the Bush administration invoked it premised on the September 11 attacks. In September 2011, President Barack Obama informed Congress that the State of National Emergency, in effect since September 14, 2001, will be extended another year.

Introduction

A state of emergency is a governmental declaration that may suspend some normal functions of the executive, legislative, and judicial powers; alert citizens to change their normal behaviors; or order government agencies to implement emergency preparedness plans. It also can be used as a rationale for suspending rights and freedoms, even if guaranteed under the Constitution. Such declarations usually come during a time of natural or man-made disaster, periods of civil unrest, or following a declaration of war or situation of international or internal armed conflict.

Application in the United States

In the United States, there are several methods for government response to emergency situations. A state governor or local mayor may declare a state of emergency within his or her jurisdiction. This is common at the state level in response to natural disasters. The president of the United States, as head of the executive branch, has the authority to declare a federal state of emergency. At least two constitutional rights are subject to revocation during a state of emergency:

The right of habeas corpus, under Article 1, Section 9, and the right to a grand jury for members of the National Guard when in actual service, under Fifth Amendment.

Habeas corpus was suspended on April 27, 1861 during the American Civil War by Abraham Lincoln in parts of Maryland and some midwestern states, including southern Indiana. He did so in response to demands by generals to set up military courts to rein in “copperheads,” those in the Union who supported the Confederate cause. On December 16, 1950, during the Korean War, President Truman issued Presidential Proclamation No. 2914, declaring a state of national emergency. In 1952, the Supreme Court ruling in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer established that presidents may not act contrary to Acts of Congress during an emergency.

The Insurrection Act of 1807is the set of laws that govern the president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection, and rebellion. The general aim is to limit presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection. Coupled with the Posse Comitatus Act, presidential powers for law enforcement are limited and delayed.

During the Watergate scandal, which erupted in the 1970s after President Richard Nixon authorized a variety of illegal acts, Congress investigated the extent of the president’s powers and belatedly realized that the United States had been in a continuous state of emergency since 1950. As a result, in 1976, the National Emergencies Act set a limit of two years on emergency declarations unless the president explicitly extends them and requires the president to specify in advance which legal provisions will be invoked. The act terminated the emergency of 1950 on September 14, 1978; however, even in the twenty-first century, the federal courts have upheld harsh penalties for crimes that occurred during the state of national emergency from 1950 to 1978, where the penalties were escalated because of the existence of that emergency.

Impact of the September 11 Attacks

The United States has been continuously in a state of national emergency since September 14, 2001, when the Bush administration invoked it premised on the September 11 attacks. In September 2011, President Barack Obama informed Congress that the State of National Emergency, in effect since September 14, 2001, would be extended another year. The National Emergencies Act grants various powers to the president during times of emergency and was intended to prevent a president from declaring a state of emergency of indefinite duration .

Insurrection Act of 1807 Flowchart

A flowchart comparison of when the provisions of the Insurrection Act can be implemented, under the original and amended wording.

On September 30, 2006, Congress modified the Insurrection Act, as part of the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill (repealed as of 2008). Section 1076 of the law changed Sec. 333 of the Insurrection Act of 1807 and widened the president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to enforce the laws. Under this act, the president may also deploy troops as a police force during a natural disaster, epidemic, serious public health emergency, terrorist attack, or other condition, when the president determines that the authorities of the state are incapable of maintaining public order. The bill also modified Sec. 334 of this act, giving the president authority to order the dispersal of either insurgents or “those obstructing the enforcement of the laws. ” The law changed the name of the chapter from “Insurrection” to “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order. “

12.1.5: Executive Orders

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the different types of executive orders made by the President

Key Points

• The term executive order is most commonly applied to orders issued by the President, who is the head of the executive branch of the federal government. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state’s governor or at the local level by the city’s mayor.
• Executive orders have the full force of law, since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress, some of which specifically delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power.
• Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of executive power given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution.
• A Presidential Determination is a document issued by the White House stating a determination resulting in an official policy or position of the executive branch of the United States government.
• Presidential memoranda do not have an established process for issuance or publication. Presidential memoranda are generally considered less prestigious than executive orders.

Key Terms

executive agreement

an understanding, less formal than a treaty, between the United States (both the executive and legislative branch, or just the executive branch) and the government of a foreign state

presidential memoranda

Presidential memoranda do not have an established process for issuance or publication. Presidential memoranda are generally considered less prestigious than executive orders. There are three types of memorandum: presidential determination or presidential finding, memorandum of disapproval, and hortatory memorandum.

executive order

A legally enforceable order, decree, or regulation issued on the authority of the head of the executive branch of government.

presidential determination

A Presidential Determination is a document issued by the White House stating a determination resulting in an official policy or position of the executive branch of the United States government.

Example

• One of the most famous presidential determinations was President Clinton’s Presidential Determination 95-45, which exempted the U.S. Air Force’s facility in the vicinity of Groom Lake, Nevada (commonly called Area 51) from environmental disclosure laws, in response to subpoenas from a lawsuit brought by Area 51 workers alleging illegal hazardous waste disposal which resulted in injury and death. Subsequent to this determination, the lawsuit was dismissed due to lack of evidence.

Introduction

In the United States, an executive order is an order or directive issued by the head of the executive branch at some level of government. The term executive order is most commonly applied to orders issued by the President, who is the head of the executive branch of the federal government. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state’s governor or at the local level by the city’s mayor.

U.S. Presidents have issued executive orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law, since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress. Typically, these specifically delegate to the President a degree of discretionary power, or are believed to take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution. However, these perceived justifications cited by Presidents when authoring Executive Orders have come under criticism for exceeding Executive authority; at various times throughout U.S. history, challenges to the legal validity or justification for an order have resulted in legal proceedings.

Basis in U.S. Constitution

Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of executive power given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional interpretations as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties. The intention is to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.

Different Applications by President

A Presidential Determination is a document issued by the White House stating a determination resulting in an official policy or position of the executive branch of the United States government. Presidential determinations may involve any number of actions, including setting or changing foreign policy, setting drug enforcement policy, or any number of other exercises of executive power. One of the most famous presidential determinations was President Clinton’s Presidential Determination 95-45, which exempted the U.S. Air Force’s facility in the vicinity of Groom Lake, Nevada (commonly called Area 51) from environmental disclosure laws, in response to subpoenas from a lawsuit brought by Area 51 workers alleging illegal hazardous waste disposal which resulted in injury and death. Subsequent to this determination, the lawsuit was dismissed due to lack of evidence.

Similarly, presidential memoranda do not have an established process for issuance or publication. Presidential memoranda are generally considered less prestigious than executive orders. There are three types of memorandum: presidential determination or presidential finding, memorandum of disapproval, and hortatory memorandum.

Finally, a presidential proclamation “states a condition, declares a law and requires obedience, recognizes an event or triggers the implementation of a law (by recognizing that the circumstances in law have been realized). ” Presidents define situations or conditions on situations that become legal or an economic truth . These orders carry the same force of law as executive orders—the difference between the two is that executive orders are aimed at those inside government while proclamations are aimed at those outside government. The administrative weight of these proclamations is upheld because they are often specifically authorized by congressional statute, making them “delegated unilateral powers.” Presidential proclamations are often dismissed as a practical presidential tool for policymaking because of the perception of proclamations as largely ceremonial or symbolic in nature. However, the legal weight of presidential proclamations suggests their importance to presidential governance.

Emancipation Proclamation

Leland-Boker Authorized Edition of the Emancipation Proclamation, printed in June 1864 with a presidential signature

12.1.6: Executive Privilege

Learning Objective

Analyze the application of executive privilege by the President since World War II

Key Points

• The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine.
• The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege.
• The Clinton administration invoked executive privilege on fourteen occasions. In 1998, President Bill Clinton became the first President since Nixon to assert executive privilege and lose in court.
• On June 20, 2012, President Barack Obama asserted executive privilege, his first, to withhold certain Department of Justice documents related to the ongoing Operation Fast and Furious controversy.

Key Term

executive privilege

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government.

Introduction

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of the executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the prosecutor to make a “sufficient showing” that the “Presidential material” is “essential to the justice of the case. ” Historically, the uses of executive privilege underscore the untested nature of the doctrine, since Presidents have generally sidestepped open confrontations with the United States Congress and the courts over the issue by first asserting the privilege, then producing some of the documents requested on an assertedly voluntary basis.

Historical Development

During the period of 1947-49, several major security cases became known to Congress. There followed a series of investigations, culminating in the famous Hiss-Chambers case of 1948. At that point, the Truman Administration issued a sweeping secrecy order blocking congressional efforts from the FBI and other executive data on security problems. During the Army–McCarthy hearings in 1954, Eisenhower used the claim of executive privilege to forbid the “provision of any data about internal conversations, meetings, or written communication among staffers, with no exception to topics or people. ” Department of Defense employees were also instructed not to testify on any such conversations or produce any such documents or reproductions.

U.S. v. Nixon

The Supreme Court addressed “executive privilege” in United States v. Nixon, the 1974 case involving the demand by Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox that President Richard Nixon produce the audiotapes of conversations he and his colleagues had in the Oval Office of the White House in connection with criminal charges being brought against members of the Nixon Administration . Nixon invoked the privilege and refused to produce any records. Because Nixon had asserted only a generalized need for confidentiality, the Court held that the larger public interest in obtaining the truth in the context of a criminal prosecution took precedence.

Post-Nixon

The Clinton administration invoked executive privilege on fourteen occasions. In 1998, President Bill Clinton became the first President since Nixon to assert executive privilege and lose in court, when a federal judge ruled that Clinton aides could be called to testify in the Lewinsky scandal.

Correspondingly, the Bush administration invoked executive privilege on six occasions. President George W. Bush first asserted executive privilege to deny disclosure of sought details regarding former Attorney General Janet Reno, the scandal involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misuse of organized-crime informants James J. Bulger and Stephen Flemmi in Boston, and Justice Department deliberations about President Bill Clinton’s fundraising tactics, in December 2001. On August 1, 2007, Bush invoked the privilege for the fourth time in little over a month, this time rejecting a subpoena for Karl Rove. The subpoena would have required the President’s Senior Advisor to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in a probe over fired federal prosecutors.

On June 20, 2012, President Barack Obama asserted executive privilege, his first, to withhold certain Department of Justice documents related to the ongoing Operation Fast and Furious controversy ahead of a United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in Contempt of Congress for refusing to produce the documents. Later the same day, the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform voted 23-17 along party lines to hold Attorney General Holder in contempt of Congress over not releasing documents regarding Fast and Furious.

Richard Nixon, 37th President of the United States

Richard Milhous Nixon, 37th President of the United States.

12.1.7: The Expansion of Presidential Powers

Learning Objective

Discuss how the powers and duties of the President have changed over time

Key Points

• The President of the United States of America is the head of state and head of government of the United States. The president leads the executive branch of the federal government and is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces.
• The president is the head of the executive branch of the federal government and is constitutionally obligated to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed. ” The executive branch has over four million employees, including members of the military.
• Perhaps the most important of all presidential powers is command of the United States Armed Forces as commander-in-chief. While the power to declare war is constitutionally vested in Congress, the president commands and directs the military and is responsible for planning military strategy.

Key Term

executive privilege

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government.

Chief Legislator

The President of the United States of America is the head of state and head of government of the United States. The president leads the executive branch of the federal government and is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces.

Powers and Duties

The first power the Constitution confers upon the president is the veto. The Presentment Clause requires any bill passed by Congress to be presented to the president before it can become law. Perhaps the most important of all presidential powers is command of the United States Armed Forces as commander-in-chief. While the power to declare war is constitutionally vested in Congress, the president commands and directs the military and is responsible for planning military strategy. Congress, pursuant to the War Powers Resolution, must authorize any troop deployments longer than 60 days, although that process relies on triggering mechanisms that have never been employed, rendering it ineffectual. Additionally, Congress provides a check to presidential military power through its control over military spending and regulation.

The president is the head of the executive branch of the federal government and is constitutionally obligated to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed. ” The executive branch has over four million employees, including members of the military. Presidents make numerous executive branch appointments–an incoming president may make up to 6,000 before he takes office and 8,000 more during his term. Ambassadors, members of the Cabinet, and other federal officers are all appointed by a president with the “advice and consent” of a majority of the Senate. Appointments made while the Senate is in recess are temporary and expire at the end of the next session of the Senate.

Historically, two doctrines concerning executive power have developed that enable the president to exercise executive power with a degree of autonomy. The first is executive privilege, which allows the president to withhold from disclosure any communications made directly to the president in the performance of executive duties. George Washington first claimed executive privilege when Congress requested to see Chief Justice John Jay’s notes from an unpopular treaty negotiation with Great Britain. While not enshrined in the Constitution, or any other law, Washington’s action created the precedent for the privilege. When Richard Nixon tried to use executive privilege as a reason for not turning over subpoenaed evidence to Congress during the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) that executive privilege did not apply in cases where a president was attempting to avoid criminal prosecution. When President Bill Clinton attempted to use executive privilege regarding the Lewinsky scandal, the Supreme Court ruled in Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997) that the privilege also could not be used in civil suits. These cases established the legal precedent that executive privilege is valid, although the exact extent of the privilege has yet to be clearly defined. Additionally, federal courts have allowed this privilege to radiate outward and protect other executive branch employees, but have weakened this protection for those executive branch communications that do not involve the president .

State of the Union 2007

A White House photo of President Bush, VP Cheney, and Speaker Pelosi at the 2007 State of the Union address. The photo has been cropped from the orginal to remove everything but the principals, the bottom stars on the flag, and the teleprompters. The caption given by the White House is: President George W. Bush receives applause while delivering the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol, Tuesday, January 23, 2007. Also pictured are Vice President Dick Cheney and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. White House photo by David Bohrer.

Critics of Enhanced Presidency

Most of the nation’s Founding Fathers expected the Congress, which was the first branch of government described in the Constitution, to be the dominant branch of government. In other words, they did not expect a strong executive. However, presidential power has shifted over time, which has resulted in claims that the modern presidency has become too powerful, unchecked, unbalanced, and “monarchist” in nature. Critic Dana D. Nelson believes presidents over the past thirty years have worked towards “undivided presidential control of the executive branch and its agencies. ” She criticizes proponents of the unitary executive for expanding “the many existing uncheckable executive powers – such as executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements – that already allow presidents to enact a good deal of foreign and domestic policy without aid, interference or consent from Congress.” Other scholars disagree with the view that the presidency has too much power and cite the ability of Congress and the courts to block presidential actions. As an example, the Supreme Court in 2016 overturned Pres. Obama’s administrative appointment made during a Congressional recess, and is scheduled to rule on the constitutionality of an executive order know as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) that delays deportation of undocumented residents who arrived as children.

12.2: The Organization and Institution of the Presidency

12.2.1: The Executive Office of the President

The Executive Office of the President is comprised of a Chief of Staff, Counsel, Press Secretary, and other members assisting the President of the United States.

Learning Objective

Distinguish the various key positions in the Executive Office and the roles and responsibilities of each

Key Points

• The White House Chief of Staff is the highest-ranking employee of the White House Office inside the Executive Office of the President of the United States and is an Assistant to the President.
• The roles of the Chief of Staff are both managerial and advisory and can include the following: select key White House staff and supervise them; structure the white house staff; control the flow of people into the Oval Office; and advice the President on various issues.
• The White House Counsel’s role is to advise the President on all legal issues concerning the President and the White House.
• The White House Press Secretary is responsible for collecting information about actions and events within the president’s administration and issues the administration’s reactions to developments around the world.
• The Chief of Staff is assisted by one or more Deputy Chiefs of Staff.

Key Terms

white house chief of staff

The White House Chief of Staff is the highest-ranking employee of the White House Office inside the Executive Office of the President of the United States and is an Assistant to the President.

de facto prime minister

It is possible that a powerful Chief of Staff with a “hands-off” president can become a de facto Prime Minister. Such prime ministers exist in some governmental systems: The prime minister runs the government, while the president remains somewhat aloof from the political process, but personally handling policy matters.

white house press secretary

The White House Press Secretary is a senior White House official whose primary responsibility is to act as spokesperson for the government administration. The Press Secretary is responsible for collecting information about actions and events within the president’s administration and issues the administration’s reactions to developments around the world.

Example

• It is possible that a powerful Chief of Staff with a “hands-off” president can become a de facto Prime Minister. Such prime ministers exist in some governmental systems: The prime minister runs the government, while the president remains somewhat aloof from the political process, but personally handling policy matters. Richard Nixon’s first Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldeman, garnered a reputation in Washington for the iron hand he wielded in the position.

The Executive Office of the President (EOP) consists of the immediate staff of the President of the United States, as well as multiple levels of support staff reporting to the President. The EOP is headed by the White House Chief of Staff, currently Jacob Lew. The size of the White House staff has increased dramatically since 1939, and has grown to include an array of policy experts in various fields.

Chief of Staff

The White House Chief of Staff is an Assistant to the President, and is the highest-ranking employee of the White House Office inside the Executive Office of the President of the United States. The current White House Chief of Staff is Denis McDonough who took over the job from Jacob Lew in 2013.

Jacob Lew

The current White House Chief of Staff is Jacob Lew, who assumed the position on January 27, 2012, after William M. Daley resigned.

The duties of the White House Chief of Staff vary greatly from one administration to another; in fact, there is no legal requirement that the President even fill the position. However, since at least 1979, all Presidents have found the need for a Chief of Staff, who typically oversees the actions of the White House staff, manages the president’s schedule, and decides who is allowed to meet with the president. Because of these duties, the Chief of Staff has at various times been labeled “The Gatekeeper,” “The Power Behind the Throne,” and “The Co-President. “

The roles of the Chief of Staff are both managerial and advisory. the Chief of Staff may select key White House staff and supervise them; structure the White House staff; control the flow of people into the Oval Office; and advise the President on various issues.

A powerful Chief of Staff with a “hands-off” president can become a de facto Prime Minister. Such prime ministers exist in some governmental systems: The prime minister runs the government, while the president remains somewhat aloof from the political process, but personally handling policy matters. Richard Nixon’s first Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldeman, garnered a reputation in Washington for the iron hand he wielded in the position. By contrast, Andrew Card, President George W. Bush’s first Chief of Staff, was not thought to be as powerful. It has been speculated that Card was “overshadowed” by the influence of Karl Rove, the Senior Adviser and Deputy Chief of Staff, who was “the architect” of Bush’s political rise.

Deputy Chiefs of Staff

The Chief of Staff is assisted by one or more Deputy Chiefs of Staff. Under the Obama Administration, these roles are filled by Anita Decker Breckenridge, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Kristie Canegallo, Deputy Chief of Staff for Implementation. During the George W. Bush Administration, Joel Kaplan held this title for Policy. Karl Rove preceded Kaplan in this role until April 19, 2006, when Joshua Bolten, the recently appointed Chief of Staff, added his former Deputy Director of the OMB to the Deputies list. Rove left the White House officially on August 31, 2007. Joe Hagin is the former Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations under George W. Bush.

Counsel

The White House Counsel is a staff appointee of the President of the United States. The Counsel’s role is to advise the President on all legal issues concerning the President and the White House. The current White House Counsel is W. Neil Eggleston since 2014. Although the White House Counsel offers legal advice to the President, the Counsel does so in the President’s official capacity and does not serve as the President’s personal attorney. Therefore, controversy has emerged over the scope of the attorney–client privilege between the Counsel and the President. It is clear, however, that the privilege does not apply in personal matters, such as impeachment proceedings; in such situations the President relies on a personal attorney for confidential legal advice.

Press Secretary

The White House Press Secretary is a senior White House official whose primary responsibility is to act as spokesperson for the administration. The Press Secretary is responsible for collecting information about actions and events within the president’s administration and issues statements regarding the administration’s reactions to developments around the world. The Press Secretary interacts with the media and deals with the White House press corps on a daily basis, generally in a daily press briefing. The current Press Secretary is Josh Earnest since 2014.

Jay Carney

Jay Carney is the current White House Press Secretary.

History of the Executive Office of the President

In 1939, during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s second term in office, the foundations of the modern White House staff were created. Based on the recommendations of a presidentially commissioned panel of political science and public administration experts, the Brownlow Committee, Roosevelt was able to get Congress to approve the Reorganization Act of 1939. The Act led to Reorganization Plan No. 1, which created the EOP, which reported directly to the president. The EOP encompassed two subunits at its outset: the White House Office (WHO) and the Bureau of the Budget, the predecessor to today’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which had been created in 1921 and originally located in the Treasury Department. It absorbed most of the functions of the National Emergency Council. The main job of the OMB is to assist the President to prepare the budget. The OMB also measures the quality of agency programs, policies, and procedures and to see if they comply with the President’s policies. In addition, the OMB oversees and coordinates the Administration’s procurement, financial management, information, and regulatory policies. In each of these areas, the OMB’s role is to help improve administrative management, to develop better performance measures and coordinating mechanisms, and to reduce any unnecessary burdens on the public.

From 1939 through the present, the situation changed dramatically. New units within the EOP were created, some by statute, some by executive order of the president. Among the most important are the Council of Economic Advisers (1946), the National Security Council and its staff (1947), the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (1963), the Council on Environmental Quality (1970), the Office of Science and Technology Policy (1976), the Office of Administration (1977), and the Office of National Drug Control Policy (1989).

Under George W. Bush, additional units were added, such as the Office of Homeland Security (2001), which later became a cabinet department, and the Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives (2001). Precise estimates as to the size and budget of the EOP are difficult to come by. Many people who work on the staff are “detailed” from other federal departments and agencies, and budgetary expenses are often charged elsewhere, for example Defense Department staff for the White House Military Office. Ballpark estimates indicate some 2,000 to 2,500 persons serve in EOP staff positions with policy-making responsibilities, with a budget of 300 to 400 million dollars.

12.2.2: The Cabinet

The Cabinet of the United States is composed of the most senior appointed officers of the executive branch of the federal government.

Learning Objective

Discuss the shape of the Cabinet of the United States and its role in government

Key Points

• All Cabinet members are nominated by the President and then presented to the Senate for confirmation or rejection by a simple majority. If they are approved, they are sworn in and then begin their duties.
• There is no explicit definition of the term “Cabinet” in either the U.S. Constitution, the United States Code, or the Code of Federal Regulations.
• Executive Schedule refers to the highest-ranked appointed positions in the executive branch of the U.S. government. The President of the United States, an elected official, appoints incumbents to these positions, most of them with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Key Terms

Cabinet

In parliamentary and some other systems of government, the group of ministers responsible for creating government policy and for overseeing the departments comprising the executive branch.

executive schedule

Executive Schedule refers to the highest-ranked appointed positions in the executive branch of the U.S. government. The President of the United States makes appointments to these positions, most with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Example

• The Secretary of State designate is reviewed and presented to the full Senate by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Hillary Rodham Clinton assumed the office of Secretary of State on January 21, 2009.

Introduction

The Cabinet of the United States is composed of the most senior appointed officers of the executive branch of the federal government of the United States, who are generally the heads of the federal executive departments. The existence of the Cabinet dates back to the first President of the United States, George Washington, who appointed a Cabinet of four men: Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of War Henry Knox, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph to advise him and to assist him in carrying out his duties.

All Cabinet members are nominated by the President and then presented to the Senate for confirmation or rejection by a simple majority. If they are approved, they are sworn in and begin their duties. Aside from the Attorney General and the Postmaster General (when it was a Cabinet position), they all receive the title of Secretary. Members of the Cabinet serve at the pleasure of the President, which means that the President may dismiss them or reappoint them (to other posts) at will. Members of the Cabinet direct their own departments; however, all of the power that they have derives from the President, in that while they may advise the President, they carry the President’s directives. In other words, the Cabinet may help shape policy, but they do not typically drive or direct policy.

In Federal Law and the Constitution

There is no explicit definition of the term “Cabinet” in either the U.S. Constitution, the United States Code, or the Code of Federal Regulations. There are occasional references to “cabinet-level officers” or “secretaries,” which when viewed in their context do refer to the “Heads of the Executive Departments.” Executive Schedule refers to the highest-ranked appointed positions in the executive branch of the U.S. government. The President of the United States, an elected official, appoints incumbents to these positions, most of them with the advice and consent of the Senate. They include members of the President’s Cabinet as well as other subcabinet policy makers. There are five pay rates within the Executive Schedule, usually denoted with a Roman numeral with I being the highest level and V the lowest.

The President of the United States has the authority to nominate members of his or her cabinet to the United States Senate for confirmation under Article II, Section II, Clause II of the United States Constitution.

U.S. Cabinet

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden pose with the full Cabinet for an official group photo in the Grand Foyer of the White House, July 26, 2012. These included U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Susan Rice, Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Cabinet Positions

The Secretary of State designate is reviewed and presented to the full Senate by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John Kerry is the current Secretary of State for President Obama’s second term, replacing Hillary Clinton. The Secretary of the Treasury is reviewed by the Senate Finance Committee. Jack Lew is Secretary of the Treasury. Ashton Carter is Secretary of Defense. 

 The confirmation of the office of Attorney General is overseen by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Eric Holder, Obama’s first-term Attorney General was replaced by Loretta E. Lynch for the second term.

12.2.3: The Vice Presidency

Constitutionally, the Vice President is indirectly elected by the people through the Electoral College to a four-year term of office.

Learning Objective

Distinguish between the Vice President’s constitutionally defined functions and the role the office has come to play

Key Points

• The Vice President is the first person in the presidential line of succession, and would ascend to the Presidency upon the death, resignation, or removal of the President.
• While the Vice President’s only constitutionally prescribed functions aside from Presidential succession relate to his role as President of the Senate, the office is commonly viewed as a component of the executive branch of the federal government.
• Under the Constitution, the Vice President is President of the United States Senate. In that capacity, he or she is allowed to vote in the Senate when necessary to break a tie.
• While Senate customs have created supermajority rules that have diminished this Constitutional power, the Vice President still retains the ability to influence legislation.
• In modern times, the Vice President rarely presides over day-to-day matters in the Senate; in his place, the Senate chooses a President pro tempore (or “president for a time”) to preside in the Vice President’s absence; the Senate normally selects the longest-serving senator in the majority party.
• The Twenty-Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that should the president die or become disabled while in office, the “powers and duties” of the office are transferred to the Vice President.

Key Terms

vice president

A deputy to a president, often empowered to assume the position of president on his death or absence

twenty-fifth amendment

The Twenty-fifth Amendment (Amendment XXV) to the United States Constitution deals with succession to the Presidency and establishes procedures both for filling a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, as well as responding to Presidential disabilities.

president pro tempore

The President pro tempore is the second-highest-ranking official of the United States Senate. The United States Constitution states that the Vice President of the United States is the President of the Senate, despite not being a member of the body, and that the Senate must choose a president pro tempore. By a long-standing tradition which has been observed consistently since the 81st Congress, the president pro tempore is the most senior senator in the majority party.

Example

• As President of the Senate, the Vice President has two primary duties: to cast a vote in the event of a Senate deadlock and to preside over and certify the official vote count of the U.S. Electoral College. For example, in the first half of 2001, the Senators were divided 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats and Dick Cheney’s tie-breaking vote gave the Republicans the Senate majority.

Introduction

The Vice President of the United States holds a public office created by the United States Constitution. The vice president, together with the president of the United States, is indirectly elected by the people through the Electoral College to a four-year term of office. The vice president is the first person in the presidential line of succession, and would ascend to the presidency upon the death, resignation, or removal of the president. While the vice president’s only constitutionally prescribed functions, aside from presidential succession, relate to his role as President of the Senate, the office is commonly viewed as a component of the executive branch of the federal government. The current vice president is former U.S. Senator Joseph Biden.

Official Portrait of Joe Biden

Official portrait of Vice President of the United States Joe Biden.

Four Vice-Presidents

Four Vice Presidents: L-R, outgoing Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson (the 37th vice president); incoming Pres. Richard Nixon (36th); Everett Dirksen; Spiro Agnew, incoming vice president (39th); and the outgoing Vice President Hubert Humphrey (38th), January 20, 1969.

Under the Constitution, the vice president is President of the United States Senate. In that capacity, he or she is allowed to vote in the Senate, when necessary, to break a tie. While Senate customs have created supermajority rules that have diminished this constitutional power, the vice president still influences legislation. According to the Twelfth Amendment, the vice president presides over the joint session of Congress when it convenes to count the vote of the Electoral College.

Origin

The creation of the Office of Vice President was a direct consequence of the Electoral College. Delegates to the Philadelphia Convention gave each state a number of presidential electors equal to that state’s combined share of House and Senate seats. Yet, the delegates were worried that each elector would only favor his own state’s favorite son candidate, resulting in deadlocked elections that would produce no winners. To counter this presumed difficulty, the delegates gave each presidential elector two votes, required that at least one of those votes be for a candidate from outside the elector’s state, and mandated that the winner of the election obtain an absolute majority with respect to the total number of electors.

With these rules in place, the delegates hoped each electors’ second vote would go to a statesman of national character However, fearing electors might throw away their second vote to bolster their favorite son’s chance of winning, the Philadelphia delegates specified that the runner up in the election would become vice president. Creating this new office imposed a political cost on discarded votes and, thus, required that electors cast their second ballots.

Roles of the Vice-President

As President of the Senate, the vice president has two primary duties: to cast a vote in the event of a Senate deadlock and to preside over and certify the official vote count of the U.S. Electoral College. For example, in the first half of 2001, the Senators were divided 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats and Dick Cheney’s tie-breaking vote gave the Republicans the Senate majority. In modern times, the vice president rarely presides over day-to-day matters in the Senate; in his place, the Senate chooses a president pro tempore (or “president for a time”) to preside in the vice president’s absence; the Senate normally selects the longest-serving senator in the majority party. The president pro tempore has the power to appoint any other senator to preside and, in practice, junior senators from the majority party are assigned the task of presiding over the Senate most of the time.

The President of the Senate also presides over counting and presentation of the votes of the Electoral College. This process occurs in the presence of both houses of Congress, generally on January 6 of the year following a U.S. presidential election. In this capacity, only four vice presidents have been able to announce their own election to the presidency: John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George H. W. Bush. By contrast, Richard Nixon presided over the process but also officially announced the election of his 1960 opponent, John F. Kennedy.

Twenty-Fifth Amendment

The U.S. Constitution provides that should the president die or become disabled while in office, the “powers and duties” of the office are transferred to the vice president. Initially, it was unclear whether the vice president actually became the new president or merely an acting president. This was first tested in 1841 with the death of President William Henry Harrison. Harrison’s Vice President, John Tyler, asserted that he had succeeded to the full presidential office, powers, and title and declined to acknowledge documents referring to him as “acting president. ” Despite some strong calls against it, Tyler took the oath of office as the tenth president. Gerald Ford was the first vice president selected by this method, after the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew in 1973; after succeeding to the Presidency, Ford nominated Nelson Rockefeller as vice president.

John Tyler

John Tyler was the first Vice President to assume the presidency following the death of his predecessor. In doing so, he insisted that he was the president, not merely an acting president.

12.2.4: The First Spouse

The First Lady of the United States is the hostess of the White House, traditionally filled by the wife of the president.

Learning Objective

Describe the evolution of the role of the First Lady

Key Points

• The use of the title First Lady to describe the spouse or hostess of an executive began in the United States. In the early days of the United States, there was not a generally accepted title for the wife of the president.
• The role of the First Lady has evolved over the centuries. She is, first and foremost, the hostess of the White House. She organizes and attends official ceremonies and functions of state either along with, or in place of, the president.
• The Office of the First Lady of the United States helps the First Lady carry out her duties as hostess of the White House, and is also in charge of all social and ceremonial events of the White House.
• The current First Lady is Michelle Obama, wife of President Barack Obama.

Key Term

first lady of the united states

The First Lady of the United States is the hostess of the White House. Because this position is traditionally filled by the wife of the president of the United States, the title is most often applied to the wife of a sitting president.

Example

• Over the course of the 20th century it became increasingly common for first ladies to select specific causes to promote, usually ones that are not politically divisive. Lady Bird Johnson pioneered environmental protection and beautification; Pat Nixon encouraged volunteerism and traveled extensively abroad; Betty Ford supported women’s rights; Rosalynn Carter aided those with mental disabilities; Nancy Reagan founded the Just Say No drug awareness campaign; Barbara Bush promoted literacy; Hillary Rodham Clinton sought to reform the healthcare system in the U.S.; and Laura Bush supported women’s rights groups and encouraged childhood literacy. Michelle Obama has sought to tackle childhood obesity.

Introduction

The First Lady of the United States is the hostess of the White House. This position is traditionally filled by the wife of the President of the United States. The current First Lady is Michelle Obama , wife of President Barack Obama. At present, there are four living former first ladies: Rosalynn Carter, wife of Jimmy Carter; Barbara Bush, wife of George H. W. Bush; Hillary Rodham Clinton, wife of Bill Clinton; and Laura Bush, wife of George W. Bush .

Four First Ladies

Laura Bush and former first ladies, from left, Rosalynn Carter, then-Senator Hillary Clinton, and Barbara Bush, at the dedication ceremony for the William J. Clinton Presidential Center and Park in Little Rock, Arkansas, November 18, 2004.

Michelle Obama

Michelle Obama, official White House portrait.

Origins of First Lady

The use of the title First Ladyto describe the spouse or hostess of an executive began in the United States. In the early days of the United States, there was not a generally accepted title for the wife of the president.

The earliest known written evidence of the title is from the November 3, 1863, diary entry of William Howard Russell, in which he recalled gossip about “the First Lady in the Land,” referring to Mary Todd Lincoln. The title first gained nationwide recognition in 1877, when newspaper journalist Mary C. Ames referred to Lucy Webb Hayes as “the First Lady of the Land” while reporting on the inauguration of Rutherford B. Hayes. The frequent reporting on the activities of Lucy Hayes helped spread use of the title outside Washington. A popular 1911 comedic play by playwright Charles Nirdlinger, titled The First Lady in the Land, popularized the title further. By the 1930s it was in wide use. Use of the title later spread from the United States to other nations.

Roles of First Lady

The position of the First Lady is not an elected one, carries no official duties, and receives no salary. Nonetheless, first ladies have held a highly visible position in U.S. government. The role of the First Lady has evolved over the centuries. She is, first and foremost, the hostess of the White House. She organizes and attends official ceremonies and functions of state either along with, or in place of, the president.

Over the course of the 20^th century it became increasingly common for first ladies to select specific causes to promote, usually ones that are not politically divisive . It is common for the First Lady to hire a staff to support these activities. Lady Bird Johnson pioneered environmental protection and beautification; Pat Nixon encouraged volunteerism and traveled extensively abroad; Betty Ford supported women’s rights; Rosalynn Carter aided those with mental disabilities; Nancy Reagan founded the Just Say No drug awareness campaign; Barbara Bush promoted literacy; Hillary Rodham Clinton sought to reform the healthcare system in the U.S.; and Laura Bush supported women’s rights groups and encouraged childhood literacy. Michelle Obama has sought to tackle childhood obesity.

First Ladies at Ronald Reagan Presidential Library

First Ladies Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush (standing, left to right), Lady Bird Johnson, Pat Nixon, Rosalynn Carter, and Betty Ford (seated, left to right) at the dedication of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, November 1991.

Office of the First Lady

The Office of the First Lady of the United States helps the First Lady carry out her duties as hostess of the White House, and is also in charge of all social and ceremonial events of the White House. The First Lady has her own staff that includes the White House Social Secretary, a chief of staff, a press secretary, a chief floral designer, and an executive chef. The Office of the First Lady is an entity of the White House Office, which is part of the Executive Office of the President.

12.3: The President’s Many Roles

12.3.1: Chief Executive

Chief Executive is a term commonly used to refer to Presidential powers given by the Constitution.

Learning Objective

Identify the nature of the powers granted to the President in Article II of the Constitution

Key Points

• The president has many official and unofficial roles. The formal powers and duties of the president are outlined in Article II of the Constitution.
• As Chief Executive the president can: implement policy, supervise the executive branch of government, prepare executive budget for submission to congress, and appoint and remove executive officials.
• The head of government is the chief officer of the executive branch of a government, often presiding over a cabinet. In presidential republics or absolute monarchies, the head of government may be the same person as the head of state, who is often also called a president or a monarch.

Key Terms

head of government

The chief officer of the executive branch of a government, often presiding over a cabinet; usually called Prime Minister (in a parliamentary system) or President (in a presidential system).

chief executive

The president of the United States.

Introduction

The president has many official and unofficial roles. The formal powers and duties of the president are outlined in Article II of the Constitution. Although the Constitution grants far fewer explicit powers to the president in Article II than it does to Congress in Article I, the ambiguity and vagueness of Article II have made it possible for presidents to expand their authority greatly beyond that specifically listed in the Constitution. The two passages in the Constitution that have provided the basis for the expansion of presidential authority are Article II, Section 1, which grants “the executive Power” to the president, and Section 3, which makes the president responsible for the enforcement of federal laws: “He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” As a result, “unofficial” presidential roles have evolved through both history and tradition.

As Chief Executive

Chief Executive is a term used for certain gubernatorial offices, expressing the nature of their job being analogous to a head of government. It is commonly used to refer to Presidential powers given by the constitution. As Chief Executive the president can: implement policy, supervise the executive branch of government, prepare an executive budget for submission to congress, and appoint and remove executive officials .

Obama Administration and Foreign Policy

President Barack Obama acts as the chief executive of the federal government of the United States.

As Head of Government

Head of government is the chief officer of the executive branch of a government, often presiding over a cabinet. In a parliamentary system, the head of government is often styled prime minister, chief minister, premier, etc. In presidential republics or absolute monarchies, the head of government may be the same person as the head of state, who is often also called a president or a monarch.

In a parliamentary system, the head of state is normally a different person from the head of government. This is in contrast to a presidential system in a democracy, where the head of state often is also the head of government, and most importantly: the executive branch does not derive its democratic legitimacy from the legislature. The Parliamentary system can be contrasted with a presidential system which operates under a stricter separation of powers, whereby the executive does not form part of, nor is appointed by, the parliamentary or legislative body. In such a system, congresses do not select or dismiss heads of governments, and governments cannot request an early dissolution as may be the case for parliaments. Since the legislative branch has more power over the executive branch in a parliamentary system, a notable amount of studies by political scientists have shown that parliamentary systems show lower levels of corruption than presidential systems of government.

12.3.2: Commander-in-Chief

A commander-in-chief is the person exercising supreme command authority of a nation’s military forces; in the US, this person is the president.

Learning Objective

Explain the President’s position as commander-in-chief

Key Points

• Civilian control of the military is a doctrine in military and political science that places ultimate responsibility for a country’s strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers.
• The current commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces is Barack Obama, the 44th person to hold the position since Grover Cleveland served two non- consecutive terms as President of the United States.
• Since 1949, the Secretary of Defense, a civil officer appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is by statute second in command over those armed forces which are part of the Department of Defense: the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Marine Corps.
• The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.S. chief of defense equivalent, may assist the President and Secretary of Defense in the exercise of their command functions, but the Chairman himself does not independently exercise command over any combatant forces.

Key Terms

commander-in-chief

A commander-in-chief is the person exercising supreme command authority over a nation’s military forces or significant element of those forces.

civilian control of the military

Civilian control of the military is a doctrine in military and political science that places ultimate responsibility for a country’s strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers.

chairman of the joint chiefs of staff

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.S. chief of defense equivalent, may assist the President and Secretary of Defense in the exercise of their command functions, but the Chairman himself does not independently exercise command over any combatant forces.

Introduction

A commander-in-chief is the person exercising supreme command authority of a nation’s military forces or significant element of those forces. As a practical term it refers to the military competencies that reside in a nation-state’s executive, Head of State and/or Head of Government. Often, a given country’s commander-in-chief need not be or have been a commissioned officer or even a veteran, and it is by this legal statute that civilian control of the military is realized in states where it is constitutionally required. Civilian control of the military is a doctrine in military and political science that places ultimate responsibility for a country’s strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers.

According to Article II, Section 2, Clause I of the Constitution, the President of the United States is commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. The current commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces is Barack Obama, the 44^th person to hold the position since Grover Cleveland served two non consecutive terms as President of the United States.

U.S. President as Commander in Chief

The amount of military detail handled by the President in wartime has varied dramatically. Abraham Lincoln was deeply involved in overall strategy and in day-to-day operations during the American Civil War, 1861–1865; historians have given Lincoln high praise for his strategic sense and his ability to select and encourage commanders such as Ulysses S. Grant.

President Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief

President Abraham Lincoln, as commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces, with Allan Pinkerton and Major General John A. McClernand after the Battle of Antietam, 1862.

On the other hand, Woodrow Wilson paid very little attention to operational military details of World War I and had very little contact with General John J. Pershing, who commanded the armies in the field. As President throughout much of World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt, on the domestic front, used his fireside chats and the press to explain and justify his difficult wartime decisions abroad. Harry S. Truman believed in a high amount of civilian leadership of the military, making many tactical and policy decisions based on the recommendations of his advisors— including the decision to use nuclear weapons on Japan, to commit American forces in the Korean War, and to terminate Douglas MacArthur from his command.

Douglas MacArthur in Manila

An immensely popular hero of World War II, General Douglas MacArthur’s public insistence on the need to expand the Korean War, over the objections of President Harry S. Truman, led to the termination of his command.

Secretary of Defense

Since 1949, the Secretary of Defense, a civil officer appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is by statute second in command over those armed forces which are part of the Department of Defense: the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Marine Corps. The operational branch of the chain of command runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense, and from the Secretary of Defense down to the combatant commanders of the unified combatant commands. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.S. chief of defense equivalent, may assist the President and Secretary of Defense in the exercise of their command functions, but the Chairman himself does not independently exercise command over any combatant forces.

12.3.3: Head of State

The President of the United States of America is the head of state and head of government of the United States.

Learning Objective

Summarize the various roles performed by the President as Head of State

Key Points

• Head of State is a term used in constitutional law, international law, political science, and diplomatic protocol to designate an official who holds the highest ranked position in a state. This official has the vested or implied powers to act as the chief public representative of a sovereign state.
• A presidential system is a system of government where an executive branch is led by a president who serves as both head of state and head of government. In such a system, this branch exists separately from the legislature, to which it is not responsible and which it cannot dismiss.
• In presidential systems, such as that of the United States, appointments are nominated at the President’s sole discretion, but this nomination is often subject to parliamentary confirmation.
• In presidential systems the head of state often formally reports to the legislature on the present national status, as in the State of the Union address in the United States of America.

Key Terms

head of state

The chief public representative of a nation having duties, privileges and responsibilities varying greatly depending on the constitutional rules; a monarch in a monarchy, and often styled president in a republic, but variations such as collegiality exist.

presidential system

A presidential system is a system of government where an executive branch is led by a president who serves as both head of state and head of government. In such a system, this branch exists separately from the legislature, to which it is not responsible and which it cannot, in normal circumstances, dismiss.

Example

• As head of state, the president can fulfill traditions established by previous presidents. William Howard Taft started the tradition of throwing out the ceremonial first pitch in 1910 at Griffith Stadium, Washington, D.C., on the Washington Senators’ Opening Day. Every president since Taft, except for Jimmy Carter, threw out at least one ceremonial first ball or pitch for Opening Day, the All-Star Game, or the World Series, usually with much fanfare.

Introduction

The President of the United States of America is the head of state and head of government of the United States. The president leads the executive branch of the federal government and is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. Head of State is a term used in constitutional law, international law, political science, and diplomatic protocol to designate an official who holds the highest ranked position in a state and has the vested or implied powers to act as the chief public representative of a sovereign state. Heads of state in most countries are natural persons holding an office, however in some countries the head of state position is held by a body of persons .

World Head of States 1889

“The World’s Sovereigns”: A photo montage made in Europe in 1889 with the main heads of state in the world. As head of state, it is the job of each of these leaders to represent their countries.

A presidential system is a system of government where an executive branch is led by a president who serves as both head of state and head of government . In such a system, this branch exists separately from the legislature, to which it is not responsible and which it cannot, in normal circumstances, dismiss. Presidential systems are a notable feature of constitutions in the Americas, including those of the Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico and Venezuela; this is generally attributed to the strong influence of the United States in the region, and as the United States Constitution served as an inspiration and model for the Latin American wars of independence of the early 19^th century.

George Washington

George Washington, the first President of the United States, set the precedent for an executive head of state in republican systems of government.

Presidential governments make no distinction between the positions of head of state and head of government, both of which are held by the president. Many parliamentary governments have a symbolic head of state in the form of a president or monarch. That person is responsible for the formalities of state functions, or in cases where the head of state has reserve powers, the “hands off” ensuing of a functional parliament, while the constitutional prerogatives of head of government are generally exercised by the prime minister.

Head of State in the United States

In the 1870s, in the aftermath of the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson and his near-removal from office, it was speculated that the United States, too, would move from a presidential system to a semi-presidential or even parliamentary one. Under this new system, the Speaker of the House of Representatives would become the real center of government as a quasi-prime minister. This did not in fact happen. The presidency, having been damaged by three late nineteenth and early twentieth century assassinations, and one impeachment, reasserted its political dominance by the early twentieth century through such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

In presidential systems, such as that of the United States, appointments are nominated by the President’s sole discretion, but this nomination is often subject to parliamentary confirmation (in the case of the US, the Senate has to approve cabinet nominees and judicial appointments by simple majority). Moreover, in presidential systems, the president often has the power to fire ministers at his sole discretion. In the United States, convention calls for cabinet secretaries to resign on their own initiative when called to do so.

Legislative Roles

It is usual that the head of state, particularly in parliamentary systems as part of the symbolic role, is the one who opens the annual sessions of the legislature, e.g. the annual State Opening of Parliament with the Speech from the Throne in Britain. Even in presidential systems the head of state often formally reports to the legislature on the present national status, e.g. the State of the Union address in the United States of America.

Ceremonial Roles

As head of state, the president can fulfill traditions established by previous presidents. William Howard Taft started the tradition of throwing out the ceremonial first pitch in 1910 at Griffith Stadium, Washington, D.C., on the Washington Senators’ Opening Day. Every president since Taft, except for Jimmy Carter, threw out at least one ceremonial first ball or pitch for Opening Day, the All-Star Game, or the World Series, usually with much fanfare .

Wilson opening day 1916

U.S. President Woodrow Wilson throws out the ball on opening day of baseball season, 1916.

During a state visit by a foreign head of state, the president typically hosts a State Arrival Ceremony held on the South Lawn, a custom begun by John F. Kennedy in 1961. This is followed by a state dinner given by the president which is held in the State Dining Room later in the evening.

12.3.4: Chief Diplomat

The appointment power of the President allows him or her to appoint and receive ambassadors around the world.

Learning Objective

Explain the President’s role as chief diplomat

Key Points

• Diplomacy is the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or states. In an informal or social sense, diplomacy is the employment of tact to gain strategic advantage or to find mutually acceptable solutions to a common challenge.
• The President is the nation’s chief diplomat; they have the power make treaties that are then subject to ratification by the Senate.
• It is generally accepted that they have the President has the power as a result of their constitutional authority to “send and receive ambassadors. ” This is generally known as the “appointment power” of the presidency.
• Along with naming judges, presidents appoint ambassadors and executive officers. If Congress is not in session, presidents can make temporary appointments known as recess appointments without Senate confirmation, good until the end of the next session of Congress.

Key Terms

recess appointments

Along with naming judges, presidents appoint ambassadors and executive officers. These appointments require Senate confirmation. If Congress is not in session, presidents can make temporary appointments known as recess appointments without Senate confirmation, good until the end of the next session of Congress.

appointment power

The appointment power of the presidency refers to the president’s constitutional authority to appoint and receive ambassadors to and from other countries.

diplomacy

The art and practice of conducting international relations by negotiating alliances, treaties, agreements, etc., bilaterally or multilaterally, between states and sometimes international organizations or even between policies with varying statuses, such as those of monarchs and their princely vassals.

Example

• Informal diplomacy has been used for centuries to communicate between powers. Most diplomats work to recruit figures in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country’s leadership. Such informal diplomacy was practiced by former US Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and by the former Israeli diplomat and minister Yossi Beilin.

Introduction

Diplomacy is the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or states. It usually refers to international diplomacy, the conduct of international relations through the intercession of professional diplomats with regard to issues of peacemaking, trade, war, economics, culture, environment and human rights. International treaties are usually negotiated by diplomats prior to endorsement by national politicians. In an informal or social sense, diplomacy is the employment of tact to gain strategic advantage or to find mutually acceptable solutions to a common challenge, one set of tools being the phrasing of statements in a nonconfrontational, or polite manner.

U.S. President as Chief Diplomat

Although the Constitution does not explicitly grant presidents the power to recognize foreign governments, it is generally accepted that they have this power as a result of their constitutional authority to “send and receive ambassadors. ” This is generally known as the “appointment power” of the presidency. Because the acts of sending an ambassador to a country and receiving its representative imply recognition of the legitimacy of the foreign government involved, presidents have successfully claimed exclusive authority to decide which foreign governments are recognized by the United States. It follows, then, that they have the power to terminate relations with other nations as well.

Along with naming judges, presidents appoint ambassadors and executive officers. These appointments require Senate confirmation. If Congress is not in session, presidents can make temporary appointments known as recess appointments without Senate confirmation, good until the end of the next session of Congress.

Although not constitutionally provided, presidents also sometimes employ “executive agreements” in foreign relations. These agreements frequently regard administrative policy choices germane to executive power; for example, the extent to which either country presents an armed presence in a given area, how each country will enforce copyright treaties, or how each country will process foreign mail. However, the 20th century witnessed a vast expansion of the use of executive agreements, and critics have challenged the extent of that use as supplanting the treaty process and removing constitutionally prescribed checks and balances over the executive in foreign relations. Supporters counter that the agreements offer a pragmatic solution when the need for swift, secret, and/or concerted action arises.

Informal Diplomacy

Informal diplomacy has been used for centuries to communicate between powers. Most diplomats work to recruit figures in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country’s leadership. On some occasion a former holder of an official position continues to carry out an informal diplomatic activity after retirement. In some cases, governments welcome such activity, for example as a means of establishing an initial contact with a hostile state of group without being formally committed. In other cases, however, such informal diplomats seek to promote a political agenda different from that of the government currently in power. Such informal diplomacy is practiced by former US Presidents Jimmy Carter and (to a lesser extent) Bill Clinton and by the former Israeli diplomat and minister Yossi Beilin.

James Carter Presidential Portrait

Jimmy Carter served as the thirty-ninth President of the United States from 1977 to 1981.

12.3.5: Chief Legislator

As chief legislator, the president may suggest, request, and insist that Congress enact laws he believes are needed.

Learning Objective

Assess the significance of the Line Item Veto for executive power

Key Points

• As chief legislator, the president shapes policy. The Constitution is reticent about the president’s role in legislating, yet the relationship between Congress and the executive is the most important aspect of the U.S. system of government.
• The president may suggest, request, and insist that Congress enact laws he believes are needed. He can attempt to influence Congress through promises of patronage and favors.
• In 1996, Congress attempted to enhance the president’s veto power with the Line Item Veto Act. The legislation empowered the president to sign any spending bill into law while simultaneously striking certain spending items within the bill.
• In Clinton v. City of New York (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled such a legislative alteration of the veto power to be unconstitutional.

Key Terms

line item veto act

The Line Item Veto Act of 1996 enacted a line-item veto for the Federal government of the United States, but its effect was brief because the act was overturned after judicial review.

clinton v. city of new york

In Clinton v. City of New York (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Line Item Veto Act’s expansion of veto power to be unconstitutional.

veto

A political right to disapprove of (and thereby stop) the process of a decision, a law, etc.

pocket veto

a legislative maneuver in lawmaking that allows a president or other official to unilaterally stop a bill by taking no action

Chief Legislator

The president has many official and unofficial roles. The formal powers and duties of the president are outlined in Article II of the Constitution. As chief legislator, the president shapes policy. The Constitution is reticent about the president’s role in legislating, yet the relationship between Congress and the executive is the most important aspect of the U.S. system of government. The president can gather information from the bureaucracy, present a legislative agenda to Congress, and go to the American public for support for his legislative agenda.

President Barack Obama Signing Legislation

President Barack Obama signs legislation in the Oval Office, Dec. 22, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The president may suggest and request that Congress enact laws he believes are needed. He can attempt to influence Congress through promises of patronage and favors. He stays in touch with Congress formally through written messages and informally through private meetings, parties, and phone calls. When the president receives legislation, he decides whether to veto it, use the pocket veto, sign it, or do nothing. If the president does nothing, then if Congress is still in session ten days later it becomes law.

In 1996, Congress attempted to enhance the president’s veto power with the Line Item Veto Act. The legislation empowered the president to sign any spending bill into law while simultaneously striking certain spending items within the bill, particularly any new spending, any amount of discretionary spending, or any new limited tax benefit. Once a president had stricken the item, Congress could pass that particular item again. If the president then vetoed the new legislation, Congress could override the veto by the ordinary method of a two-thirds vote in both houses. In Clinton v. City of New York (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled such a legislative alteration of the veto power to be unconstitutional.

12.3.6: Political Party Leader

The president is largely responsible for dictating the legislative agenda of his political party.

Learning Objective

Describe roles that the President plays above and beyond serving as the nation’s chief executive

Key Points

• The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the president from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress.
• Nevertheless, the president can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in one or both houses of Congress.
• The modern presidential campaign begins before the primary elections, which the two major political parties use to clear the field of candidates before their national nominating conventions, where the most successful candidate is made the party’s nominee for president.

Key Term

ineligibility clause

The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the president from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress.

Example

• The president can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in one or both houses of Congress. For example, the president or other officials of the executive branch may draft legislation and then ask senators or representatives to introduce these drafts into Congress.

Introduction

The President of the United States of America is the head of state and head of government of the United States. The president leads the executive branch of the federal government and is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. Since the founding of the United States, the power of the president and the federal government have grown substantially, and each modern president, despite possessing no formal legislative powers beyond signing or vetoing congressionally passed bills, is largely responsible for dictating the legislative agenda of his party and the foreign and domestic policy of the United States .

Obama Taking Oath of Office

After winning the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama was sworn into office on January 20, 2009.

As Legislative Facilitator

The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the president from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress. However, the president can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in one or both houses of Congress. For example, the president or other officials of the executive branch may draft legislation and then ask senators or representatives to introduce these drafts into Congress. The president can further influence the legislative branch through constitutionally mandated, periodic reports to Congress. These reports may be either written or oral, but today are given as the State of the Union Address, which often outlines the president’s legislative proposals for the coming year.

Campaigns and Nomination

The modern presidential campaign begins before the primary elections, which the two major political parties use to clear the field of candidates before their national nominating conventions, where the most successful candidate is made the party’s nominee for president. Typically, the party’s presidential candidate chooses a vice presidential nominee, and this choice is rubber stamped by the convention. Nominees participate in nationally televised debates, and while the debates are usually restricted to the Democratic and Republican nominees, third party candidates may be invited, such as Ross Perot in the 1992 debates. Nominees campaign across the country to explain their views, convince voters, and solicit contributions. Much of the modern electoral process is concerned with winning swing states through frequent visits and mass media advertising drives.

11.1: The Nature and Function of Congress

11.1.1: The House of Representatives

Learning Objective

Discuss the organizational structure of the House of Representatives and the qualifications for its members

Key Points

• The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the U.S. President before becoming law.
• Each U.S. state is represented in the House in proportion to its population but is entitled to at least one representative. The most populous state, California, currently has 53 representatives.
• In some states, the Republican and Democratic parties choose their candidates for each district in their political conventions in spring or early summer, which often use unanimous voice votes to reflect either confidence in the incumbent or because of bargaining in earlier private discussions.
• The House uses committees and their subcommittees for a variety of purposes, including the review of bills and the oversight of the executive branch. The entire House formally makes the appointment of committee members, but the choice of members is actually made by the political parties.
• The Constitution empowers the House of Representatives to impeach federal officials for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors and empowers the Senate to try such impeachment.

Key Term

impeachment

the act of impeaching a public official, either elected or appointed, before a tribunal charged with determining the facts of the matter.

Example

• In the history of the United States, the House of Representatives has impeached sixteen officials, of whom seven were convicted. (Another, Richard Nixon, resigned after the House Judiciary Committee passed articles of impeachment but before a formal impeachment vote by the full House. ) Only two Presidents of the United States have ever been impeached by the House: Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Both trials ended in acquittal; in Johnson’s case, the Senate fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for conviction.

The House of Representatives

Background

The United States House of Representatives is one of the two houses of the United States Congress (bicameral legislature). It is frequently referred to as the House. The other house is the Senate.

US Congress in Present Times

Using Weber’s theory of stratification, members of the U.S. Congress are at the top of the social hierarchy because they have high power and status, despite having relatively little wealth on average.

The composition and powers of the House are established in Article 1 of the United States Constitution. The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the United States President before becoming law (unless both the House and Senate re-pass the legislation with a two-thirds majority in each chamber). The House has several exclusive powers: the power to initiate revenue bills, to impeach officials, and to elect the President in case there is no majority in the Electoral College.

Each U.S. state is represented in the House in proportion to its population but is entitled to at least one representative. The most populous state, California, currently has 53 representatives. Law fixes the total number of voting representatives at 435. Each representative serves for a two-year term. The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, who presides over the chamber, is elected by the members of the House, and is therefore traditionally the leader of the House Democratic Caucus or the House Republican Conference, whichever of the two Congressional Membership Organizations has more (voting) members.

Apportionment

The population of U.S. Representatives is allocated to each of the 50 states and DC, ranked by population. DC (ranked 50) receives no seats in the House. Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, population, as determined by the census conducted every ten years, apportions seats in the House of Representatives among the states. Each state, however, is entitled to at least one Representative.

Qualifications

Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must: (1) be at least twenty-five years old; (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years; and (3) be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they represent. Members are not required to live in the district they represent, but they traditionally do. The age and citizenship qualifications for representatives are less than those for senators. The constitutional requirements of Article I, Section 2 for election to Congress is the maximum requirements that can be imposed on a candidate. Therefore, Article I, Section 5, which permits each House to be the judge of the qualifications of its own members does not permit either House to establish additional qualifications. Likewise, a state could not establish additional qualifications.

Demographics

Congress is constantly changing, constantly in flux. In recent times, the American south and west have gained House seats according to demographic changes recorded by the census and includes more minorities and women although both groups are still underrepresented, according to one view. While power balances among the different parts of government continue to change, the internal structure of Congress is important to understand along with its interactions with so-called intermediary institutions such as political parties, civic associations, interest groups, and the mass media.

Elections

Elections for representatives are held in every even-numbered year, on Election Day the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Representatives must be elected from single-member districts by plurality voting.

In most states, major party candidates for each district are nominated in partisan primary elections, typically held in spring to late summer. In some states, the Republican and Democratic parties choose their respective candidates for each district in their political conventions in spring or early summer. They often use unanimous voice votes to reflect either confidence in the incumbent or as the result of bargaining in earlier private discussions.

Representatives and Delegates serve two-year terms, while the Resident Commissioner serves for four years. The Constitution permits the House to expel a member with a two-thirds vote. In the history of the United States, only five members have been expelled from the House.

11.1.2: The Senate

Learning Objective

Summarize the powers accorded the Senate and the qualifications set for Senators

Key Points

• The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article One of the U.S. Constitution. Two senators, regardless of population, represent each U.S. state. Senators serve staggered six-year terms.
• It has the power to consent to treaties as a precondition to their ratification and consenting or confirming appointments of Cabinet secretaries, federal judges, other federal executive officials, military officers, regulatory officials, ambassadors, and other federal uniformed officers.
• The Constitution stipulates that no constitutional amendment may be created to deprive a state of its equal suffrage in the Senate without that state’s consent.
• Senators serve terms of six years each; the terms are staggered so that approximately one-third of the seats are up for election every two years.
• Senate procedure depends not only on the rules, but also on a variety of customs and traditions. The Senate commonly waives some of its stricter rules by unanimous consent. Party leaders typically negotiate unanimous consent agreements beforehand.

Key Terms

cloture

In legislative assemblies that permit unlimited debate (filibuster); a motion, procedure or rule, by which debate is ended so that a vote may be taken on the matter. For example, in the United States Senate, a three-fifths majority vote of the body is required to invoke cloture and terminate debate.

bicameral

Having, or pertaining to, two separate legislative chambers or houses.

Background

The United States Senate is the upper house of the bicameral legislature of the United States, and together with the United States House of Representatives comprises the United States Congress. The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article One of the U.S. Constitution. Two senators, regardless of population, represent each U.S. state. Senators serve staggered six-year terms. The chamber of the United States Senate is located in the north wing of the Capitol, in Washington, D.C., the national capital.

Capitol-Senate

The Senate’s side of the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.

The Senate has several exclusive powers not granted to the House. These include the power to consent to treaties as a precondition to their ratification. The senate may also consent to or confirm the appointment of Cabinet secretaries, federal judges, other federal executive officials, military officers, regulatory officials, ambassadors, and other federal uniformed officers. The Senate is also responsible for trying federal officials impeached by the House.

The Constitution stipulates that no constitutional amendment may be created to deprive a state of its equal suffrage in the Senate without that state’s consent. The District of Columbia and all other territories (including territories, protectorates, etc. ) are not entitled to representation in either House of the Congress. The District of Columbia elects two shadow senators, but they are officials of the D.C. city government and not members of the U.S. Senate. The United States has had 50 states since 1959, thus the Senate has had 100 senators since 1959.

Qualifications

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: 1) they must be at least 30 years old, 2) they must have been citizens of the United States for at least the past nine years, and 3) they must be inhabitants of the states they seek to represent at the time of their election. The age and citizenship qualifications for senators are more stringent than those for representatives. In Federalist No. 62, James Madison justified this arrangement by arguing that the “senatorial trust” called for a “greater extent of information and stability of character. “

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution disqualifies from the Senate any federal or state officers who had taken the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engaged in rebellion or aided the enemies of the United States. This provision, which came into force soon after the end of the Civil War, was intended to prevent those who had sided with the Confederacy from serving.

Term and Elections

Senators serve terms of six years each. The terms are staggered so that approximately one-third of the seats are up for election every two years. This was achieved by dividing the senators of the 1^st Congress into thirds (called classes), where the terms of one-third expired after two years, the terms of another third expired after four, and the terms of the last third expired after six years. This arrangement was also followed after the admission of new states into the union. The staggering of terms has been arranged such that both seats from a given state are not contested in the same general election, except when a mid-term vacancy is being filled. Current senators whose six-year terms expire on January 3, 2013, belong to Class I.

Daily Procedures

Senate procedure depends not only on the rules, but also on a variety of customs and traditions. The Senate commonly waives some of its stricter rules by unanimous consent. Party leaders typically negotiate unanimous consent agreements beforehand. A senator may block such an agreement, but in practice, objections are rare. The presiding officer enforces the rules of the Senate, and may warn members who deviate from them. The presiding officer sometimes uses the gavel of the Senate to maintain order.

A “hold” is placed when the leader’s office is notified that a senator intends to object to a request for unanimous consent from the Senate to consider or pass a measure. A hold may be placed for any reason and can be lifted by a senator at any time. A senator may place a hold simply to review a bill, to negotiate changes to the bill, or to kill the bill. A bill can be held for as long as the senator who objects to the bill wishes to block its consideration.

Holds can be overcome, but require time-consuming procedures such as filing cloture. Holds are considered private communications between a senator and the Leader, and are sometimes referred to as “secret holds”. A senator may disclose that he or she has placed a hold.

11.1.3: The House and the Senate: Differences in Responsibilities and Representation

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the structure and composition of the House and Senate

Key Points

• Congress is split into two chambers—the House of Representatives and Senate. Congress writes national legislation by dividing work into separate committees which specialize in different areas. Some members of Congress are elected by their peers to be officers of these committees.
• The disparity between the most and least populous states has grown since the Connecticut Compromise, which granted each state two members of the Senate and at least one member of the House of Representatives, for a total minimum of three presidential Electors, regardless of population.
• The Senate has several distinct powers. The “advice and consent” powers, such as the power to approve treaties, are a sole Senate privilege. The House, however, can initiate spending bills and has exclusive authority to impeach officials and choose the President in an Electoral College deadlock.
• The Senate and House are further differentiated by term lengths and the number of districts represented. With longer terms, fewer members and (in all but seven delegations) larger constituencies, senators may receive greater prestige.

Key Terms

apportionment

It is the process of allocating the political power of a set of constituent voters among their representatives in a governing body.

gerrymandering

The practice of redrawing electoral districts to gain an electoral advantage for a political party.

Example

• The “advice and consent” powers, such as the power to approve treaties, are a sole Senate privilege. The House, however, can initiate spending bills and has exclusive authority to impeach officials and choose the President in an Electoral College deadlock. The Senate and House are further differentiated by term lengths and the number of districts represented.

Background

Congress is split into two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. Congress writes national legislation by dividing work into separate committees which specialize in different areas. Some members of Congress are elected by their peers to be officers of these committees. Ancillary organizations such as the Government Accountability Office and the Library of Congress provide Congress with information, and members of Congress have staff and offices to assist them. Additionally, a vast industry of lobbyists helps members write legislation on behalf of diverse corporate and labor interests.

Senate Apportionment and Representation

The Constitution stipulates that no constitutional amendment may be created to deprive a state of its equal suffrage in the Senate without that state’s consent. The District of Columbia and all other territories (including territories, protectorates, etc.) are not entitled to representation in either House of the Congress. The District of Columbia elects two shadow senators, but they are officials of the D.C. city government and not members of the U.S. Senate. The United States has had 50 states since 1959, so the Senate has had 100 senators since 1959.

The disparity between the most and least populous states has grown since the Connecticut Compromise, which granted each state two members of the Senate and at least one member of the House of Representatives, for a total minimum of three presidential Electors, regardless of population. This means some citizens are effectively an order of magnitude better represented in the Senate than those in other states. For example, in 1787, Virginia had roughly ten times the population of Rhode Island. Today, California has roughly seventy times the population of Wyoming, based on the 1790 and 2000 censuses. Seats in the House of Representatives are approximately proportionate to the population of each state, reducing the disparity of representation.

House of Representatives Apportionment and Representation

Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned among the states by population, as determined by the census conducted every ten years. Each state, however, is entitled to at least one Representative.

The only constitutional rule relating to the size of the House reads, “The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand. Congress regularly increased the size of the House to account for population growth until it fixed the number of voting House members at 435 in 1911. The number was temporarily increased to 437 in 1959 upon the admission of Alaska and Hawaii, seating one representative from each of those states without changing existing apportionment, and returned to 435 four years later, after the reapportionment consequent to the 1960 census.

The Constitution does not provide for the representation of the District of Columbia or territories. The District of Columbia and the territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are represented by one non-voting delegate each. Puerto Rico elects a Resident Commissioner, but other than having a four-year term, the Resident Commissioner’s role is identical to the delegates from the other territories. The five Delegates and Resident Commissioner may participate in debates. Prior to 2011, they were also allowed to vote in committees and the Committee of the Whole when their votes would not be decisive.

States that are entitled to more than one Representative are divided into single-member districts. This has been a federal statutory requirement since 1967. Prior to that law, general ticket representation was used by some states. Typically, states redraw these district lines after each census, though they may do so at other times. Each state determines its own district boundaries, either through legislation or through non-partisan panels. Disproportion in representatives is unconstitutional and districts must be approximately equal in. The Voting Rights Act prohibits states from gerrymandering districts .

Gerrymandering Comparison

In this example, the more even distribution is on the left and the gerrymandered distribution is on the right.

Comparison to the Senate

As a check on the popularly elected House, the Senate has several distinct powers. For example, the “advice and consent” powers are a sole Senate privilege. The House, however, can initiate spending bills and has exclusive authority to impeach officials and choose the President in an Electoral College deadlock. The Senate and House are further differentiated by term lengths and the number of districts represented. Unlike the Senate, the House is more hierarchically organized, with leadership roles such as the Whips and the Minority and Majority leaders playing a bigger part. Moreover, the procedure of the House depends not only on the rules, but also on a variety of customs, precedents, and traditions. In many cases, the House waives some of its stricter rules (including time limits on debates) by unanimous consent. With longer terms, fewer members and (in all but seven delegations) larger constituencies, senators may receive greater prestige. The Senate has traditionally been considered a less partisan chamber because it’s relatively small membership might have a better chance to broker compromises.

11.1.4: The Legislative Function

Learning Objective

Differentiate between the powers granted by the Constitution to the House and Senate

Key Points

• Article I of the Constitution states all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives. Both are equal partners in the legislative process; legislation can’t be enacted without both their consent.
• Congress has implied powers deriving from the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause which permit Congress to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution…”.
• Legislative, oversight, and internal administrative tasks are divided among about two hundred committees and subcommittees which gather information, evaluate alternatives, and identify problems.

Key Terms

Necessary and Proper Clause

the provision in Article One of the United States Constitution, section 8, clause 18, which states that Congress has the power “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” for executing its duties

bypass

It is to avoid an obstacle etc, by constructing or using a bypass.

legislative

That branch of government which is responsible for making, or having the power to make, a law or laws.

Background

Article I of the Constitution states all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives. The House and Senate are equal partners in the legislative process—legislation cannot be enacted without the consent of both chambers. However, the Constitution grants each chamber some unique powers. The Senate ratifies treaties and approves presidential appointments while the House initiates revenue-raising bills. The House initiates impeachment cases, while the Senate decides impeachment cases. A two-thirds vote of the Senate is required before an impeached person can be forcibly removed from office.

Congress has implied powers deriving from the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause which permit Congress to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. ” Broad interpretations of this clause and of the Commerce Clause, the enumerated power to regulate commerce, in rulings such as McCulloch v Maryland have effectively widened the scope of Congress’s legislative authority far beyond that prescribed in Section 8.

Congress Overseeing the Executive Branch

One of Congress’s foremost non-legislative functions is the power to investigate and oversee the executive branch. Congressional oversight is usually delegated to committees and is facilitated by Congress’s subpoena power. Some critics have charged that Congress has, in some instances, failed to do an adequate job of overseeing the other branches of government. In the Plame affair, critics, including Representative Henry A. Waxman, charged that Congress was not doing an adequate job of oversight in this case. There have been concerns about congressional oversight of executive actions such as warrantless wiretapping, although others respond that Congress did investigate the legality of presidential decisions.

Congress also has the exclusive power of removal, allowing impeachment and removal of the president, federal judges and other federal officers. There have been charges that presidents acting under the doctrine of the unitary executive have assumed important legislative and budgetary powers that should belong to Congress. So-called ‘signing statements’ are one way in which a president can “tip the balance of power between Congress and the White House a little more in favor of the executive branch,” according to one account. Past presidents, including Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush have made public statements when signing congressional legislation about how they understand a bill or plan to execute it, and commentators including the American Bar Association have described this practice as against the spirit of the Constitution. There have been concerns that presidential authority to cope with financial crises is eclipsing the power of Congress

The impeachment trial of President Clinton

Floor proceedings of the U.S. Senate, in session during the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton.

Power in Committees

Committees write legislation. While procedures such as the House discharge petition process can introduce bills to the House floor and effectively bypass committee input, they are exceedingly difficult to implement without committee action. Committees have power and have been called ‘independent fiefdoms’. Legislative, oversight, and internal administrative tasks are divided among about two hundred committees and subcommittees which gather information, evaluate alternatives, and identify problems. They propose solutions for consideration by the full chamber. They also perform the function of oversight by monitoring the executive branch and investigating wrongdoing.

Bills and resolutions

In order to form a bill or resolution, first the House Financial Services committee meets. Committee members sit in the tiers of raised chairs, while those testifying and audience members sit below. Ideas for legislation can come from members, lobbyists, state legislatures, constituents, legislative counsel, or executive agencies. Usually, the next step is for the proposal to be passed to a committee for review. A submitted proposal usually takes one of the following forms:

• A bill, which is a law in the making.
• A joint resolution, which differs little from a bill since both are treated similarly. However, a joint resolution originates from the House.
• A Concurrent Resolutions, which affects both House and Senate and thus are not presented to the president for approval later.
• Simple resolutions, which concern only the House or only the Senate.

11.1.5: The Representation Function

Learning Objective

Describe the outcome of the Connecticut Compromise

Key Points

• Since 1787, the population disparity between large and small states has grown. For example, in 2006 California had 70 times the population of Wyoming.
• Critics, such as constitutional scholar Sanford Levinson, have suggested that the population disparity works against residents of large states and causes a steady redistribution of resources from large states to small states.
• The Connecticut Compromise gave every state, large and small, an equal vote in the Senate. Since each state has two senators, residents of smaller states have more clout in the Senate than residents of larger states.
• Providing services helps members of Congress win votes because elections can make a difference in close races. Congressional staff can help citizens navigate government bureaucracies.

Key Terms

cloakroom

A room, in a public building such as a theatre, where coats and other belongings may be left temporarily.

framers

The authors of the American Constitution.

Background

The two-chamber structure had functioned well in state governments. A compromise plan was adopted and representatives were chosen by the population which benefited larger states. Two senators were chosen by state governments which benefited smaller states.

When the Constitution was ratified in 1787, the ratio of the populations of large states to small states was roughly 12 to one. The Connecticut Compromise gave every state , large and small, an equal vote in the Senate. Since each state has two senators, residents of smaller states have more clout in the Senate than residents of larger states. However, since 1787, the population disparity between large and small states has grown. For example, in 2006 California had 70 times the population of Wyoming.

Congress Hall Committee Room in Philadelphia

The second committee room upstairs in Congress Hall, Philadelphia, PA.

Critics, such as constitutional scholar Sanford Levinson, have suggested that the population disparity works against residents of large states and causes a steady redistribution of resources from large states to small states. However, others argue that the framers intended for the Connecticut Compromise to construct the Senate so that each state had equal footing that was not based on population. Critics contend that the result is successful for maintaining balance.

Members and Constituents

A major role for members of Congress is providing services to constituents. Constituents request assistance with problems. Providing services helps members of Congress win votes because elections can make a difference in close races. Congressional staff can help citizens navigate government bureaucracies. One academic described the complex intertwined relation between lawmakers and constituents as “home style. “

Congressional Style

According to political scientist Richard Fenno, there are specific ways to categorize lawmakers. First, is if they are generally motivated by reelection: these are lawmakers who never met a voter they did not like and provide excellent constituent services. Second, is if they have good public policy: these are legislators who burnish a reputation for policy expertise and leadership. Third, is if they have power in the chamber: these are lawmakers who spend serious time along the rail of the House floor or in the Senate cloakroom ministering to the needs of their colleagues.

11.1.6: Service to Constituents

Learning Objective

Summarize the services Congresspersons and their staff provide constituents

Key Points

• A major role for members of Congress is providing services to constituents. Constituents request assistance with problems. Providing services helps members of Congress win votes and elections and can make a difference in close races.
• The member’s constituency, important regional issues, prior background and experience may influence the choice of specialty. Senators often choose a different specialty from that of the other senator from their state to prevent overlap.
• Senators often choose a different specialty from that of the other senator from their state to prevent overlap. Some committees specialize in running the business of other committees and exert a powerful influence over all legislation.

Key Term

constituency

An interest group or fan base.

Background

A major role for members of Congress is providing services to constituents. Constituents request assistance with problems. Providing services helps members of Congress win votes and elections and can make a difference in close races. Congressional staff can help citizens navigate government bureaucracies. One academic described the complex intertwined relationship between lawmakers and constituents as “home style. “

Committees investigate specialized subjects and advise the entire Congress about choices and trade-offs. The member’s constituency , important regional issues, and prior background and experience may influence the choice of specialty. Senators often choose a different specialty from that of the other senator from their state to prevent overlap. Some committees specialize in running the business of other committees and exert a powerful influence over all legislation; for example, the House Ways and Means Committee have considerable influence over House affairs.

2004 Presidential Election by County

This map shows the vote in the 2004 presidential election by county. All major Republican geographic constituencies are visible: red dominates the map, showing Republican strength in the rural areas, while the denser areas (i.e., cities) are blue. Notable exceptions include the Pacific coast; New England; the Black Belt, areas with high Native American populations; and the heavily Hispanic parts of the Southwest.

Congressional Style

One way to categorize lawmakers, according to political scientist Richard Fenno, is by their general motivation:

• re-election, these are lawmakers who “never met a voter they did not like” and provide excellent constituent services
• good public policy, legislators who burnish a reputation for policy expertise and leadership
• power in the chamber, lawmakers who spend serious time along the rail of the House floor or in the Senate cloakroom ministering to the needs of their colleagues – famous legislator Henry Clay in the mid-nineteenth century was described as an “issue entrepreneur” who looked for issues to serve his ambitions
• gridlock, unless Congress can begin to work together through compromise, each member will be removed, by one means or another (i.e., by CPA).

11.1.7: The Oversight Function

Learning Objective

Describe congressional oversight and the varied bases whence its authority is derived

Key Points

• Congressional oversight is the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation.
• Congress exercises this power largely through its congressional committee system. However, oversight, which dates to the earliest days of the Republic, also occurs in a wide variety of congressional activities and contexts.
• It is implied in the legislature’s authority, among other powers and duties, to appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, provide for a Navy, declare war, and impeach and remove from office the President, Vice President, and other civil officers.

Key Term

subpoena

A writ requiring someone to appear in court to give testimony.

Background

Congressional oversight refers to oversight by the United States Congress of the Executive Branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies. Congressional oversight is the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation. Congress exercises this power largely through its congressional committee system. However, oversight, which dates to the earliest days of the Republic, also occurs in a wide variety of congressional activities and contexts. These include authorization, appropriations, investigative, and legislative hearings by standing committees; specialized investigations by select committees; and reviews and studies by congressional support agencies and staff.

Congress’s oversight authority derives from its “implied” powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.

Report on the Organization of Congress

Oversight is an implied rather than an enumerated power under the U.S. Constitution. The government’s charter does not explicitly grant Congress the authority to conduct inquiries or investigations of the executive, to have access to records or materials held by the executive, or to issue subpoenas for documents or testimony from the executive.

There was little discussion of the power to oversee, review, or investigate executive activity at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or later in the Federalist Papers, which argued in favor of ratification of the Constitution. The lack of debate was because oversight and its attendant authority were seen as an inherent power of representative assemblies, which enacted public law.

Oversight also derives from the many, varied express powers of the Congress in the Constitution. It is implied in the legislature’s authority, among other powers and duties, to appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, provide for a Navy, declare war, and impeach and remove from office the President, Vice President, and other civil officers. Congress could not reasonably or responsibly exercise these powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials were obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.

The Supreme Court of the United States made the oversight powers of Congress legitimate, subject to constitutional safeguards for civil liberties, on several occasions. For instance, in 1927 the High Court found that in investigating the administration of the Justice Department, Congress was considering a subject “on which legislation could be had or would be materially aided by the information which the investigation was calculated to elicit. “

Activities and Avenues

Oversight occurs through a wide variety of congressional activities and avenues. Some of the most publicized are the comparatively rare investigations by select committees into major scandals or executive branch operations gone awry. Examples are temporary select committee inquiries into: China’s acquisition of U.S. nuclear weapons information, in 1999; the Iran-Contra affair, in 1987; intelligence agency abuses, in 1975-1976, and “Watergate,” in 1973-1974. The precedent for this kind of oversight goes back two centuries: in 1792, a special House committee investigated the defeat of an Army force by confederated Indian tribes.

Jim Greenwood Committee Chair

Congressman Jim Greenwood, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, gavels to start the hearing on human cloning.

11.1.8: The Public-Education Function of Congress

Learning Objective

Give examples of the various roles the Library Congress plays in public education

Key Points

• Putnam focused his efforts on making the Library more accessible and useful for the public and for other libraries. He instituted the interlibrary loan service, transforming the Library of Congress into what he referred to as a “library of last resort”.
• Based in the Progressive era’s philosophy of science as a problem-solver, and modeled after successful research branches of state legislatures, the LRS would provide informed answers to Congressional research inquiries on almost any topic.
• The library is open to the general public for academic research and tourists. Only those who are issued a Reader Identification Card may enter the reading rooms and access the collection.

Key Term

endowment

The invested funds of a not-for-profit institution.

Background

The Library of Congress , spurred by the 1897 reorganization, began to grow and develop more rapidly. Herbert Putnam held the office for forty years from 1899 to 1939, entering into the position two years before the Library became the first in the United States to hold one million volumes. Putnam focused his efforts on making the Library more accessible and useful for the public and for other libraries. He instituted the interlibrary loan service, transforming the Library of Congress into what he referred to as a library of last resort. Putnam also expanded Library access to “scientific investigators and duly qualified individuals” and began publishing primary sources for the benefit of scholars.

Library of Congress

The collections of the Library of Congress include more than 32 million cataloged books and other print materials in 470 languages; more than 61 million manuscripts.

Putnam’s tenure also saw increasing diversity in the Library’s acquisitions. In 1903, he persuaded President Theodore Roosevelt to transfer by executive order the papers of the Founding Fathers from the State Department to the Library of Congress. Putnam expanded foreign acquisitions as well.

In 1914, Putnam established the Legislative Reference Service as a separative administrative unit of the Library. Based in the Progressive era’s philosophy of science as a problem-solver, and modeled after successful research branches of state legislatures, the LRS would provide informed answers to Congressional research inquiries on almost any topic. In 1965, Congress passed an act allowing the Library of Congress to establish a trust fund board to accept donations and endowments, giving the Library a role as a patron of the arts.

The Library received the donations and endowments of prominent individuals such as John D. Rockefeller, James B. Wilbur and Archer M. Huntington. Gertrude Clarke Whittall donated five Stradivarius violins to the Library and Elizabeth Sprague Coolidge’s donations paid for a concert hall within the Library of Congress building and the establishment of an honorarium for the Music Division. A number of chairs and consultantships were established from the donations, the best known of which is the Poet Laureate Consultant.

Library of Congress Expansion

The Library’s expansion eventually filled the Library’s Main Building, despite shelving expansions in 1910 and 1927, forcing the Library to expand into a new structure. Congress acquired nearby land in 1928 and approved construction of the Annex Building (later the John Adams Building) in 1930. Although delayed during the Depression years, it was completed in 1938 and opened to the public in 1939.

When Putnam retired in 1939, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Archibald MacLeish as his successor. Occupying the post from 1939 to 1944 during the height of World War II, MacLeish became the most visible Librarian of Congress in the Library’s history. MacLeish encouraged librarians to oppose totalitarianism on behalf of democracy; dedicated the South Reading Room of the Adams Building to Thomas Jefferson, commissioning artist Ezra Winter to paint four themed murals for the room; and established a “democracy alcove” in the Main Reading Room of the Jefferson Building for important documents such as the Declaration, Constitution and Federalist Papers.

Even the Library of Congress assisted during the war effort. These efforts ranged from the storage of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution in Fort Knox for safekeeping to researching weather data on the Himalayas for Air Force pilots. MacLeish resigned in 1944 to become Assistant Secretary of State, and President Harry Truman appointed Luther H. Evans as Librarian of Congress. Evans, who served until 1953, expanded the Library’s acquisitions, cataloging and bibliographic services as much as the fiscal-minded Congress would allow, but his primary achievement was the creation of Library of Congress Missions around the world. Missions played a variety of roles in the postwar world: the mission in San Francisco assisted participants in the meeting that established the United Nations, the mission in Europe acquired European publications for the Library of Congress and other American libraries, and the mission in Japan aided in the creation of the National Diet Library.

 In 2016, Dr. Carla Hayden was appointed as the 14th Librarian of Congress, the first woman, and the first African-American to serve in the position.The library is open to the general public for academic research and tourists. Only those who are issued a Reader Identification Card may enter the reading rooms and access the collection. The Reader Identification Card is available in the Madison building to persons who are at least 16 years of age upon presentation of a government issued picture identification (e.g. driver’s license, state ID card or passport). However, only members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices, their staff, Library of Congress staff and certain other government officials may actually remove items from the library buildings. Members of the general public with Reader Identification Cards must use items from the library collection inside the reading rooms only. Since 1902, libraries in the United States have been able to request books and other items through interlibrary loan from the Library of Congress if these items are not readily available elsewhere.

11.1.9: The Conflict-Resolution Function

Learning Objective

Summarize the steps by which a bill becomes law

Key Points

• Representatives introduce a bill while the House is in session by placing it in the hopper on the Clerk’s desk. It is assigned a number and referred to a committee. The committee studies each bill intensely at this stage.
• Each bill goes through several stages in each house including consideration by a committee and advice from the Government Accountability Office. Most legislation is considered by standing committees, which have jurisdiction over a particular subject such as Agriculture or Appropriations.
• Once a bill is approved by one house, it is sent to the other house which may pass, reject, or amend it. For the bill to become law, both houses must agree to identical versions of the bill.
• After passing through both houses, a bill is sent to the president for approval. The president may sign it making it law or veto it and return it to Congress with his objections. A vetoed bill can still become law if each house of Congress votes to override the veto with a two-thirds majority.
• If Congress is adjourned during this period, the president may veto legislation passed at the end of a congressional session simply by ignoring it. This maneuver is known as a pocket veto. It cannot be overridden by the adjourned Congress.

Key Terms

appropriation

Public funds set aside for a specific purpose.

amend

To make a formal alteration in legislation by adding, deleting, or rephrasing.

Background

Representatives introduce a bill while the House is in session by placing it in the hopper on the Clerk’s desk. It is assigned a number and referred to a committee. At this stage, the committee studies each bill intensely. Drafting statutes requires “great skill, knowledge, and experience” and can sometimes take a year or more. On occasion, lobbyists write legislation and submit it to a member for introduction. Joint resolutions are the normal way to propose a constitutional amendment or declare war. On the other hand, concurrent resolutions (passed by both houses) and simple resolutions (passed by only one house) do not have the force of law, but they express the opinion of Congress or regulate procedure. Any member of either house may introduce bills. However, the Constitution provides states that: All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. While the Senate cannot originate revenue and appropriation bills, it has the power to amend or reject them. Congress has sought ways to establish appropriate spending levels.

Bill and Resolutions

Each bill goes through several stages in each house including consideration by a committee and advice from the Government Accountability Office. Most legislation is taken into consideration by standing committees, which have jurisdiction over a particular subject such as Agriculture or Appropriations. The House has 20 standing committees; the Senate has 16. Standing committees meet at least once each month. Almost all standing committee meetings for transacting business must be open to the public unless the committee publicly votes to close the meeting. A committee might call for public hearings on important bills. A chair who belongs to the majority party and a ranking member of the minority party lead each committee. Witnesses and experts can present their case for or against a bill. Then, a bill may go to what is called a mark-up session where committee members debate the bill’s merits. The committee members may offer amendments or revisions. Committees may also amend the bill, but the full house holds the power to accept or reject committee amendments. After debate, the committee votes whether it wishes to report the measure to the full house. If a bill is tabled, then it is rejected. If amendments are extensive, sometimes a new bill with amendments built in will be submitted as a so-called “clean bill” with a new number. Generally, members who have been in Congress longer have greater seniority and therefore greater power.

U.S. House Committee

The House Financial Services Committee meets. Committee members sit in the tiers of raised chairs, while individuals testifying and audience members sit below.

A bill, that reaches the floor of the full house, can be simple or complex. It begins with an enacting formula such as “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. ” Consideration of a bill requires, itself, a rule which is a simple resolution specifying the particulars of debate—time limits, possibility of further amendments, and such. Each side has equal time and members can yield to other members who wish to speak. Sometimes opponents seek to recommit a bill, which means to change part of it. Generally, discussion requires a quorum, usually half of the total number of representatives, before discussion can begin, although there are exceptions. The house may debate and amend the bill. The precise procedure used by the House and Senate differs. A final vote on the bill follows.

Once a bill is approved by one house, it is sent to the other which may pass, reject, or amend it. For the bill to become law, both houses must agree to identical versions of the bill. If the second house amends the bill, then the differences between the two versions must be reconciled in a conference committee. This is an ad hoc committee that includes both senators and representatives and uses a reconciliation process to limit budget bills. Both Houses use a budget enforcement mechanism informally known as “pay-as-you-go” or “pay-go” which discourages members from considering acts which increase budget deficits. If both houses agree to the version reported by the conference committee, the bill passes, otherwise it fails.

The Constitution, however, requires a recorded vote if demanded by one-fifth of the members present. If the voice vote is unclear or if the matter is controversial, a recorded vote usually happens.

After passage by both houses, a bill is enrolled and sent to the president for approval. The president may sign it making it law. If the bill is vetoed, the president returns it to Congress with his objections. A vetoed bill can still become law if each house of Congress votes to override the veto with a two-thirds majority. However, if Congress is adjourned during this period, the president may veto legislation passed at the end of a congressional session simply by ignoring it. This maneuver is known as a pocket veto. It cannot be overridden by the adjourned Congress.

11.2: Organization of Congress

11.2.1: Party Leadership in the House

Party leaders and whips of the U.S. House of Representatives are elected by their respective parties in a closed-door caucus.

Learning Objective

Explain in detail the power of the Speaker of the House, the Majority Leader and the Party Whip

Key Points

• The current House Majority Leader is Republican Kevin McCarthy, while the current House Minority Leader is Democrat Nancy Pelosi. The current House Majority Whip is Republican Steve Scalise, while the current House Minority Whip is Democrat Steny Hover.
• The Majority Leader’s duties and prominence vary depending upon the style of the Speaker of the House and the political climate within the majority caucus.
• The Minority Leader of the House serves as floor leader of the opposition party and is the counterpart to the Majority Leader.

Key Terms

Speaker of the House

the presiding officer (chair) of the House of Representatives

minority leader

the floor leader of the second largest caucus in a legislative body; the leader of the opposition

majority leader

a partisan position in a legislative body; often the chief spokesperson for the party in power, who sets the floor agenda and oversees the committee chairmen

Party leaders and whips of the United States House of Representatives are elected by their respective parties in a closed-door caucus by secret ballot. The party leaders are also known as floor leaders. The U.S. House of Representatives does not officially use the term “Minority Leader” although the media frequently does. Instead, the House uses the terms “Republican Leader” or “Democratic Leader” depending on which party holds a minority of seats.

The current House Majority Leader is Republican Kevin McCarthy, while the current House Minority Leader is Democrat Nancy Pelosi. The current House Majority Whip is Republican Steve Scales, while the current House Minority Whip is Democrat Steny Hoyer. The Majority Leader’s duties and prominence varies depending upon the style of the Speaker of the House and the political climate within the majority caucus.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy

The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader

The House Majority Leader’s duties and prominence vary depending upon the style and power of the Speaker of the House. Typically, the Speaker does not participate in debate and rarely votes on the floor. In some cases, Majority Leaders have been more influential than the Speaker, notably Tom DeLay who was more prominent than Speaker Dennis Hastert. In addition, Speaker Newt Gingrich delegated to Dick Armey an unprecedented level of authority over scheduling legislation on the House floor. As presiding office of the House of Representatives, the Speaker holds a variety of powers over the House but usually delegates them to another member of the majority party.

The Speaker in the United States, by tradition, is the head of the majority party in the House of Representatives, outranking the Majority Leader. However, despite having the right to vote, the Speaker usually does not participate in debate and rarely votes. The Speaker is responsible for ensuring that the House passes legislation supported by the majority party. In pursuing this goal, the Speaker may use his or her power to determine when each bill reaches the floor. They also chair the majority party’s steering committee in the House. While the Speaker is the functioning head of the House majority party, the same is not true of the President pro tempore of the Senate, whose office is primarily ceremonial and honorary. The Speaker may designate any member of the House to act as Speaker pro tempore and preside over the House. During important debates, the Speaker pro tempore is ordinarily a senior member of the majority party who may be chosen for his or her skill in presiding. At other times, more junior members may be assigned to preside to give them experience with the rules and procedures of the House. The Speaker may also designate a Speaker pro tempore for special purposes, such as designating a Representative whose district is near Washington, DC to sign enrolled bills during long recesses.

The Minority Leader

The Minority Leader of the House serves as floor leader of the opposition party and is the counterpart to the Majority Leader. Unlike the Majority Leader, the Minority Leader is on the ballot for Speaker of the House when Congress convenes. If the Minority Leader’s party takes control of the House and the party officers are all re-elected to their seats, the Minority Leader is usually the party’s top choice for Speaker for the next Congress, while the Minority Whip is typically in line to become Majority Leader. The Minority Leader usually meets with the Majority Leader and the Speaker to discuss agreements on controversial issues.

The floor leaders and whips of each party are elected by their respective parties in a closed-door caucus by secret ballot. The Speaker-elect is also chosen in a closed-door session although they are formally installed in their position by a public vote when Congress reconvenes.

11.2.2: Party Leadership in the Senate

The party leadership of the Senate refers to the officials elected by the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate Republican Conference.

Learning Objective

Summarize the leadership structure in the Senate

Key Points

• Each party is led by a floor leader who directs the legislative agenda and is augmented by an Assistant Leader and several other officials who work together to manage the floor schedule of legislation, enforce party discipline, oversee efforts to elect new Senators, and maintain party unity.
• The titular, non-partisan leaders of the Senate itself are the Vice President of the United States, who serves as President of the Senate, and the President pro tempore, the most senior most member of the majority who theoretically presides in the absence of the Vice President.
• Unlike committee chairmanships, leadership positions are not traditionally conferred on the basis of seniority but are elected in closed-door caucuses.

Key Terms

seniority

refers to the number of years one member of a group has been a part of the group, or the political power attained by position within the United States Government

titular

One who holds a title.

caucus

A meeting, especially a preliminary meeting, of persons belonging to a party, to nominate candidates for public office, or to select delegates to a nominating convention, or to confer regarding measures of party policy; a political primary meeting.

The party leadership of the United States Senate refers to the officials elected by the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate Republican Conference to manage the affairs of each party in the Senate. Each party is led by a floor leader who directs the legislative agenda of his caucus in the Senate, and who is augmented by an Assistant Leader or Whip, and several other officials who work together to manage the floor schedule of legislation, enforce party discipline, oversee efforts to elect new Senators, and maintain party unity.

The titular, non-partisan leaders of the Senate itself are the Vice President of the United States, who serves as President of the Senate, and the President pro tempore, the most senior member of the majority who theoretically presides in the absence of the Vice President.

Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill, where bills become laws.

Unlike committee chairmanships, leadership positions are not traditionally conferred on the basis of seniority, but are elected in closed-door caucuses.

Since January 3, 2007, the Democratic Party has constituted a majority in the Senate. The Senate Majority Leader is Harry Reid (Nevada) and serves as leader of the Senate Democratic Conference and manages the legislative business of the Senate. The Senate Majority Whip is Dick Durbin (Illinois) who manages votes, communicates with individual senators, and ensures passage of bills relevant to the agenda and policy goals of the Senate Democratic Conference. Since January 3, 2007, the Republican Party has constituted the minority of the Senate. Mitch McConnell (Kentucky) is the Senate Minority Leader and Jon Kyl (Arizona) is the Senate Minority Whip.

11.2.3: Bicameralism

Bicameralism is the practice of having two legislative or parliamentary chambers.

Learning Objective

Describe bicameralism and the Founding Fathers’ understanding of its role in American federalism

Key Points

• The Founding Fathers of the United States favored a bicameral legislature. The idea was to have the Senate be wealthier and wiser. The Senate was created to be a stabilizing force, elected not by mass electors, but selected by the State legislators.
• A conference committee is appointed when the two chambers cannot agree on the same wording of a proposal, and consists of a small number of legislators from each chamber. This tends to place much power in the hands of only a small number of legislators.
• State legislators chose the Senate and senators had to possess a significant amount of property in order to be deemed worthy and sensible enough for the position.
• As part of the Great Compromise, the Founding Fathers developed a form of bicameralism in which the upper house would have states represented equally, and the lower house would have them represented by population.

Key Terms

Great Compromise

An agreement reached during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that in part defined the legislative structure and representation that each state would have under the US Constitution. It called for a bicameral legislature, along with proportional representation in the lower house, but required the upper house to be weighted equally between the states.

bicameral

Having, or pertaining to, two separate legislative chambers or houses.

Bicameralism

In government, bicameralism is the practice of having two legislative or parliamentary chambers comprise bills. Bicameralism is an essential and defining feature of the classical notion of mixed government. Bicameral legislatures tend to require a concurrent majority to pass legislation. A conference committee is appointed when the two chambers cannot agree on the same wording of a proposal that consists of a small number of legislators from each chamber. This tends to place much power in the hands of only a small number of legislators. Whatever legislation, if any, the conference committee finalizes must then be approved in an unamendable “take-it-or-leave-it” manner by both chambers.

The Founding Fathers of the United States favored a bicameral legislature. The idea was to have the Senate be wealthier and wiser. The Senate was created to be a stabilizing force, elected not by mass electors, but selected by the State legislators. Senators would be more knowledgeable and more deliberate—a sort of republican nobility—and a counter to what Madison saw as the “fickleness and passion” that could absorb the House.

Capitol Hill

The U.S. has a bicameral legislature in Congress, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate

State legislators chose the Senate and senators had to possess a significant amount of property in order to be deemed worthy and sensible enough for the position. In fact, it was not until the year 1913 that the Seventeenth Amendment was passed, which “mandated that Senators would be elected by popular vote rather than chosen by the State legislatures. ” As part of the Great Compromise, they invented a new rationale for bicameralism in which the upper house would have states represented equally, and the lower house would have them represented by population.

During the 1930s, the Legislature of the State of Nebraska was reduced from bicameral to unicameral with the 43 members that once comprised that state’s Senate. One of the arguments used to sell the idea at the time to Nebraska voters was that by adopting a unicameral system, the perceived evils of the conference committee process would be eliminated. During his term as Governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura proposed converting the Minnesotan legislature to a single chamber with proportional representation, as a reform that he felt would solve many legislative difficulties and impinge upon legislative corruption. Ventura argued that bicameral legislatures for provincial and local areas were excessive and unnecessary, and discussed unicameralism as a reform that could address many legislative and budgetary problems for states.

11.2.4: Legislative Agendas

An agenda is a list of meeting activities in the order in which they are to be taken up in the legislature.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between two uses of the word agenda

Key Points

• A political agenda is a set of issues and policies laid out by an executive or cabinet in government that tries to influence current and near-future political news and debate.
• In parliamentary procedure, an agenda is not binding upon an assembly unless its own rules make it so, or unless it has been adopted as the agenda for the meeting by majority vote at the start of the meeting.
• If an agenda is binding upon an assembly and a specific time is listed for an item, that item cannot be taken up before that time, and must be taken up when that time arrives even if other business is pending.

Key Terms

town meeting

a form of direct democratic rule, used primarily in portions of the United States since the 17th century, in which most or all the members of a community come together to legislate policy and budgets for local government

docket

A short entry of the proceedings of a court; the register containing them; the office containing the register.

adjourn

Temporarily ending an event with intentions to complete it at another time or place.

An agenda is a list of meeting activities in the order in which they are to be taken up, by beginning with the call to order and ending with adjournment. It usually includes one or more specific items of business to be discussed. It may, but is not required to, include specific times for one or more activities. An agenda may also be called a “docket. “

A political agenda is a set of issues and policies laid out by an executive or cabinet in government that tries to influence current and near-future political news and debate. In parliamentary procedure, an agenda is not binding upon an assembly unless its own rules make it so or unless it has been adopted as the agenda for the meeting by majority vote at the start of the meeting. Otherwise, it is merely for the guidance of the chair.

If an agenda is binding upon an assembly, and a specific time is listed for an item. That item cannot be taken up before that time and must be taken up when that time arrives even if other business is pending. If it is desired to do otherwise, the rules can be suspended for that purpose.

Gerald Ford Papers

Gerald Ford set the Republican legislative agenda.

The political agenda while shaped by government can be influenced by grassroots support from party activists at events, such as a party conference, and can even be shaped by non-governmental activist groups which have a political aim. Increasingly, the mass media can have an effect in shaping the political agenda through its news coverage of news stories. A political party can be described as shaping the political agenda or setting the political agenda if its promotion of certain issues gains prominent news coverage. For example, at election time, if a political party wants to promote its polices and gain prominent news coverage in order to increase its support.

11.2.5: The Committee System

A congressional committee is a legislative sub-organization in Congress that handles a specific duty.

Learning Objective

Describe the committee system, its growth, and that growth’s effect on Congress’s power

Key Points

• Committees monitor on-going governmental operations, identify issues suitable for legislative review, gather and evaluate information and recommend courses of action to their parent body.
• Congressional committees provide invaluable informational services to Congress by investigating and reporting about specialized subjects.
• Since 1761, the growing autonomy of committees has fragmented the power of each congressional chamber as a unit. This centrifugal dispersion of power has, without doubt, weakened the Legislative Branch relative to the other branches of the federal government.
• Today the Senate operates with 20 standing and select committees. These select committees, however, are permanent in nature and are treated as standing committees under Senate rules.

Key Term

Ways and Means

The Committee of Ways and Means is the chief tax-writing committee of the United States House of Representatives

A congressional committee is a legislative sub-organization in the U.S. Congress that handles a specific duty. Committee membership enables members to develop specialized knowledge of the matters under their jurisdiction. Committees monitor on-going governmental operations, identify issues suitable for legislative review, gather and evaluate information and recommend courses of action to their parent body. It is neither expected nor possible that a member of Congress be an expert on all matters and subject areas that come before Congress. Congressional committees provide invaluable informational services to Congress by investigating and reporting about specialized subjects.

Most legislation is considered by standing committees which have jurisdiction over a particular subject such as Agriculture or Appropriations. The House has twenty standing committees; the Senate has sixteen. Standing committees meet at least once each month. Almost all standing committee meetings for transacting business must be open to the public unless the committee votes, publicly, to close the meeting. A committee might call for public hearings on important bills. Each committee is led by a chair who belongs to the majority party and a ranking member of the minority party. Witnesses and experts can present their case for or against a bill. Then, a bill may go to what’s called a mark-up session where committee members debate the bill’s merits and may offer amendments or revisions. Committees may also amend the bill, but the full house holds the power to accept or reject committee amendments. After debate, the committee votes whether it wishes to report the measure to the full house. If a bill is tabled then it is rejected. If amendments are extensive, sometimes a new bill with amendments built in will be submitted as a so-called clean bill with a new number.

Congress divides its legislative, oversight, and internal administrative tasks among approximately 200 committees and subcommittees. Within assigned areas, these functional subunits gather information, compare and evaluate legislative alternatives, identify policy problems and propose solutions, select, determine, and report measures for full chamber consideration, monitor executive branch performance and investigate allegations of wrongdoing. While this investigatory function is important, procedures such as the House discharge petition process are so difficult to implement that committee jurisdiction over particular subject matter of bills has expanded into semi-autonomous power.

Since 1761, the growing autonomy of committees has fragmented the power of each congressional chamber as a unit. Over time, this system proved ineffective, so in 1816 the Senate adopted a formal system of 11 standing committees with five members each. With the advent of this new system, committees are able to handle long-term studies and investigations, in addition to regular legislative duties. With the growing responsibilities of the Senate, the committees gradually grew to be the key policy-making bodies of the Senate, instead of merely technical aids to the chamber.

By 1906, the Senate maintained 66 standing and select committees—eight more committees than members of the majority party. The large number of committees and the manner of assigning their chairmanships suggests that many of them existed solely to provide office space in those days before the Senate acquired its first permanent office building, the Russell Senate Office Building. By May 27, 1920, the Russell Senate Office Building had opened, and with all Senate members assigned private office space, the Senate quietly abolished 42 committees. Today the Senate operates with 20 standing and select committees. These select committees, however, are permanent in nature and are treated as standing committees under Senate rules.

Russell Senate Office Building

The Russell Senate Office Building houses several Congressional staff members, including those on the United States Senate Committees on Armed Services, Rules and Administration, Veterans’ Affairs, and others.

The first House Committee was appointed on April 2, 1789 to prepare and report such standing rules and orders of proceeding as well as the duties of a Sergeant-at-Arms to enforce those rules. Other committees were created as needed, on a temporary basis, to review specific issues for the full House. The House relied primarily on the Committee of the Whole to handle the bulk of legislative issues. The Committee on Ways and Means followed on July 24, 1789 during a debate on the creation of the Treasury Department over concerns of giving the new department too much authority over revenue proposals. The House felt it would be better equipped if it established a committee to handle the matter. This first Committee on Ways and Means had 11 members and existed for just two months. It later became a standing committee in 1801, a position it still holds today.

Ways and Means Committee Logo

The Ways and Means Committee has been an important committee in the U.S. since 1789

11.2.6: The Staff System

Congressional staff are employees of the United States Congress or individual members of Congress.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between the roles of different congressional staff; in the Congressional Research Service, Congressional Budget Office, and Government Accountability Office

Key Points

• In the year 2000, there were approximately 11,692 personal staff, 2,492 committee staff, 274 leadership staff, 5,034 institutional staff, 3,500 GAO employees, 747 CRS employees, and 232 CBO employees.
• Every Representative hired 14 staff members, while the average Senator hired 34. In 2000, Representatives had a limit of 18 full-time and four part-time staffers, while Senators had no limit on staff.
• Majority and minority members hire their own staff except for two committees in each house: the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the House, and the Select Committee on Ethics and Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in the Senate.

Key Terms

Congressional Research Service

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), known as Congress’s think tank, is a public policy research arm of the United States Congress.

Congressional Budget Office

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is a federal agency within the legislative branch of the United States government that provides economic data to Congress.

Government Accountability Office

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is the audit, evaluation, and investigative arm of the United States Congress.

appropriation

Public funds set aside for a specific purpose.

Congressional staff are employees of the United States Congress or individual members of Congress. The various types of congressional staff are as follows: personal staff, who work for individual members of Congress; committee staff, who serve either the majority or minority on congressional committees; leadership staff, who work for the speaker, majority and minority leaders, and the majority and minority whips; institutional staff, who include the majority and minority party floor staff and non-partisan staff; and the support agency staff, who are the non-partisan employees of the Congressional Research Service (CRS), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Russell Senate Office Building

The Russell Senate Office Building houses several Congressional staff members, including those on the United States Senate Committees on Armed Services, Rules and Administration, Veterans’ Affairs, and others.

In the year 2000, there were approximately 11,692 personal staff, 2,492 committee staff, 274 leadership staff, 5,034 institutional staff, 747 CRS employees, and 232 CBO employees, and 3,500 GAO employees. Every Representative hired 14 staff members, while the average Senator hired 34. Representatives had a limit of 18 full-time and four part-time staffers, while Senators had no limit on staff.

Each congressional committee has a staff of varying size. Appropriations for committee staff are made in annual legislative appropriations bills. Majority and minority members hire their own staff, with the exception of two committees in each house: the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the House, and the Select Committee on Ethics and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in the Senate. These committees have a single staff.

In 2000, House committees had an average of 68 staff, and Senate committees an average of 46. Committee staff includes staff directors, committee counsel, committee investigators, press secretaries, chief clerks and office managers, schedulers, documents clerks, and assistants.

11.2.7: The Caucus

A caucus is a meeting of supporters or members of a political party or movement.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between two different types of political caucus

Key Points

• The term caucus is often used to discuss procedures implemented by states, including Iowa and Texas, to select presidential nominees.
• Depending on how the caucus is organized, the caucus system may require voters to publicly announce the candidates they support. Voters have the option to draft resolutions introduced at later divisional caucuses or conventions.
• A caucus can also be a sub-grouping of officials who convene to advocate, agitate, lobby or vote collectively on policy.

Key Term

bicameral

Having, or pertaining to, two separate legislative chambers or houses.

A caucus is a meeting of supporters or members of a political party or movement. Members of a political party or subgroup may meet to coordinate actions, choose group policy or nominate candidates for various offices.The term caucus is often used to discuss procedures implemented by states, including Iowa and Texas, to select presidential nominees. . Since 1980, caucuses have become an important component of the nomination process.

Iowa Caucus

The Iowa Caucus is the first major electoral event of the nominating process for President of the United States.

Despite a Democratic Party rule that delegates are allocated proportionally rather than “winner takes all,” some caucus groups decide individually how to allocate their group’s delegates. Discussion of party rules is not necessarily part of the caucus experience, while few rules govern the actual process. In the “winner-take-all” scenario, a group’s delegate allocation may be reported as unanimous while ignoring minority votes. Depending on how the caucus is organized, the caucus system may require voters to publicly announce the candidates they support. Voters have the option to draft resolutions introduced by delegates at later divisional caucuses or conventions.

A caucus can also be a sub-grouping of officials with shared affinities or ethnicities. These officials convene to advocate, agitate, lobby or to vote collectively on policy. At the congressional and legislative levels, Democratic and Republican members organize themselves into a caucus.

There can also be smaller caucuses in a legislative body, including those that are multi-partisan or bicameral. One of the best-known is the Congressional Black Caucus, a group of African-American congressmen. Another prominent example is the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whose members advance issues affecting Hispanics. In a different vein, the Congressional Internet Caucus is a bipartisan group promoting the growth and advancement of the Internet. Other congressional caucuses like the Out of Iraq Caucus strive to achieve political goals, generally organized around a single issue.

11.2.8: Congressional Districts

The quantity and boundaries of the 435 districts are determined after each census gauges the population shifts in each state.

Learning Objective

Describe what determines the quantity and boundaries of congressional districts

Key Points

• The boundaries of districts often shift with each redistricting. Over time, the region and demographics represented in a district can change substantially.
• As of the 2000 census, the average population per district is 646,946 people. California, with 53 districts, has the most. States with only one district include Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming.
• Alaska is the district with the greatest area and New York’s 15th district has the smallest area. Montana’s district has the largest number of people (905,316) and Wyoming has the fewest number of people (495,304). Delaware is the oldest district.

Key Terms

apportion

To divide and distribute portions of a whole.

apportionment

The act of apportioning or the state of being apportioned

Congressional Districts

The quantity (apportionment) and boundaries (redistricting) of districts are determined after each census, although in some cases states have changed the boundaries more than once per census. The census is used to gauge each state’s population and thus, proportional need for representation. Due to the shifts in population a state may gain or lose congressional districts. For example, since the 2000 census, Nebraska has had three districts, but it used to have as many as six. Texas currently has 32 districts, but will be adding 4 due to reapportionment as a result of the 2010 census. Other states will lose districts since the number of congressional seats has been set at 435 by statute.

The boundaries of districts often shift with each redistricting. Over time, the region and demographics represented in a district can change substantially. Furthermore, districts sometimes retain the same boundaries while changing their district numbers.

U.S. District Map

This map shows the U.S. Congress House Districts for the 110th-112th Congresses.

As of the 2000 census, the average population per district is 646,946 people. California had the most, at 53 districts. States with only one district include Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming. Alaska, Delaware, and Wyoming are the only states that have never had more than one district. Alaska is the district with the greatest area and New York’s 15^th district has the smallest area. Montana’s district has the largest number of people (905,316) and Wyoming has the fewest number of people (495,304). Delaware is the oldest district; It has had the same geographical borders since 1789.

11.3: The Legislative Function of Congress

11.3.1: How a Bill Becomes Law

A bill is introduced by a member of the legislature, read through, debated, and then passed to become a law.

Learning Objective

Explain the process by which a bill becomes a law through the legislative and executive branches of government

Key Points

• In the US system, where the executive is formally separated from the legislature, all bills must originate from the legislature.
• In the U.S. Congress, a system of committees considers law relating to each policy area jurisdictions. The committee system is a way to provide for specialization, or a division of the legislative labor.
• At the second reading the general merits of the bill are considered. The committee reports to the legislature and further amendments are proposed. A third reading debate occurs and the bill is submitted.
• Bills passed by the legislature usually require the approval of the executive to become law. The legislature often has the power to override the veto of the executive by means of a supermajority. Any branch at anytime may decline the proposed bill.

Key Term

fiat

An authoritative command or order to do something; an effectual decree.

How a Bill Becomes Law

A bill is introduced by a member of the legislature. While mechanisms exist to allow other members of the legislature to introduce bills, these are subject to strict timetables and usually fail unless a consensus is reached. In the U.S. system, where the executive is formally separated from the legislature, all bills must originate from the legislature.

Bills can be introduced through leave and government motion. Leave is when a motion is brought before the house asking that leave be given to bring in a bill. The legislator has 10 minutes to propose a bill, which can then be considered by the House on a day appointed for the purpose. While this rule still exists in the rules of procedure of the U.S. Congress, it is seldom used. A government motion occurs in jurisdictions where the executive can control legislative business a bill may be brought in by executive fiat.

A system of committees considers law relating to each policy area jurisdictions in the U.S. Congress. Thousands of bills are introduced in every session of Congress and no single member can possibly be adequately informed on all the issues that arise. The committee system is a way to provide for specialization, or a division of the legislative labor. Committees usually have the final say on pieces of legislation and only very rarely are deprived of control of a bill; although this kind of action is allowed in the rules of each chamber.

Capitol Hill

The U.S. has a bicameral legislature in Congress, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate

House and Senate Committees

A congressional committee is a legislative sub-organization in the United States Congress that handles a specific duty. Committee membership enables members to develop specialized knowledge of the matters under their jurisdiction. Congress divides its legislative, oversight, and internal administrative tasks among approximately 200 committees and subcommittees.

There are three main types of committees—standing, select or special, and joint. In the House of Representatives, there are 21 permanent committees, and 20 in the United States Senate. Four joint committees operate with members from both houses on matters of mutual jurisdiction and oversight. Committees in the House of Representatives generally have more members, due its larger size, as compared to the smaller 100-member Senate. Senate rules fix the maximum size for many of its committees, while the House determines the size and makeup of each committee every new Congress.

Bills are generally considered through a number of readings. This refers to the historic practice of the clerical officers of the legislature reading the contents of a bill to the legislature. While the bill is no longer read, the motions on the bill still refer to this practice.

At the second reading the general merits of the bill are considered. After which, the bill is referred to a committee, considering the bill line by line proposing amendments. The committee reports to the legislature, at which stage further amendments are proposed. Finally a third reading debate at which the bill as amended is considered in its entirety. The process is repeated in the other house, before the Bill is submitted to the executive for approval.

Bills passed by the legislature usually require the approval of the executive to become law. The need to receive approval can be used as a political tool by the executive and its refusal is known as a veto. The legislature often has the power to override the veto of the executive by means of a supermajority. Any branch at anytime may decline the proposed bill.

11.3.2: Committee Deliberation

Deliberation is a process of thoughtfully weighing options, usually prior to voting, emphasizing the use of logic and reason.

Learning Objective

Identify the significance of committee deliberation in the legislative process

Key Points

• In deliberative democracy the aim is for both elected officials and the general public to use deliberation rather than power-struggle as the basis for their vote and is a form of democracy in which deliberation is central to decision making.
• Deliberative democracy differs from traditional democratic theory in that authentic deliberation, not mere voting, is the primary source of legitimacy for the lawmaking processes.
• A deliberative assembly is an organization comprising members who use parliamentary procedure to make decisions. A committee is a small deliberative assembly subordinate to a larger deliberative assembly.

Key Term

subordinate

Placed in a lower class, rank, or position.

Deliberation and Democracy

Deliberation is a process of thoughtfully weighing options, usually prior to voting. Deliberation emphasizes the use of logic and reason as opposed to power-struggle, creativity, or dialogue. Group decisions are generally made after deliberation through a vote of those involved.

In deliberative democracy the aim is for both elected officials and the general public to use deliberation rather than power-struggle as the basis for their vote. Deliberative democracy is a form of democracy in which deliberation is central to decision making. It adopts elements of both consensus decision-making and majority rule. Deliberative democracy differs from traditional democratic theory in that authentic deliberation, not mere voting, is the primary source of legitimacy for the lawmaking processes.

Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill, where bills become laws.

Debate in the U.S. Congress

Each bill goes through several stages in each house including consideration by a committee and advice from the Government Accountability Office. Most legislation is considered by standing committees which have jurisdiction over a particular subject such as Agriculture or Appropriations. The House has twenty standing committees; the Senate has sixteen. Standing committees meet at least once each month. Almost all standing committee meetings for transacting business must be open to the public unless the committee votes, publicly, to close the meeting. A committee might call for public hearings on important bills. Each committee is led by a chair who belongs to the majority party and a ranking member of the minority party. Witnesses and experts can present their case for or against a bill. Then, a bill may go to what’s called a mark-up session where committee members debate the bill’s merits and may offer amendments or revisions. Committees may also amend the bill, but the full house holds the power to accept or reject committee amendments. After debate, the committee votes whether it wishes to report the measure to the full house. If a bill is tabled then it is rejected. If amendments are extensive, sometimes a new bill with amendments built in will be submitted as a so-called clean bill with a new number. Both houses have procedures under which committees can be bypassed or overruled but they are rarely used. Generally, members who have been in Congress longer have greater seniority and therefore greater power.

A bill which reaches the floor of the full house can be simple or complex and begins with an enacting formula such as “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. ” Consideration of a bill requires, itself, a rule which is a simple resolution specifying the particulars of debate—time limits, possibility of further amendments, and such. Each side has equal time and members can yield to other members who wish to speak. Sometimes opponents seek to recommit a bill which means to change part of it. Generally, discussion requires a quorum, usually half of the total number of representatives, before discussion can begin, although there are exceptions. The house may debate and amend the bill; the precise procedures used by the House and Senate differ. A final vote on the bill follows.

Once a bill is approved by one house, it is sent to the other which may pass, reject, or amend it. For the bill to become law, both houses must agree to identical versions of the bill. If the second house amends the bill, then the differences between the two versions must be reconciled in a conference committee, an ad hoc committee that includes both senators and representatives sometimes by using a reconciliation process to limit budget bills. Both Houses use a budget enforcement mechanism informally known as pay-as-you-go or paygo which discourages members from considering acts which increase budget deficits. If both houses agree to the version reported by the conference committee, the bill passes, otherwise it fails. In this respect, this is how bills “die” in committees.

The Constitution specifies that a majority of members known as a quorum be present before doing business in each house. However, the rules of each house assume that a quorum is present unless a quorum call demonstrates the contrary. Since representatives and senators who are present rarely demand quorum calls, debate often continues despite the lack of a majority.

11.3.3: Debate

Debate is contention in argument and a method of interactive representational argument, and often occurs in Congress.

Learning Objective

Discuss the role that debate plays in the United States Congress

Key Points

• Debate is a broader form of argument than deductive reasoning, which only examines whether a conclusion is a consequence of premises, and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn’t the case, or rhetoric, which is a technique of persuasion.
• Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior context and framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
• Debating is commonly carried out in many assemblies of various types to discuss matters and to make resolutions about action to be taken, often by a vote.

Key Terms

filibuster

A delaying tactic, especially the use of long, often irrelevant speeches given in order to delay progress or the making of a decision, especially on the floor of the US Senate.

rhetoric

The art of using language, especially public speaking, as a means to persuade.

Debate is contention in argument, dispute, controversy, and discussion. It is a method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than deductive reasoning, which only examines whether a conclusion is a consequence of premises, and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn’t the case, or rhetoric, which is a technique of persuasion. Debates are often organized for purely competitive purposes.

The use of debate in Congress often occurs when a new bill is introduced, especially if that bill is controversial. Senators may debate a bill. In the Senate, Senators sometimes use this rule to filibuster a bill—that is, continue debating a bill endlessly so that it cannot be voted on. The only way to end a filibuster is for three-fifths of all Senators to vote for a cloture resolution, which ends all debate and brings the bill up for voting. Use of the filibuster tends to be controversial. Whichever party is in the majority tends to call its use “obstructionism,” while the other side sees it as an important check on the majority.

Because of its size, the House relies heavily upon fixed rules and strict timetables for debate. When bills are debated on the floor of the House, each party’s leader is allocated a fixed amount of time to present their argument for or against the bill, and they can delegate this time to members of their party as they see fit. During House debates, it is common for representatives to “yield their time” to one another. Times for debate and other procedures are set by the House Rules Committee, which is generally considered to be one of the most powerful committees in Congress.

Congressional Records

The Congressional Records contain sections of verbatum congressional debates.

11.3.4: Conference Committee

A conference committee is a committee of Congress appointed by the House and Senate to resolve disagreements on a particular bill.

Learning Objective

Explain the function of the conference committee in the legislative process

Key Points

• The conference committee is usually composed of the senior Members of the standing committees of each House that originally considered the legislation.
• Conference committees exist to draft a compromise bill that both houses can accept. Both houses of Congress must eventually pass the identical legislation for the bill to become law.
• Each house determines the number of conferees from its house. The number of conferees need not be equal from each side. In order to conclude its business, a majority of both House and Senate delegations to the conference must indicate their approval by signing the conference report.
• The authority to appoint conferees lies in the entire House, and the entire Senate can appoint conferees by adopting a debatable motion to do so, but leadership has increasingly exercised authority in the appointment of conferees.
• The conference committee produces a conference report melding the work of the House and Senate into a final version of the bill and the conference report also includes a joint explanatory statement of the conference committee.

Key Terms

standing committee

a committee established by an official and providing for its scope and power

chair

Chairperson.

joint committee

a Congressional committee consisting of Members of both Houses and having jurisdiction over matters of joint interest

conference committee

a joint committee of a bicameral legislature, which is appointed by, and consists of, members of both chambers to resolve disagreements on a particular bill

A conference committee is a committee of Congress appointed by the House of Representatives and Senate to resolve disagreements on a particular bill. The conference committee is usually composed of the senior members of the standing committees of each house that originally considered the legislation.

Conference committees operate after the House and the Senate have passed different versions of a bill. Conference committees exist to draft a compromise bill that both houses can accept. Both houses of Congress must eventually pass the identical legislation for the bill to become law. The two houses can reach that identical product through the process of amendments between Houses, where the House passes the Senate bill with a House amendment, or vice versa. Thus most major bills become law through using a conference committee.

After one house passes a bill, the second house will often pass the same bill, with an amendment representing the second house’s work product. The second house will then send a message to the first house, asking the first house to concur with the second house’s amendment. If the first house does not like the second house’s amendment, then the first house can disagree with the amendment of the second house, request a conference, appoint conferees, and send a message to that effect to the second house. The second house then insists on its amendment, agrees to a conference, and appoints conferees.

Each house determines the number of conferees from its house. The number of conferees need not be equal from each side. In order to conclude its business, a majority of both House and Senate delegations to the conference must indicate their approval by signing the conference report.

The authority to appoint conferees lies in the entire House, and the entire Senate can appoint conferees by adopting a debatable motion to do so. But leadership have increasingly exercised authority in the appointment of conferees. The House and Senate may instruct conferees, but these instructions are not binding on conferees.

Conference committees can be extremely contentious, particularly if the houses are controlled by different parties . House rules require that one conference meeting be open to the public, unless the house, in open session, votes that a meeting will be closed to the public. But apart from this one open meeting, conference committees usually meet in private and are dominated by the Chairs of the House and Senate Committees.

John Boehner

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R), seen here with President Barack Obama during the 2011 State of the Union, called for a conference committee to discuss new tax policies that were introduced to the house in 2011. Critics say he used the conference committees to stall the passing of any tax compromises.

House and Senate rules forbid Conferees from inserting into their report matter not committed to them by either house, but conference committees sometimes do introduce new matter. In such a case, the rules of each house provide that a Member may object through a point of order, although each house has procedures under which it can vote to waive the point of order. The house provides a procedure by which the offending provision may be stricken from the bill. Formerly, the Senate required a Senator to object to the whole bill as reported by the conference committee. If the objection was well founded, the Presiding Officer ruled and a Senator could appeal the ruling of the Chair. If the appeal was sustained by a majority of the Senate, it had precedential effect, eroding the rule on the scope of conference committees.

The conference committee produces a conference report melding the work of the House and Senate into a final version of the bill. A conference report proposes legislative language as an amendment to the bill and also includes a joint explanatory statement of the conference committee. This explanatory statement provides one of the best sources of legislative history on the bill.

Once a bill has been passed by a conference committee, it goes directly to the floor of both houses for a vote, and is not open to further amendment. In the first house to consider the conference, a Member may move to recommit the bill to the conference committee. But once the first house has passed the conference report, the conference committee is dissolved and the second house to act can no longer recommit the bill to conference.

11.3.5: Presidential Action

The Ineligibility Clause prevents the President from being a member of Congress and cannot directly introduce legislative proposals.

Learning Objective

Identify the role of the President in drafting and passing bills into federal law

Key Points

• The President can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in Congress.
• According to Article II, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the president may convene either or both houses of Congress.
• The President cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress.

Key Term

adjourn

Temporarily ending an event with intentions to complete it at another time or place.

The President of the United States has limited legislative powers. The Constitution’s Ineligibility Clause prevents the President from simultaneously being a member of Congress. Therefore, the president cannot directly introduce legislative proposals for consideration in Congress. However, the president can take an indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president’s political party has a majority in one or both houses of Congress.

For example, the president or other officials of the executive branch may draft legislation and then ask senators or representatives to introduce these drafts into Congress. The president can further influence the legislative branch through constitutionally mandated, periodic reports to Congress. These reports may be either written or oral, but today are given as the State of the Union address, which often outlines the president’s legislative proposals for the coming year.

In the 20^th century critics began charging that too many legislative and budgetary powers have slid into the hands of presidents that should belong to Congress. As the head of the executive branch, presidents control a vast array of agencies that can issue regulations with little oversight from Congress. One critic charged that presidents could appoint a virtual army of ‘czars’ each wholly unaccountable to Congress yet tasked with spearheading major policy efforts for the White House. Presidents have been criticized for making singing statements when signing congressional legislation about how they understand a bill or plan to execute it. This practice has been criticized by the American Bar Association (ABA, ) as unconstitutional. Conservative commentator George Will wrote of an increasingly swollen executive branch and the eclipse of Congress.

American Bar Association

Union Trust Building, Washington D.C.Home to the American Bar Association’s Branch office

According to Article II, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the president may convene either or both houses of Congress. If both houses cannot agree on a date of adjournment, the president may appoint a date for Congress to adjourn.

11.4: The Budgeting Function of Congress

11.4.1: The Budgeting Process

Each year, the President of the United States submits his budget request to Congress.

Learning Objective

Describe the key components of the budget process and the current fiscal position of the United States

Key Points

• The Budget of the United States Government often begins as the President’s proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1.
• Several government agencies provide budget data and analysis. These include the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Treasury Department.
• Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid expenditures are funded by more permanent Congressional appropriations and so are considered mandatory spending.
• During 2011, the U.S. spent more on its military budget than the next 13 countries combined.
• The annual budget deficit is the difference between actual cash collections and budgeted spending (a partial measure of total spending) during a given fiscal year, which runs from October 1 to September 30.

Key Terms

Public Debt

The United States public debt is the money borrowed by the federal government of the United States through the issuing of securities by the Treasury and other federal government agencies.

budget

The amount of money or resources earmarked for a particular institution, activity, or time-frame.

Example

• The military budget of the United States during FY 2011 was approximately $740 billion in expenses for the Department of Defense (DoD), $141 billion for veteran expenses, and $48 billion in expenses for the Department of Homeland Security, for a total of $929 billion.

Introduction

The Budget of the United States Government often begins as the President’s proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1. However, Congress is the body required by law to pass a budget annually and to submit the budget passed by both houses to the President for signature. Congressional decisions are governed by rules and legislation regarding the federal budget process. Budget committees set spending limits for the House and Senate committees and for Appropriations subcommittees, which then approve individual appropriations bills to allocate funding to various federal programs.

Several government agencies provide budget data and analysis. These include the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Treasury Department. These agencies have reported that the federal government is facing a series of important financing challenges. In the short-run, tax revenues have declined significantly due to a severe recession and tax policy choices, while expenditures have expanded for wars, unemployment insurance and other safety net spending. In the long-run, expenditures related to healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are projected to grow faster than the economy overall as the population matures.

Major Expenditure Categories

During FY 2012, the federal government spent $3.54 trillion on a budget or cash basis, down $60 billion or 1.7% vs. FY 2011 spending of $3.60 trillion. Major categories of FY 2012 spending included: Medicare & Medicaid ($802B or 23% of spending), Social Security ($768B or 22%), Defense Department ($670B or 19%), non-defense discretionary ($615B or 17%), other mandatory ($461B or 13%) and interest ($223B or 6%). Social Security spending increased versus 2011 while Defense, Medicare and Medicaid spending fell.

Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid expenditures are funded by more permanent Congressional appropriations and so are considered mandatory spending. Social Security and Medicare are sometimes called “entitlements,” because people meeting relevant eligibility requirements are legally entitled to benefits, although most pay taxes into these programs throughout their working lives. Some programs, such as Food Stamps, are appropriated entitlements. Some mandatory spending, such as Congressional salaries, is not part of any entitlement program. Mandatory spending accounted for 57.4% of total federal outlays in FY2012, with net interest payments accounting for an additional 6.3%. In 2000, these were 53.2% and 12.5%, respectively.

Other Expenditures

The military budget of the United States during FY 2011 was approximately $740 billion in expenses for the Department of Defense (DoD), $141 billion for veteran expenses, and $48 billion in expenses for the Department of Homeland Security, for a total of $929 billion. Much of the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been funded through regular appropriations bills, but through emergency supplemental appropriations bills. As such, most of these expenses were not included in the budget deficit calculation prior to FY2010. Some budget experts argue that emergency supplemental appropriations bills do not receive the same level of legislative care as regular appropriations bills. During 2011, the U.S. spent more on its military budget than the next 13 countries combined.

Non-defense discretionary spending is used to fund the executive departments (e.g., the Department of Education) and independent agencies (e.g., the Environmental Protection Agency), although these do receive a smaller amount of mandatory funding as well. Discretionary budget authority is established annually by Congress, as opposed to mandatory spending that is required by laws that span multiple years, such as Social Security or Medicare.

The annual budget deficit is the difference between actual cash collections and budgeted spending (a partial measure of total spending) during a given fiscal year, which runs from October 1 to September 30. Since 1970, the U.S. federal government has run deficits for all but four years (1998–2001) contributing to a total debt of $16.1 trillion as of September 2012.

Public Debt

The United States public debt is the money borrowed by the federal government of the United States through the issuing of securities by the Treasury and other federal government agencies. US public debt consists of two components: Debt held by the public includes Treasury securities held by investors outside the federal government, including that held by individuals, corporations, the Federal Reserve System and foreign, state and local governments. Individuals, corporations, the Federal Reserve System and foreign, state and local governments.

Debt held by government accounts or intragovernmental debt includes non-marketable Treasury securities held in accounts administered by the federal government that are owed to program beneficiaries, such as the Social Security Trust Fund. Debt held by government accounts represents the cumulative surpluses, including interest earnings, of these accounts that have been invested in Treasury securities.

11.4.2: Preparing the Budget

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) performs key tasks in preparing the presidential budget request that is submitted to Congress.

Learning Objective

Summarize the key role played by the Office of Management and Budget in shaping the President’s budget request

Key Points

• The OMB’s primary mission is to assist the president in overseeing the preparation of the federal budget and to supervise the administration of that budget in executive branch agencies.
• Tasks undertaken by the OMB, in order to help the president generate a budget, include evaluating the effectiveness of agency programs, policies, and procedures, and assessing competing funding demands among agencies.
• The fact that the organizational structure of the OMB, and its staff, remain unchanged regardless of which party occupies the White House, facilitates the budget process.

Key Terms

Office of Management and Budget

The largest office within the Executive Office of the President, the OMB is in charge of overseeing the preparation of the federal budget and the administering of that budget within the federal branch.

legislation

Law which has been enacted by legislature or other governing body

budget

The amount of money or resources earmarked for a particular institution, activity, or time-frame.

Introduction

A great deal of preparation goes into the president’s budget request submission, which is entitled, Budget of the U.S. Government. Before it is submitted, the president spends months working with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to formulate this budget request . The Office of Management and Budget is the largest office within the Executive Office of the President. The OMB’s primary mission is to assist the president as he or she supervises the preparation of the federal budget. It is also responsible, later, for administering that budget to executive branch agencies.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget Seal

The Office of Management and Budget plays a key role in preparing the president’s budget request to Congress.

OMB’s Responsibilities

In order to aid the president in generating a budget submission, the OMB evaluates the effectiveness of various agency programs, policies, and procedures. The OMB also assesses competing funding demands among agencies in order to decide upon funding priorities. In preparation for submitting a final presidential budget request to Congress, the OMB also ensures that reports from individual agencies, along with any rules, testimony, and proposed legislation, are consistent with the president’s budget request and administration policies.

OMB’s Structure

The structure of the OMB facilitates the preparation of the budget and the later submission of that budget to Congress. OMB staff provide the Executive Office of the President with vital continuity, because they are among the several hundred career professionals that remain in their positions regardless of which party occupies the White House. The largest offices of the OMB are the four Resource Management Offices. Staff members from these offices are assigned to monitor federal agencies or topical areas, like issues associated with U.S. Navy warships. They perform in-depth program evaluations and review federal agency budget requests to decide which resource requests will be sent to Congress under the president’s budget. In addition to these departments, staff members from the Office of General Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Budget Review Division, and the Legislative Reference Division provide important support for the general operations of the OMB.

11.4.3: The Election Year Budget

Budget proposals during election years are usually politicized to gain votes and increase constituency support.

Learning Objective

Summarize the various conflicts that can plague the federal budget

Key Points

• The Budget of the United States Government often begins as the President’s proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1.
• The annual budget deficit is the difference between actual cash collections and budgeted spending (a partial measure of total spending) during a given fiscal year, which runs from October 1 to September 30.
• The debate between the executive and the House has carried on into the presidential election, in which incumbent Democrat President Obama’s spending policies are compared against those of Republican vice-presidential candidate and current House Budget Committee chairman, Paul Ryan.
• While both executive and House budget plans focus on deficit reduction, they differ in their changes to taxation, entitlement programs, defense spending, and research funding.

Key Terms

budget

The amount of money or resources earmarked for a particular institution, activity, or time-frame.

budget deficit

the difference between government revenues and spending, in which the government is spending more than it’s earning

fiscal

Related to the treasury of a country, company, region, or city, particularly to government spending and revenue.

deficit

A situation wherein, or amount whereby, spending exceeds government revenue.

Example

• Since 1970, the U.S. federal government has run deficits for all but four years (1998–2001) contributing to a total debt of $16.1 trillion as of September 2012

Introduction

The Budget of the United States Government often begins as the President’s proposal to the U.S. Congress which recommends funding levels for the next fiscal year, beginning October 1. However, Congress is the body required by law to pass a budget annually and to submit the budget passed by both houses to the President for signature. Congressional decisions are governed by rules and legislation regarding the federal budget process. Budget committees set spending limits for the House and Senate committees and for Appropriations subcommittees, which then approve individual appropriations bills to allocate funding to various federal programs.

Understanding Deficits and Debt

The annual budget deficit is the difference between actual cash collections and budgeted spending (a partial measure of total spending) during a given fiscal year, which runs from October 1 to September 30. Since 1970, the U.S. federal government has run deficits for all but four years (1998–2001) contributing to a total debt of $16.1 trillion as of September 2012 .

Revenue and Expense to GDP Chart 1993 – 2008

Tax and Spend percent GDP in United States 1981-2012,

Many of the debates surrounding the United States federal budget center around competing macroeconomic schools of thought. In general, Democrats favor the principles of Keynesian economics to encourage economic growth via a mixed economy of both private and public enterprise, a welfare state, and strong regulatory oversight. Conversely, Republicans generally support applying the principles of either laissez-faire or supply-side economics to grow the economy via small government, low taxes, limited regulation, and free enterprise.

Election-Year Budgets

The 1996 United States federal budget was the United States federal budget to fund government operations for the fiscal year 1996, which was October 1995 – September 1996. This budget was the first to be submitted after the Republican Revolution in the 1994 midterm elections. Disagreements between Democratic President Bill Clinton and Republicans led by Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich led to the United States federal government shutdown of 1995 and 1996.

U.S. President Bill Clinton

Official White House photo of President Bill Clinton, President of the United States.

The failure of Congress and the President to enact the remaining appropriations legislation led to government shutdowns during November 13–19, 1995 and December 15, 1995 through January 6, 1996. The shutdowns were triggered by the expiration of continuing resolutions. The first shutdown caused the furlough of about 800,000 federal employees, while the second affected 284,000 due to additional appropriations bills enacted in the interim.

Paul Ryan

Rep. Paul Ryan is former head of the House Budget Committee, but now serves as the Speaker of the House.

The Obama Administration’s Budget Plans

The Obama administration’s 2012 budget request focused on reducing annual deficits to more sustainable levels by making certain cuts in spending while continuing to support areas that would promote long-term economic growth, such as education and clean energy. The plan did not contain proposals to rein in spending on entitlement programs expected to increase the deficit in future years, like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The 2012 budget plan was a shift from the Obama administration’s previous strategy of using increased government spending to stimulate the economy. Instead, the budget request was projected to reduce government deficits by 1.1 trillion dollars over the next ten years. Republicans have criticized the president’s plan for not going far enough to reduce future deficits.

The 2016 budget plan President Obama proposed requested 4 trillion in fiscal year 2016. His proposal called for 74 billion in additional discretionary spending above the sequestration caps set in place. The additional spending would be about evenly split between defense and non-defense discretionary programs.

This budget request is President Obama’s first on-time budget proposal since 2011. It included more than $1.15 trillion in discretionary spending, an increase of about 2 percent relative to 2015 enacted levels. 

The president proposed $60 billion over 10 years for a new initiative that would allow students to attend community college for up to two years tuition free and would again provide expanded Head Start and universal pre-kindergarten.

The budget also includes $478 billion in additional infrastructure spending over the next six years, which would pay for surface transportation improvements such as roads and bridges. The president proposes to pay for this through various tax reforms.

11.4.4: Budget Resolutions

The budget resolution serves as a blueprint for the actual appropriations process and provides Congress with some control over the process.

Learning Objective

Summarize the aims and shape of Congress’s annual budget resolution

Key Points

• The budget resolution establishes budget totals, allocations, entitlements, and sometimes includes reconciliation instructions to certain House or Senate committees. Federal spending is apportioned among 20 functional categories such as national defense, agriculture, and transportation.
• The budget resolution sets spending ceilings for the Congressional committees with jurisdiction over spending.
• The budget resolution is created in response to the president’s budget request according to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
• No penalty exists if the budget resolution is not completed by April 15th or if it is not completed at all.

Key Terms

appropriations

In law and government, appropriation (from Latin appropriare, “to make one’s own,” later “to set aside”) is the act of setting apart something for its application to a particular usage to the exclusion of all other uses. It typically refers to the legislative designation of money for particular uses in the context of a budget or spending bill.

fiscal

Related to the treasury of a country, company, region, or city, particularly to government spending and revenue.

budget resolution

In the United States Congress, a budget resolution is a legislation in the form of a concurrent resolution setting forth the congressional budget. The budget resolution establishes various budget totals, allocations, and entitlements. It may include reconciliation instructions to designated House or Senate committees.

Congress must create an annual budget resolution in response to the President’s budget request according to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (also known as the Congressional Budget Act) . The budget resolution must cover the time span of a minimum of five fiscal years, which includes the upcoming fiscal year plus the four following fiscal years. The budget resolution establishes budget totals, allocations, entitlements, and sometimes includes reconciliation instructions to certain House or Senate committees. Federal spending is apportioned among 20 functional categories such as national defense, agriculture, and transportation.

Nixon Departing the White House after His Resignation

The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Congressional Budget Act), created during the Nixon administration, established the current budget resolution process.

The budget resolution also sets spending ceilings for the Congressional committees that have jurisdiction over spending. Even though the budget resolution covers at least five fiscal years, the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations receive allocations only for the upcoming fiscal year because appropriations measures are annual. After the appropriations committees receive their spending ceilings, they are responsible for dividing the amount among their respective subcommittees.

The budget resolution binds Congress, but it is not law since it is not sent to the President. It does not provide budget authority or change the level of revenues. Instead, the budget resolution serves as a blueprint for the actual appropriations process and provides Congress with some control over this process.

April 15^th is the target date for congressional adoption of the budget resolution set by the Congressional Budget Act. However, Congress has frequently not met this target date since the fiscal year 1977. In some instances, Congress has not adopted a budget resolution. No penalty exists if the budget resolution is not completed by April 15^th or if it is not completed at all. However, some enforceable spending ceilings cannot be established until the budget resolution is completed. The Congressional Budget Act also prohibits House and Senate floor consideration of appropriations measures for the upcoming fiscal year before the budget resolution is completed. However, the House can bypass this prohibition after May 15^th and the Senate can bypass it by adopting a motion to waive the rule by majority vote.

11.4.5: Authorization and Appropriation

Authorizations and appropriations functions are separate in principle, but this separation is often imperfect in reality.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between authorization and appropriation

Key Points

• Authorization acts establish, continue, or modify agencies or programs.
• Appropriations acts provide new budget authority for programs, activities, and agencies that have been authorized by authorization committees.
• The separation of authorization and appropriation functions are enforced through House and Senate rules that divide committee jurisdiction between authorization and appropriations bills.
• The separation between authorization and appropriations measures is imperfect: prohibited language in appropriations bills can still be passed, some authorized programs receive no funding, and some unauthorized programs do receive funding.

Key Terms

appropriation

Public funds set aside for a specific purpose.

budget resolution

In the United States Congress, a budget resolution is a legislation in the form of a concurrent resolution setting forth the congressional budget. The budget resolution establishes various budget totals, allocations, and entitlements. It may include reconciliation instructions to designated House or Senate committees.

authorization

Permission, possibly limited, to spend funds for a specific budgetary purpose.

The budget resolution adopted by Congress provides a blueprint for later authorization and appropriations measures. These measures are distinct from each other and perform different functions. Authorization acts establish, continue, or modify agencies or programs. For instance, an authorization act could establish or modify programs within a federal department. Authorization acts also authorize subsequent appropriations for specific agencies and programs, often setting spending ceilings for them. Meanwhile, appropriations acts provide new budget authority for programs, activities, and agencies that have been authorized by authorization committees.

The separation of authorization and appropriation functions are enforced through House and Senate rules that divide committee jurisdiction between authorization and appropriations bills . Points of order also prohibit certain provisions in appropriations measures. For instance, the House and Senate prohibit language in appropriations bills that provides appropriations not authorized by law, also known as unauthorized appropriations. An unauthorized appropriation is a new budget authority for agencies or programs either without authorization or where the budget authority exceeds the authorized ceiling. Language in an appropriations bill that provides legislation on the bill is additionally prohibited. In other words, language in appropriations measures cannot change existing law; legislation is solely the jurisdiction of legislative committees.

House Appropriations Committee Logo

Appropriations committees are distinct from authorization committees in principle, but the division is often imperfect in reality.

In reality, the separation between authorization and appropriation measures is imperfect. Authorization for many programs has long since expired, but these programs still receive appropriated amounts. Other authorized programs receive no appropriated funds at all. Meanwhile, the aforementioned language prohibitions in appropriations bills sometimes gets passed in the bills either because no one raised a point of order or the House and Senate waived the rules.

11.5: The Oversight Function of Congress

11.5.1: Investigation

Congressional oversight is the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation.

Learning Objective

Name several key enumerated powers that imply oversight authority

Key Points

• Congressional oversight refers to oversight by the United States Congress of the Executive Branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies. Congressional oversight refers to the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation.
• Congress’s oversight authority derives from its implied powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.
• Congress could not reasonably or responsibly exercise these powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials were obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.
• Oversight also is derived from the many and varied express powers of the Congress in the Constitution. Congress could not reasonably exercise its powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost.

Key Terms

enumerated powers

The enumerated powers are a list of items found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of Congress. In summary, Congress may exercise the powers that the Constitution grants it, subject to explicit restrictions in the Bill of Rights and other protections in the Constitution.

implied powers

They are those powers authorized by a legal document (from the Constitution) which, while not stated, seem to be implied by powers expressly stated.

congressional oversight

Congressional oversight refers to oversight by the United States Congress of the Executive Branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies.

Introduction

Congressional oversight refers to oversight by the United States Congress of the Executive Branch, including the numerous U.S. federal agencies. Congressional oversight refers to the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation. Congress exercises this power largely through its congressional committee system. However, oversight, which dates to the earliest days of the Republic, also occurs in a wide variety of congressional activities and contexts. These include authorization, appropriations, investigative, and legislative hearings by standing committees; specialized investigations by select committees; and reviews and studies by congressional support agencies and staff.

Arthur Andersen Witnesses

Arthur Andersen witnesses testify at the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Commerce House of Representatives (107th Congress) hearing on January 24, 2002.

Congress’s oversight authority derives from its implied powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.

Report on the Organization of Congress

Oversight is an implied rather than an enumerated power under the U.S. Constitution. The government’s charter does not explicitly grant Congress the authority to conduct inquiries or investigations of the executive, have access to records or materials held by the executive, or to issue subpoenas for documents or testimony from the executive.

There was little discussion of the power to oversee, review, or investigate executive activity at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or later in the Federalist Papers, which argued in favor of ratification of the Constitution. The lack of debate was based on the view that oversight and its attendant authority were inherent powers of representative assemblies, which enacted public law.

Oversight also is derived from the many and varied express powers of the Congress in the Constitution. It is implied in the legislature’s authority, among other powers and duties, that it can appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, provide for a Navy, declare war, and impeach and remove from office the president, vice president, and other civil officers. Congress could not reasonably or responsibly exercise these powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials were obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.

The U.S. Constitution

Although the Constitution grants no formal, express authority to oversee or investigate the executive or program administration, oversight is implied in Congress’s array of enumerated powers. The legislature is authorized to appropriate funds; raise and support armies; provide for and maintain a navy; declare war; provide for organizing and calling forth the national guard; regulate interstate and foreign commerce; establish post offices and post roads; advise and consent on treaties and presidential nominations (Senate); and impeach (House) and try (Senate) the President, Vice President, and civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Reinforcing these powers is Congress’s broad authority “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

Activities and Training

Although the Constitution grants no formal, express authority to oversee or investigate the executive or program administration, oversight is implied in Congress’s array of enumerated powers. The legislature is authorized to appropriate funds; raise and support armies; provide for and maintain a navy; declare war; provide for organizing and calling forth the national guard; regulate interstate and foreign commerce; establish post offices and post roads; advise and consent on treaties and presidential nominations (Senate); and impeach (House) and try (Senate) the President, Vice President, and civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Reinforcing these powers is Congress’s broad authority “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

11.5.2: Oversight

Oversight of various federal agencies is one of Congress’ enumerated powers.

Learning Objective

Describe the source and nature of Congress’s oversight function.

Key Points

• The authority to oversee the executive comes from the constitutional powers. Congress could not carry them out reasonably or responsibly without knowing what the executive is doing.
• Reinforcing these oversight powers is Congress’s broad authority to make all laws that shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government, or in any Department or Officer in the government.
• Besides these general powers, numerous statutes direct the executive to give information to or consult with Congress.
• Oversight occurs through a wide variety of congressional activities and avenues. Some of the most publicized are the comparatively rare investigations by select committees into major scandals or into executive branch operations gone awry.

Key Term

subcommittee

A committee formed by an existing committee.

Example

• The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344) allowed committees to conduct program evaluation themselves or contract out for it; strengthened GAO’s role in acquiring fiscal, budgetary, and program-related information; and upgraded GAO’s review capabilities.

Background

Although the Constitution grants no formal, express authority to oversee or investigate the executive or program administration, oversight is implied in Congress’s array of enumerated powers. The legislature is authorized to appropriate funds, raise and support armies, provide for and maintain a navy, declare war, provide for organizing and calling forth the national guard, regulate interstate and foreign commerce, establish post offices and post roads, advise and consent on treaties and presidential nominations (Senate), and impeach (House) and try (Senate) the President, Vice President, and civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Reinforcing these powers is Congress’s broad authority to make all laws that will be necessary to carry out execution the foregoing powers, all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government, or in any Department or Officer in the government.

The authority to oversee is derived from these constitutional powers. Congress could not carry them out reasonably or responsibly without knowing what the executive is doing; how programs are being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials are obeying the law and complying with legislative intent. The Supreme Court has legitimated Congress’s investigative power, subject to constitutional safeguards for civil liberties.

Statutes

The necessary and proper clause of the Constitution also allows Congress to enact laws that mandate oversight by its committees, grant relevant authority to itself and its support agencies, and impose specific obligations on the executive to report to or consult with Congress, and even seek its approval for specific actions. Broad oversight mandates exist for the legislature in several significant statutes.

Besides these general powers, numerous statutes direct the executive to furnish information to or consult with Congress. For example, the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, requires agencies to consult with Congress on their strategic plans and report annually on performance plans, goals, and results. In fact, more than 2,000 reports are submitted each year to Congress by federal departments, agencies, commissions, bureaus, and offices. Inspectors general (IGs), for instance, report their findings about waste, fraud, and abuse. and their recommendations for corrective action, periodically to the agency head and Congress. The IGs are also instructed to immediately issue special reports concerning particularly serious problems to the agency head, who transmits them unaltered to Congress within seven days.

House and Senate Chamber rules also reinforce the oversight function. House and Senate rules, for instance, provide for “special oversight” or “comprehensive policy oversight,” respectively, for specified committees over matters that relate to their authorizing jurisdiction. In addition, House rules direct each standing committee to require its subcommittees to conduct oversight or to establish an oversight subcommittee for this purpose. House rules also call for each committee to submit an oversight agenda, listing its prospective oversight topics for the ensuing Congress, to the House Committee on Government Reform, which compiles and prints the agendas.

The House Government Reform Committee and the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, which have oversight jurisdiction over virtually the entire federal government, are authorized to review and study the operation of government activities to determine their economy and efficiency and to submit recommendations based on GAO reports. In addition, House rules require that the findings and recommendations from the Government Reform Committee be considered by authorizing panels, if presented to them in a timely fashion.

Activities and Avenues

Oversight occurs through a wide variety of congressional activities and avenues. Some of the most publicized are the comparatively rare investigations by select committees into major scandals or into executive branch operations gone awry. Examples include temporary select committee inquiries into: China’s acquisition of U.S. nuclear weapons information, in 1999; the Iran-Contra affair, in 1987; intelligence agency abuses, in 1975-1976, and “Watergate,” in 1973-1974. The precedent for this kind of oversight goes back two centuries: in 1792, a special House committee investigated the defeat of an Army force by confederated Indian tribes.

Congress Hall Committee Room Marie Antoinette

One of several committee rooms in Congress Hall, in Philadelphia, PA. The room is located on the second floor, on the west side of the building, adjacent to the Senate chamber. The view is looking toward the front of the building. The portrait of Marie Antoinette, by Élisabeth Vigée-Lebrun (1788), was presented as a gift from the French monarch following the American Revolution.

11.5.3: Advice and Consent

Advice and consent is a power of the Senate to be consulted on and approve treaties signed by the president.

Learning Objective

Describe the origins and development of the Senate’s “advise and consent” powers

Key Points

• The term “advice and consent” first appears in the United States Constitution in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, referring to the Senate’s role in the signing and ratification of treaties.
• Typically, a congressional hearing is held to question the appointee. For a treaty, a two-thirds vote of the Senate is required anyway; thus, a filibuster could only delay passage.
• Several framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that the required role of the Senate is to advise the president after the nomination.
• Under the Twenty-fifth Amendment, appointments to the Office of Vice President are confirmed by a majority vote in both Houses of Congress, instead of just the Senate.

Key Term

consent

To express willingness, to give permission.

Example

• The actual motion adopted by the Senate when exercising the power is “to advise and consent,” which shows how initial advice on nominations and treaties is not a formal power exercised by the Senate. For appointments, a majority of senators are needed to pass a motion “to advise and consent”, but unless the appointment has the support of three-fifths of senators, a filibuster blocking the passage of the motion is possible.

Background

In the United States, advice and consent is a power of the United States Senate to be consulted on and approve treaties signed and appointments made by the President of the United States to public positions, including Cabinet secretaries, federal judges, and ambassadors . This power is also held by several state Senates, which are consulted on and approve various appointments made by the state’s chief executive, such as some statewide officials, state departmental heads in the Governor’s cabinet, and state judges (in some states).

John Roberts Confirmation Hearings

Under the Constitution, the Senate have advice and consent on any nominations made by the President to the Supreme Court of the United States. Here, the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings of John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 2005.

Constitutional Provision

Article II, Section 2, paragraph two of the United States Constitution states: “The President shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. “

The term “advice and consent” first appears in the United States Constitution in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, referring to the Senate’s role in the signing and ratification of treaties. This term is then used again, to describe the Senate’s role in the appointment of public officials, immediately after describing the president’s duty to nominate officials .

Advice and Consent

Senators also have the power of “advice and consent” over other authorities in the federal or state governments.

The founding fathers of the United States included the language as part of a delicate compromise concerning the balance of power in the federal government. Many delegates preferred to develop a strong executive control vested in the president, while others, worried about authoritarian control, preferred to strengthen the Congress. Requiring the president to gain the advice and consent of the Senate achieved both goals without hindering the business of government.

Under the Twenty-fifth Amendment, appointments to the Office of Vice President are confirmed by a majority vote in both Houses of Congress, instead of just the Senate.

Historical Development of Power

Several framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that the required role of the Senate is to advise the president after the nomination. Roger Sherman believed that advice before nomination could still be helpful. Likewise, President George Washington took the position that pre-nomination advice was allowable but not mandatory. The notion that pre-nomination advice is optional has developed into the unification of the advice portion of the power with the “consent” portion, although several presidents have consulted informally with senators over nominations and treaties.

Use today

The actual motion adopted by the Senate when exercising the power is “to advise and consent,” which shows how initial advice on nominations and treaties is not a formal power exercised by the Senate. For appointments, a majority of senators are needed to pass a motion “to advise and consent,” but unless the appointment has the support of three-fifths of senators, a filibuster blocking the passage of the motion is possible. Typically, a congressional hearing is held to question the appointee. For a treaty, a two-thirds vote of the Senate is required anyway; thus, a filibuster could only delay passage.

11.5.4: Impeachment and Removal from Office

Impeachment is an expressed power that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between the roles played by the House and Senate in impeachment proceedings.

Key Points

• Impeachment is analogous to indictment in regular court proceedings. Trial by the other house is analogous to the trial before judge and jury in regular courts. Typically, the lower house of the legislature will impeach the official and the upper house will conduct the trial.
• Impeachment proceedings may be commenced by a member of the House of Representatives on their own initiative, either by presenting a listing of the charges under oath or by asking for referral to the appropriate committee.
• The Senate enters judgment on its decision, whether that be to convict or acquit. A copy of the judgment is filed with the Secretary of State. Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed from office and may also be barred from holding future office.

Key Terms

impeachment

the act of impeaching a public official, either elected or appointed, before a tribunal charged with determining the facts of the matter.

indictment

An official formal accusation for a criminal offence or the process by which it is brought to a jury.

Example

• A United States federal judge named Walter Nixon was convicted of committing perjury before a grand jury. He refused to resign from office even after he had been incarcerated. Nixon was subsequently impeached by the United States House of Representatives. The matter was referred to the United States Senate for a vote on Nixon’s removal.

Background

Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature that allows for formal charges against a civil government officer for crimes committed in office. The actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself.

The Senate as a Court of Impeachment for the Trial of Andrew Johnson

The Impeachment of Andrew Johnson

Impeachment is analogous to indictmentin regular court proceedings. Trial by the other house is analogous to the trial before judge and jury in regular courts. Typically, the lower house of the legislature will impeach the official and the upper house will conduct the trial.

At the federal level, Article II of the United States Constitution (Section 4), states that the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and in conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching, while the United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate.

The House of Representatives

Impeachment proceedings may be commenced by a member of the House of Representatives on their own initiative, either by presenting a listing of the charges under oath or by asking for referral to the appropriate committee. Non-members may trigger the impeachment process. For example, when the Judicial Conference of the United States suggests a federal judge be impeached, a charge of what actions constitute grounds for impeachment may come from a special prosecutor, the President, a state or territorial legislature, grand jury, or by petition.

The House debates the resolution and at the conclusion may consider the resolution as a whole or vote on each article of impeachment individually. A simple majority of those present and voting is required for each article or the resolution as a whole to pass. If the House votes to impeach, managers (typically referred to as House managers, with a lead House manager) are selected to present the case to the Senate. Recently, managers have been selected by resolution, while historically the House would occasionally elect the managers or pass a resolution allowing the appointment of managers at the discretion of the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. These managers are roughly the equivalent of the prosecution/district attorney in a standard criminal trial.

Also, the House will adopt a resolution in order to notify the Senate of its action. After receiving the notice, the Senate will adopt an order notifying the House that it is ready to receive the managers. Then the House managers appear before the bar of the Senate and exhibit the articles of impeachment. After the reading of the charges, the managers return and make a verbal report to the House.

Senate

The proceedings unfold in the form of a trial, with each side having the right to call witnesses and perform cross-examinations. The House members, who are given the collective title of managers during the course of the trial, present the prosecution case. The impeached official has the right to mount a defense with his own attorneys as well. Senators must also take an oath or affirmation that they will perform their duties honestly and with due diligence (as opposed to the House of Lords in the Parliament of the United Kingdom, who vote upon their honor). After hearing the charges, the Senate usually deliberates in private. Conviction requires a two-thirds majority.

The Senate enters judgment on its decision, whether that is to convict or acquit. A copy of the judgment is filed with the Secretary of State. Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed from office and may also be barred from holding future office. The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. The President may not grant a pardon in the impeachment case, but may in any resulting criminal case.

11.5.5: Senate Confirmation

Senate confirmation is required for certain presidential appointments stated under the Constitution.

Learning Objective

Describe the significance of the Senate’s role in presidential appointments

Key Points

• Under the United States Constitution and law of the United States, certain federal positions appointed by the president of the United States require confirmation (advice and consent) of the United States Senate.
• United States Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. In theory, this procedure allows both the executive and legislative branches to have some power over the judiciary and thus check the judicial branch’s power.
• The principle of checks and balances allows branches of government to be isolated from each other so that no branch has total power over all functions of government…an attack on or abuse of power by individuals of a single branch will not lead to tyranny or the fall of the entire government.

Key Term

checks and balances

A system for multiple parties wherein each has some control over the actions of each of the others.

Senate Confirmation

Background

Under the United States Constitution and law of the United States, certain federal positions appointed by the president of the United States require confirmation (advice and consent) of the United States Senate. These positions are referred to as Presidential Appointment with Senate confirmation (PAS).

PAS positions, as well as other types of federal government positions, are published in the United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), which are released after each United States presidential election.

Senate Confirmation and Checks and Balances

United States Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. In theory, this procedure allows both the executive and legislative branches to have some power over the judiciary and thus check the judicial branch’s power. However, following confirmation by the Senate, all Supreme Court justices hold office for life unless they are impeached or they voluntarily retire. Because justices serve for life, their appointments can be politically controversial if they are perceived to have been appointed to implement or serve a more partisan agenda.

John Roberts Confirmation Hearings

Under the Constitution, the Senate have advice and consent on any nominations made by the President to the Supreme Court of the United States. Here, the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings of John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 2005.

The principle of checks and balances allows branches of government to be isolated from each other so that no branch has total power over all functions of government. As such, an attack on or abuse of power by individuals of a single branch will not lead to tyranny or the fall of the entire government. The judicial branch, however, holds the potential to nullify laws approved by the legislative branch, disregard the executive branch, and, (in essence) control the rule of law in the United States in accordance to the opinions of its sitting justices.

11.6: Congressional Elections

11.6.1: Eligibility of Congressmen

Sections 2 and 3 of Article 1 of the Constitution describe the qualifications for membership in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Learning Objective

Compare the qualifications for membership in the House and Senate

Key Points

• The Senate has 100 members, elected for six year terms in dual-seat constituencies, two from each state. One-third are renewed every two years. The group of the Senate seats that is up for election during a given year is known as a class.
• The House of Representatives has 435 members, elected for two year terms in single-seat constituencies. House of Representatives elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years, correlated with presidential elections..
• Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must (1) be at least twenty-five years old, (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years, and (3) be an inhabitant of the state they represent.
• The constitutional requirements of Article I, Section 2 for election to Congress are the maximum requirements that can be imposed on a candidate.
• Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: (1) they must be at least 30 years old, (2) they must have been citizens of the United States for at least the past nine years, and (3) they must be inhabitants of the states they seek to represent.
• The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution disqualifies from the Senate any federal or state officers who had taken the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engaged in rebellion or aided the enemies of the United States.

Key Terms

u.s. house of representatives

The U.S. House of Representatives has 435 members, elected for two year terms in single-seat constituencies. House of Representatives elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years, correlated with presidential elections. House elections are first-past-the-post elections that elect a Representative from each of 435 House districts which cover the United States.

delegate

A person authorized to act as representative for another; in politics, a party representative allocated to nominate a party candidate.

u.s. senate

The U.S. Senate has 100 members, elected for six year terms in dual-seat constituencies, two from each state. One-third are renewed every two years.

Example

• The Senate is the sole judge of a senator’s qualifications. During its early years, however, the Senate did not closely scrutinize the qualifications of its members. As a result, three senators who failed to meet the age qualification were nevertheless admitted to the Senate: Henry Clay (aged 29 in 1806), Armistead Thomson Mason (aged 28 in 1816), and John Eaton (aged 28 in 1818). Such an occurrence, however, has not been repeated since. In 1934, Rush D. Holt, Sr. was elected to the Senate at the age of 29; he waited until he turned 30 (on the following June 19) to take the oath of office. In 1972, Joe Biden was elected to the Senate shortly before his 30th birthday, but he reached his 30th birthday in time for the swearing-in ceremony for incoming senators in January 1973.

Introduction

The U.S. Senate has 100 members, elected for six year terms in dual-seat constituencies, two from each state. One-third are renewed every two years. The group of the Senate seats that is up for election during a given year is known as a class. The three classes are staggered so that only one of the three groups is renewed every two years. Until the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1913, Senators were elected by state legislatures, not the electorate of states. The age of candidacy to be a Senator is 30.

Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill, where bills become laws.

111th US Senate class photo

A class photo of the 111th United States Senate.

The U.S. House of Representatives has 435 members, elected for two year terms in single-seat constituencies. House of Representatives elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years, correlated with presidential elections. House elections are first-past-the-post elections that elect a Representative from each of 435 House districts which cover the United States. Special House elections can occur if a member dies or resigns during a term . The delegates of the territories of American Samoa, District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are also elected. The age of candidacy to be a Representative is 25.

Barack Obama meets with Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer & George Miller

President Barack Obama meets with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and House Education and Labor Committee Chair Rep. George Miller, in the Oval Office Wednesday, May 13, 2009. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Rep. Henry Waxman, and House Ways and Means Committee Chair Rep. Charlie Rangel also attended the meeting but are not in the photo.

Qualifications in the House

Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must (1) be at least twenty-five years old, (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years, and (3) be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they represent. Members are not required to live in the district they represent, but they traditionally do. The age and citizenship qualifications for representatives are less than those for senators. The constitutional requirements of Article I, Section 2 for election to Congress are the maximum requirements that can be imposed on a candidate. Therefore, Article I, Section 5, which permits each House to be the judge of the qualifications of its own members does not permit either House to establish additional qualifications. Likewise a State cannot establish additional qualifications.

Qualifications in the Senate

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: (1) they must be at least 30 years old, (2) they must have been citizens of the United States for at least the past nine years, and (3) they must be inhabitants of the states they seek to represent at the time of their election. The age and citizenship qualifications for senators are more stringent than those for representatives. In Federalist No. 62, James Madison justified this arrangement by arguing that the “senatorial trust” called for a “greater extent of information and stability of character. “

The Senate is the sole judge of a senator’s qualifications. During its early years, however, the Senate did not closely scrutinize the qualifications of its members. As a result, three senators who failed to meet the age qualification were nevertheless admitted to the Senate: Henry Clay (aged 29 in 1806), Armistead Thomson Mason (aged 28 in 1816), and John Eaton (aged 28 in 1818). Such an occurrence, however, has not been repeated since. In 1934, Rush D. Holt, Sr. was elected to the Senate at the age of 29; he waited until he turned 30 (on the following June 19) to take the oath of office. In 1972, Joe Biden was elected to the Senate shortly before his 30^th birthday, but he reached his 30^th birthday in time for the swearing-in ceremony for incoming senators in January 1973.

It is important to mention disqualification procedures in Congress. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, a federal or state officer who takes the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engages in rebellion or aids the enemies of the United States, is disqualified from becoming a representative. This post-Civil War provision was intended to prevent those who sided with the Confederacy from serving. However, disqualified individuals may serve if they gain the consent of two-thirds of both houses of Congress.

11.6.2: The Power of Incumbency

The incumbent is the existing holder of a political office who normally has a structural advantage over challengers during an election.

Learning Objective

Summarize the advantages the incumbents have in campaigns

Key Points

• The incumbent is the existing holder of a political office who normally has a structural advantage over challengers during an election for multiple reasons.
• A race without an incumbent is known as an open seat because of the lack of incumbency advantage and they are the most contested races in an election.
• The anti-incumbency factor is when incumbency leads to the downfall of the incumbent.
• An anti-incumbent vote is one exercised against elected officials currently in power.

Key Terms

incumbency

the state of holding an office or title

reapportionment

Reassignment of representation in a legislature, especially of U.S. House of Representative seats, in accord with changes in the census population determination.

The incumbent is the existing holder of a political office. It is usually used in reference to elections where races can often be defined as being between an incumbent and non-incumbents. Incumbents have structural advantages over challengers during elections. The percentage of incumbents who win reelection after seeking it in the U.S. House of Representatives has been over 80% for more than 50 years, and is often over 90%. Additionally, shifts in congressional districts due to reapportionment or other longer-term factors may make it more or less likely for an incumbent to win re-election over time. A race without an incumbent is referred to as an open seat because of the lack of incumbency advantage and they are the most contested races in an election.

Longtime House Incumbent, Ben Cardin

Current Senator Ben Cardin was a longtime incumbent in the House of Representatives, serving from 1987 to 2007.

When newcomers vie to fill an open office, voters tend to compare and contrast the candidates’ qualifications, positions on issues and personal characteristics in a relatively straightforward way. Incumbents traditionally win their party’s nomination to run for office and unseating an incumbent during a primary elections is very difficult. The timing of elections may be determined by the incumbent instead of a set schedule. The incumbent often has more name recognition because of their previous work in the office they occupy. Incumbents have easier access to campaign finance and government resources that can be indirectly used to boost a campaign.

In general, incumbents have structural advantages over challengers during elections. The timing of elections may be determined by the incumbent instead of a set schedule. For most political offices, the incumbent often has more name recognition due to their previous work in the office. Incumbents also have easier access to campaign finance, as well as government resources (such as the franking privilege) that can be indirectly used to boost a campaign. An election (especially for a legislature) in which no incumbent is running is often called an open seat; because of the lack of incumbency advantage, these are often amongst the most hotly contested races in any election.

In the United States, incumbents traditionally win their party’s nomination to run for office. Unseating an incumbent president, senator or other figure during a primary election is very difficult, and even in the general election, incumbents have a very strong record. For instance, the percentage of incumbents who win reelection after seeking it in the U.S. House of Representatives has been over 80% for over 50 years, and is often over 90%.

However, there exist scenarios in which the incumbency factor itself leads to the downfall of the incumbent. Popularly known as the anti-incumbency factor, situations of this kind occur when the incumbent has proven himself not worthy of office during his tenure and the challenger demonstrates this fact to the voters. An anti-incumbent vote is one exercised against elected officials currently in power. It allows the voters to register their discontent with sitting government officials, particularly when protesting against certain actions taken by the government or the elected officials in question. An anti-incumbency factor can also be responsible for bringing down incumbents who have been in office for many successive terms in spite of performance indicators, simply because the voters are convinced by the challenger of a need for change. Nick Panagakis, a pollster, coined what he dubbed the “incumbent rule” in 1989—that any voter who claims to be undecided towards the end of the election will probably end up voting for the challenger.

Voters first have to consider the records and antecedents of the incumbent. Only if they decide to “fire” the incumbent do they begin to evaluate whether the challenger is an acceptable alternative. At the same time, if the challenger is determined to be completely unacceptable, voters might reluctantly vote for the incumbent. There are situations in which the incumbency factor leads to the downfall of the incumbent. This is known as the anti-incumbency factor. Situations of this kind occur when the incumbent has proven himself unworthy of the office during his tenure and the challenger convincingly demonstrates this fact to the voters. An anti-incumbency factor can also be responsible for voting out incumbents who have been in office for many successive terms in spite of performance indicators, simply because the voters are convinced by the challenger of a need for change.

11.6.3: Congressional Terms and Term Limits

Members of the Senate may serve unlimited six-year terms and members of the House may serve unlimited two-year terms.

Learning Objective

Summarize the attempts to impose term limits on Senators and Representatives

Key Points

• Under the Constitution, members of the United States Senate may serve an unlimited number of six-year terms and members of the House of Representatives may serve an unlimited number of two-year terms.
• In the 1990s, reformers put congressional term limits on the ballot and the main Republican Party platform was to pass legislation setting term limits in Congress.
• A proposed amendment limited members of the Senate to two six-year terms and members of the House to six two-year terms. The amendment was never passed.

Key Terms

amendment

An addition to and/or alteration to the Constitution.

referendum

A direct popular vote on a proposed law or constitutional amendment.

Congressional Terms and Term Limits

Under the Constitution, members of the United States Senate may serve an unlimited number of six-year terms and members of the House of Representatives may serve an unlimited number of two-year terms.

Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill, or the Capitol Building, houses the United States Congress.

Reformers during the early 1990s used referendums to put congressional term limits on the ballot in 24 states. Voters in eight of these states approved the congressional term limits by an average electoral margin of two to one. In the elections of 1994, part of the Republican platform was to pass legislation setting term limits in Congress. After winning the majority, they brought the constitutional amendment to the House floor. The amendment limited members of the Senate to two six-year terms and members of the House to six two-year terms. However, constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority and the votes to impose term limits on Congress fell short of that number.

In May 1995, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995). The ruling says that states cannot impose term limits on their federal Representatives or Senators. The U.S. Term Limits was the largest private organization pushing for Congressional term limits. Earlier that year, the Congress had given the Court assurance that the Justices would be acting only against state statutes, not overturning an act of Congress.The hopes of some that Congress would self-impose term limits had abruptly come to an end.

With the Republicans holding 230 seats in the House, three versions of the amendment got well under 200 votes, while the 12 year term-limits managed a bare majority in the House of 227-204, well short of the requisite two-thirds majority (290 votes) required to pass a constitutional amendment. Defeated in Congress and overridden by the Supreme Court, this populist uprising was brought to a halt for the purpose of reforming the federal government. The term limits intended simultaneously to reform legislatures remain in fifteen states.

In 2007, Professor Larry J. Sabato revived the debate over term limits by arguing in A More Perfect Constitution that the success and popularity of term limits at the state level suggests that they should be adopted at the federal level as well. He specifically put forth the idea of congressional term limits and suggested a national constitutional convention be used to accomplish the amendment, since the Congress would be unlikely to propose and adopt any amendment that limits its own power.

11.6.4: Candidates for Congressional Elections

Congressional elections determine the structure and makeup of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Learning Objective

Describe the relationship between House elections and the Presidential term cycle

Key Points

• The House of Representatives has 435 members, elected for a two year term in single-seat constituencies. House of Representatives elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years.
• House elections occur every two years, correlated with presidential elections or halfway through a President’s term. Typically, when a House election occurs in the same year as a presidential election, the party of the presidential winner will gain seats.
• An increasing trend has been for incumbents to have an overwhelming advantage in House elections, and since the 1994 election, an unusually low number of seats has changed hands in each election.
• The Senate has 100 members, elected for a six year term in dual-seat constituencies (2 from each state), with one-third being renewed every two years.
• Elections to the Senate are held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in even-numbered years, Election Day, and coincide with elections for the House of Representatives. Senators are elected by their state as a whole.

Key Terms

senate

The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Each U.S. state is represented by two senators, regardless of population. Senators serve staggered six-year terms. The chamber of the United States Senate is located in the north wing of the Capitol, in Washington, D.C., the national capital.

house of representatives

The United States House of Representatives is one of the two houses of the United States Congress. The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country, although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the U.S. President before becoming law.

Example

• Due to gerrymandering, fewer than 10% of all House seats are contested in each election cycle. Over 90% of House members are reelected every two years, due to lack of electoral competition.

Congressional elections

Elections to Congress take place every two years. Congress has two chambers in Capitol Hill . Although the two-party system preserves the dominance of the Republican and Democratic parties, there is no direct relationship between congressional party discipline and election years. The support and backing of the parties is not necessary and sufficient to win elections. However, candidates no longer have a congressional party discipline like in other historical times.

Capitol Hill

Capitol Hill, where bills become laws.

Senate elections

The Senate has 100 members, elected for a six year term in dual-seat constituencies (2 from each state), with one-third being renewed every two years. The group of the Senate seats that is up for election during a given year is known as a “class”; the three classes are staggered so that only one of the three groups is renewed every two years. Until the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913, Senators were elected by state legislatures, not the electorate of states.

Originally, senators were selected by the state legislatures, not by popular elections. By the early years of the 20^th century, the legislatures of as many as 29 states had provided for popular election of senators by referendums. Popular election to the Senate was standardized nationally in 1913 by the ratification of the 17^th Amendment.

Elections to the Senate are held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in even-numbered years, Election Day, and coincide with elections for the House of Representatives. Senators are elected by their state as a whole. In most states, a primary election is held first for the Republican and Democratic parties, with the general election following a few months later. Ballot access rules for independent and minor party candidates vary from state to state. The winner is the candidate who receives a plurality of the popular vote. In some states, runoffs are held if no candidate wins a majority.

House of Representatives Elections

The House of Representatives has 435 members, elected for a two year term in single-seat constituencies. House of Representatives elections are held every two years on the first Tuesday after November 1 in even years. House elections are first-past-the-post elections that elect a Representative from each of 435 House districts which cover the United States. Special House elections can occur between if a member dies or resigns during a term. The delegates of the territories of American Samoa, District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands are also elected.

House elections occur every two years, correlated with presidential elections or halfway through a President’s term. Typically, when a House election occurs in the same year as a presidential election, the party of the presidential winner will gain seats. On the other hand, there is a historical pattern that the incumbent president’s party loses seats in elections that are held in the middle of a presidential term. This may be because the President’s popularity has slipped since election, or because the President’s popularity encouraged supporters to come out to vote for him in the presidential election, but these supporters are less likely to vote when the President is not up for election.

As the redistricting commissions of states are often partisan, districts are often drawn which benefit incumbent . An increasing trend has been for incumbents to have an overwhelming advantage in House elections, and since the 1994 election, an unusually low number of seats has changed hands in each election. Due to gerrymandering, fewer than 10% of all House seats are contested in each election cycle. Over 90% of House members are reelected every two years, due to lack of electoral competition. Gerrymandering of the House, combined with the divisions inherent in the design of the Senate and of the Electoral College, result in a discrepancy between the percentage of popular support for various political parties and the actual level of the parties’ representation.

US House Balance OverTime

Chart shows the percentage of the United States House of Representatives held by various parties from 1789 until 2004. (as elected in the biennial elections) Occasionally terms are applied in a slightly anachronistic way, such as for Federalists and Democratic-Republicans in the first few years on the Congress, or for Whigs during Jackson’s presidency. Notable features include the near absence of minor parties, and the narrowness of the current majority by historical standards.

2016 Congressional Elections

A total of 469 seats in the U.S. Congress (34 Senate seats and all 435 House seats) are up for election on November 8, 2016.

The big questionof the 2016 congressional election cycle is whether or not the Democratic Party will be able to regain control of the Senate. In order to take the chamber back, Democrats will need to gain five seats in 2016. The majority of vulnerable seats are held by Republican incumbents, many of whom are freshmen who were swept into office in the Republican wave of 2010. Additionally, Democrats only have 10 seats to defend in 2016, while 24 Republican incumbents are up for re-election.

11.7: How Congressmen Decide

11.7.1: Political Parties

Political parties serve to coordinate, assist and provide resources for members of congress and political candidates.

Learning Objective

Describe the history of political parties and their role in Congress

Key Points

• Political parties are one of the most enduring political institutions in the US, and with recent increases in the partisan nature of congress political parties are playing a increased role in US democracy.
• There is little mention of political parties in the US constitution, or any other founding documents, and many of the country’s founder opposed political parties expecting them to be divisive.
• In congress political parties serve to coordinate, assistant and provide resources for members of congress and political candidates.
• Since the 1990s there has been a stronger control by congressional party leaders on individual members including higher rates of party voting. Members of congress now routinely vote with their party at rates as high as 60 or 70 percent.
• The increase in party power also means that bipartisan collaboration between members of congress is less likely.

Key Terms

caucus

A meeting, especially a preliminary meeting, of persons belonging to a party, to nominate candidates for public office, or to select delegates to a nominating convention, or to confer regarding measures of party policy; a political primary meeting.

bipartisan

relating to, or supported by two groups, especially by two political parties

party voting

The type of voting that describes when voters cast their vote based on their self-identification with a particular political party.

Political Parties

Political parties are one of the most enduring political institutions in the US, and with recent increases in the partisan nature of congress political parties are playing a increased role in US democracy.

Political parties are one of the main coordinating bodies in Congress. With hundreds of individual members the party’s caucus or conference helps to bring together like-minded politicians and constituents, coordinate election efforts, set legislative priorities, and determine who will receive important committee appointments.

History of Political Parties

The Democrat and Republican parties have dominated the political landscape in the US for quite some time now. However, this has not always been the case, and the current political parties have also changed significantly over this time.

There is little mention of political parties in the US constitution, or any other founding documents. Many of the country’s founder opposed political parties, expecting them to be divisive. However, by the 1790s two parties the Federalists and Republicans had been established. These parties were separated by preferences for either a strong or weak central government.

Each of today’s major parties have made various changes throughout their existence, even as their name may have remained the same. For example it was a Republican-led congress that initiated the Civil War amendments that officially outlawed slavery in the US and gave citizenship and voting rights to formerly enslaved people and their ancestors. However, by the 1960s in was Democratic politicians who moved forward Civil Rights legislation. Today we are seeing another shift in the Republican Party with the increased influence of the Tea Party social movement within the leadership of the party.

Political Parties in Congress

In Congress political parties serve to coordinate, assistant and provide resources for members of congress and political candidates. Parties control primary elections which are the main means through which candidates can get on ballots. They also control committee appointments, and since the 1990s there has been a stronger control by congressional party leaders on individual members including higher rates of party voting. Members of congress now routinely vote with their party at rates as high as 60 or 70 percent. In addition to increasing the power of party leadership it means that bipartisan collaboration between members of congress is less likely.

Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi is the leader of the House Democrats and the first women to be Speaker of the House.

This rise in party power also means that the experiences of members of the majority versus minority party will be quite different. Majority party members will have many positive powers to pass legislation to support their own ideology and constituencies. However, minority party members will have to rely on negative powers such as blocking legislation in committees, or using filibuster techniques.

Coalitions

To deal with a situation in which no clear majorities appear through general elections, parties either form coalition cabinets, supported by a parliamentary majority, or minority cabinets which may consist of one or more parties. Cabinets based on a coalition with majority in a parliament, ideally, are more stable and long-lived than minority cabinets. While the former are prone to internal struggles, they have less reason to fear votes of non-confidence. Majority governments based on a single party are typically even more stable, as long as their majority can be maintained.

Coalition cabinets are common in countries in which a parliament is proportionally representative, with several organized political parties represented. It usually does not appear in countries in which the cabinet is chosen by the executive rather than by a lower house, such as in the United States (however, coalition cabinets are common in Brazil). In semi-presidential systems such as France, where the president formally appoints a prime minister but the government itself must still maintain the confidence of parliament, coalition governments occur quite regularly. In the United States, political parties are best described as coalitions.

11.7.2: Constituency

Each member of Congress has a responsibility to their constituents because they decide if a congressional member will be re-elected.

Learning Objective

Identify the rules and duties of members of Congress while they are in office, and the factors that shape how they vote on bills

Key Points

• Each member of the U.S. Congress is elected by voters in their home district. These voters are members of Congress’ constituency.
• Each member has a special responsibility to their constituents because these are the only voters who get to decide if a congressional member will be re-elected.
• Districts are reevaluated after each 10 year census and redrawn as needed to adjust to population changes. However, this is not a completely neutral process. The practice of gerrymandering has been used to insure that one party or the other will have an easier time winning elections.
• All members of Congress maintain constituency offices which are home bases where staff can keep in touch with local concerns, activists, and interests.
• Members of Congress also attempt to maintain support with constituency members by using their influence in Congress to gain support for local projects such as new, lucrative construction projects.

Key Terms

pork barrel

The appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative’s district

gerrymandering

The practice of redrawing electoral districts to gain an electoral advantage for a political party.

Constituency

Each member of the U.S. Congress is elected by voters in their home district. These voters are a part of congress’ constituency. Each congressional member has a special responsibility to their constituents because these are the only voters who get to decide if a member will be re-elected.

Models of Representation: The Delegate vs. Trustee Model

Representatives can act in two models of representation: as delegates or trustees. The delegate model of representation is a model of a representative democracy. In this model, constituents elect their representatives as delegates for their constituency. These delegates act only as a mouthpiece for the wishes of their constituency, and have no autonomy from the constituency. This model does not provide representatives the luxury of acting in their own conscience. Essentially, the representative acts as the voice of those who are (literally) not present.

On the other hand, the trustee model of representation is a model for how we should understand the role of representatives, and is frequently contrasted with the delegate model of representation. Constituents elect their representatives as ‘trustees’ (or ‘entrust’ them) for their constituency. These ‘trustees’ have sufficient autonomy to deliberate and act in favor of the greater common good and national interest, even if it means going against the short-term interests of their own constituencies. The model provides a solution to the problem of uninformed constituents who lack the necessary knowledge on issues to take an educated position. By contrast in the delegate model, the representative is expected to act strictly in according to a mandate from the represented.

House of Representatives Districts

Members of the House of Representatives are elected to represent districts that range in size from the 905,316 people representing the entire state of Montana to 495,304 which represents the entire state of Wyoming. Most states have multiple representatives.

Districts are generally reevaluated after each 10 year census. The districts are redrawn as needed to adjust to population changes. However, this is not a completely neutral process. The practice of gerrymandering has been used to insure that one or the other party will have an easier time winning elections by creating districts that hold a majority of voters likely to vote for one party or the other. Looking at the maps of congressional districts it is obvious that some districts are far from uniform. The more complicated shapes on the map might be a result of gerrymandering.

U.S. Congress House Districts

This map shows the boundaries for the U.S. Congress housing districts.

Senate Seats

U.S. Senators simply represent their states. There are two senators per state. Therefore, the constituency in smaller states such as Wyoming might be able to gain disproportionate influence.

Local Concerns

All members of congress maintain constituency offices, which are home bases where staff can keep in touch with local concerns, activists, and interests. Members of Congress will pay a great deal of attention to their constituency’s concerns. Congressional members will often attempt to maintain support with constituency members through practices such as pork barrel politics. This practice is when members will use their influence in Congress to gain support for local projects such as new lucrative construction projects.

11.7.3: Interest Groups, Lobbyists, and PACs

Interest groups attempt to influence Members of Congress in a variety of ways, such as lobbying and financing campaigns using PACs.

Learning Objective

Describe how outside groups work to shape policy at the federal level through the use of interest groups, lobbyists, and PACs.

Key Points

• Interest group represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, through advocacy, public campaigns, and even lobbying governments to make changes in public policy.
• Interest groups may take on a variety of strategies including public education, encouraging public participation, and providing education and special information for civil servants and politicians.
• Interest groups are also involved in actives such as lobbying to directly persuade decision makers in Congress along with members of the executive branch.
• PACs are organized groups that work on election campaigns both for specific parties and ballot initiatives. These groups pool donations to redistribute to candidates, parties and other PACs.
• Super PACs can also spend unlimited amounts of money advocating for or against a candidate or issue, but may not donate to, or coordinate with, a particular campaign.

Key Term

lobbyist

A person remunerated to persuade (to lobby) politicians to vote in a certain way or otherwise use their office to effect a desired result.

Interest Groups, Lobbyists, and PACs

Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members through advocacy, public campaigns, and lobbying governments to make changes in public policy. There are a wide variety of interest groups representing a variety of constituencies including business, labor, consumers, other governments, and various single issue groups.

Interest groups may take on a variety of strategies including public education, encouraging public participation, and providing education and special information for civil servants and politicians. However, interest groups are also involved in activities such as lobbying and forming PACs, which has led to concerns that some groups and even individuals might have disproportionate influence on Congress.

Lobbyists

There are over twelve thousand registered lobbyists in Washington, but only a handful of those have the influence and connections needed to consistently influence policy. Lobbyists work for a wide variety of groups, ranging from individual companies and non-profit organizations, to other governments and large coordinated councils representing whole industries, labor movements, or consumers. Lobbyists work to directly persuade decision makers in Congress along with members of the executive branch.

The impact of lobbyists is unclear, but many believe they can influence public policy. One example is the strength and influence of the National Rifle Association (NRA), who are advocates for gun rights. They also oppose gun regulations and legislation that infringe on the privacy of gun owners in the United States, who has one of the most lenient gun regulations in the Global North.

Political Action Committees (PACs)

PACs are organized groups that work on election campaigns often on behalf of specific parties and ballot initiatives. These groups pool donations to redistribute to candidates, parties, and other PACs. Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations limit the amount of money PACs can donate to any one campaign or party, and there are limits to the amount of money they can receive from any one donor.

PACs can be connected to existing organizations such as business, labor or trade organizations or non-connected, usually rallying around a single issue or ideology.

While PACs have existed since the 1940s, the 2010 SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission decision of the Supreme Court created a new form of PAC. They are officially known as independent expenditure-only committees, but better known as Super PACs . These groups can raise money without limits in from individuals, organizations, and large donors such as corporations or labor unions. Super PACs can also spend unlimited amounts of money advocating for or against a candidate or issue, but may not donate to, or coordinate with, a particular campaign.

Stephen Colbert

Political satirist Stephen Colbert has started his own Super PAC to draw attention to these organizations.

The SpeechNow.org case built on the decision in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case earlier in 2010, which held that the First Amendment right to free speech meant that legislatures could not limit independent political spending by corporations and unions.

The 2012 election cycle is the first presidential election to be held under the new rules. Before the campaigns even ended, the Super PACs had outspent the top ten PACs from 2008 by at least tenfold. A large majority of Super PAC donations also come from wealthy individual donors. By October 2012, the top 100 individual Super PAC donors donated 80% of all Super PAC funds, yet made up fewer than 4% of all donors.

Information and Watchdogs

Critics of Super PACs are concerned that these groups can, in effect, “buy” elections. If elected, the candidates may then feel a special obligation to these wealthy donors and organizations. Several groups now exist to track the connections between Members of Congress, lobbyists, and campaign financing. Some of these groups include the Center for Responsive Politics and the OpenCongress.org website.

11.7.4: Switching Parties

Though uncommon, a member of Congress switch parties for either ideological or pragmatic reasons.

Learning Objective

List several well-known cases of senators switching parties

Key Points

• Political parties provide various benefits to Members of Congress and so it is fairly uncommon for a Member of Congress to cross over parties.
• Some Members might cross over due to ideological differences with their party, or more pragmatic reasons such as power gain or reelection in the Senate.
• Various politicians who have crossed parties have found both success and failure.

Key Term

primary

A primary election; a preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

Crossing Over of Parties

Political Parties provide various benefits to Members of Congress, including some election support, support in Congress, and positions on various committee. Political parties also serve as ideological homes for Members, and voters are often more attached to a party than to any given candidate. For these reasons, it is fairly uncommon for a Member of Congress to cross over parties, but it is not unheard of.

A member might switch parties, or “cross the floor,” for a number of reasons. Some members might switch due to ideological differences with their party. This was the case with Senator Strom Thurmond who, in 1964, switched from the Democratic to Republican party in opposition to the Civil Rights Bills. Others switch for more pragmatic reasons, such as to gain more power in Congress or to gain reelection. Richard Shelby, a relatively conservative Democrat Senator switched to the Republican Party in 1994 after they gained a majority in the Senate, and went on receive high profile committee appointments.

Crossing over can cause difficulties. For example, when Ben Nighthorse Campbell crossed to the Republican party after being elected as a Democratic Senator, much of his Congressional staff quit. Others who have crossed over have found success: Senator Joe Lieberman served as a Democrat and even ran as the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee in 2000, but after losing the Democratic primary in his home state of Connecticut, ran and was elected as an Independent. He eventually supported the 2008 Republican presidential ticket.

Joe Lieberman and John McCain

Senator Lieberman was a Democrat, then crossed over as an Independent, then endorsed a Republican presidential candidate.

12: The Presidency

10.1: The Role of the Media in Politics

10.1.1: Types of Media

Learning Objective

Evaluate the claim that press freedom is compromised by increasing consolidation in the media industry

Key Points

• Media in the United States has taken several forms, including television, film, radio and blogs.
• Media frequently gains power through its support from large corporations, and is often criticized by the public for such alliances.
• Reporters Without Borders publishes a yearly ranking on the level of free media in each country.

Key Term

blog

A website that allows users to reflect, share opinions, and discuss various topics in the form of an online journal while readers may comment on posts. Most blogs are written in a slightly informal tone (personal journals, news, businesses, etc. ) Entries typically appear in reverse chronological order.

Media in the United States comprises several different types of widespread communication: television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet-based websites (especially blogs). Many of these networks are controlled by large, for-profit corporations that reap revenue from advertising, subscriptions, and the sale of copyrighted material. American media conglomerates tend to be leading global players, generating substantial revenue, not to mention fierce opposition in many parts of the world. Further deregulation and convergence are under way, suggesting more mega-mergers, greater concentration of media ownership, and the emergence of multinational media conglomerates. Critics allege that localism (local news and other content at the community level), media spending and coverage of news, and diversity of ownership and represented views have suffered as a result of such processes.

Theories on the success of such companies note a reliance on certain policies of the American federal government as well as a natural tendency to produce monopolies in the industry. Many prominent news organizations such as CBS, ABC, and Fox News are often criticized for creating political and corporate monopolies to boost popularity.

The organization Reporters Without Borders compiles and publishes an annual ranking of countries based on its assessment of their press freedom records . A smaller score on the index corresponds to greater freedom of press. Reporters Without Borders is careful to note that the index only addresses press freedom and does not measure the quality of journalism. In 2011-12 the United States was ranked 47^th out of 179 countries, which was a setback from the preceding year.

2010 Press Freedom Index Scores

These countries have been ranked on their freedom-of-press laws. A smaller score on the index correspondes to great freedom of press. The United States has a score of 47.

10.1.2: Regulation of Broadcast Media

Learning Objective

Summarize key developments in the history of broadcasting law

Key Points

• The FCC was created in 1934 to regulate laws about broadcasting on the public airwaves.
• By 1949, the Fairness Doctrine ensured that networks had to cover opposing perspectives on controversial issues.
• The Reagan Administration tried to eliminate the Fairness Doctrine, but the policy is still in effect today.

Key Term

broadcasting

transmitting, sending out messages omnidirectionally

In the United States, freedom of press does not necessarily mean an unregulated media.

Some of the more notable aspects of broadcast law include:

• frequency allocation: The division of the spectrum into unlicensed frequency bands, such as ISM band and U-NII band, and licensed frequency bands, along with television channel frequencies, FM broadcast band, and amateur radio frequency.
• low-power broadcasting
• Fairness Doctrine
• public broadcasting

Today, broadcasting rights fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), but other legislations set the precedent for this modern day law.

The History of Broadcasting Law

The Radio Act of 1927 was the first major broadcasting law in the country. Among its provisions was the equal opportunity provision, which provided a foundation for the equal time rule. This provision required radio stations, television stations and cable systems, which originated their own programming, to treat legally qualified political candidates equally when it came to selling or giving away air time. This provision was a result of legislators’ growing concerns that, without mandated equal opportunity for candidates, some broadcasters might try to manipulate elections.

The Communications Act of 1934 amended the Radio Act, and the equal time provision is located in Section 315 of the Communications Act. This act was another crucial moment in broadcasting law history, because it created the Federal Communications Commission (FCC, ). The FCC’s intent was to “regulat[e] interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nation wide, and world wide wire and radio communications service . . . “. (In this context, the word “radio” covers both broadcast radio and television). The FCC has the authority to “make such regulations not inconsistent with law as it may deem necessary to prevent interference between stations and to carry out the provisions of [the] Act. “

FCC Commissioners inspect the latest in television (1939).

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has promised to ensure fairness in broadcasting.

In 1949, the FCC enacted the Fairness Doctrine for the purpose of ensuring balanced and fair coverage of all controversial issues by a broadcast station. The FCC adopted the view that station licensees were “public trustees,” and therefore, had an obligation to broadcast contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance. It was later established that stations should also actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming about those issues. During the 1980s, the Reagan Administration pressured the FCC to eliminate the Fairness Doctrine, but was unsuccessful in its attempts.

10.1.3: Organization and Ownership of the Media

Learning Objective

Discuss the recent history of media consolidation

Key Points

• In the United States, movies have experienced conglomerate ownership since the early twentieth century, but just recently have news and broadcasting in the United States started to experience it.
• The Telecommunications Act of 1996 allowed for cross media, and since then Clear Channel Telecommunications have acquired many radio stations.
• The twentieth century has also seen many forms of media merging.

Key Term

conglomerate

A corporation formed by the combination of several smaller corporations whose activities are unrelated to the corporation’s primary activity. <!–<span style=”font-variant:small-caps;text-transform:lowercase”>example:</span> General Electric Company.–>

Concentration of media ownership, also known as media consolidation or media convergence, is a process whereby progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing shares of the mass media. Contemporary research demonstrates increasing levels of consolidation, with many media industries already highly concentrated and dominated by a very small number of firms. Over the years there have been many merger attempts, some successful, and others unsuccessful. Over time the amount of media merging has increased and the amount of media outlets have increased. This means that there are fewer companies owning more media sources, thereby increasing the concentration of ownership.

Examples of Media Mergers and their Potential Effect

In the United States, media consolidation has been in effect since the early twentieth century with major studios dominating movie production. Before that, there was a period in which Edison monopolized the industry. The music and television industries recently witnessed cases of media consolidation when SONY Music Entertainment’s parent company merged their music division with Bertelsmann AG’s BMG to form Sony BMG. TimeWarner’s The WB and CBS Corp’s UPN also merged to form The CW. In the case of Sony BMG, there was a “Big Five” (now “Big Four”) conglomerate of major record companies, while The CW’s creation was an attempt to consolidate ratings and stand up to the “Big Four” of American television (this was despite the fact that The CW was, in fact, partially owned by CBS, one of the “Big Four”). In television, the vast majority of broadcast and basic cable networks, over a hundred in all, are controlled by nine corporations: News Corporation (the Fox family of channels), The Walt Disney Company (which includes the ABC, ESPN and Disney brands), CBS Corporation, Viacom, Comcast (which includes the NBC brands), Time Warner, Discovery Communications, EW Scripps television, or some combination thereof (including the aforementioned The CW as well as A&E networks, which is a consortium of Comcast and Disney, ).

Walt Disney Studies

Walt Disney is a major media conglomerate.

Another example occurred in 1999, when Viacom made CBS an offer of $37 billion to buy them out. This buyout caused a lot of hype and many people were worried that this merge would decrease diversity and the quality of journalism because of the increased political influence.

There are also some large-scale owners in an industry that are not the causes of monopoly or oligopoly. For example, Clear Channel Communications, especially since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, acquired many radio stations across the United States, and came to own more than 1,200 stations. However, the radio broadcasting industry in the United States and elsewhere can be regarded as oligopolistic regardless of the existence of such a player. Because radio stations are local in reach, each station licenses a specific part of spectrum by the FCC in a certain local area, any local market is served by a limited number of stations. In most countries, this system of licensing makes many markets local oligopolies. The similar market structure exists for television broadcasting, cable systems, and newspaper industries, all of which are characterized by the existence of large-scale owners. Concentration of ownership is often found in these industries.

10.1.4: Nationalization of the News

Learning Objective

Describe the phenomena associated with the nationalization of the news

Key Points

• Local channels are facing challenges such as the advent of new technology and a competitive market.
• Bigger networks are able to use the technology needed to provide fast-paced news.
• ABC News, NBC News, and CBS News are three examples that are buying out local markets.

Key Term

cable

(communications) A system for receiving television or Internet service over coaxial or fibreoptic cables

Nationalization of the news refers to the modern phenomenon of the decline of local news networks and the increase in power of national news networks. A few factors are contributing to this trend, including the pressure in generating new and fresh content and the increasing power of conglomerates.

The internet age, digital cable and satellite broadcast have prservices, comes on-demand news programming. News operations have begun to feel the burden of needing to generate news content on a 24-hour news cycle, while keeping material fresh on their regularly scheduled newscasts. This means around-the-clock coverage. Rather than having a certain deadline for scheduled newscasts to meet, reporters have to file stories as fast as they can. Producers, on the other hand, have to find more ways to keep news stories “fresh” to viewers. The larger networks like ABC News , NBC News, and CBS News are able to afford these technologies and are beginning to buy out the smaller, local networks.

ABC News

ABC News is an example of a large networks “buying out” smaller ones.

In the early days, local newscasts were seen more as a public service. The style was straightforward. For instance, a newscast was divided into three blocks: news, sports, and weather. The news block was divided into local, national and international stories. Modern day news is now seen as a competition, and the stations must compete for relevance in the local market.

10.1.5: Agenda-Setting Theory

Learning Objective

Summarize the results of the key “Chapel Hill” study of the media and public opinion

Key Points

• Drs. McCombs and Shaw did a study based on the 1968 election and discovered the correlation between what news viewers watched and their perception of important events.
• Mass communication is defined as the process whereby professional communicators use technological devices to share messages over great distances to influence large audiences.
• The theory of accessibility states that the more the media plays a story, the more accessible that story is to the viewer’s mind.

Key Term

agenda setting

A theory in mass-communication stating that the media have the ability to determine which issues are important to the public.

Agenda-Setting Theory

Agenda-setting theory describes the “ability [of the news media] to influence the salience of topics on the public agenda. ” That is, if a news item is covered frequently, the audience will regard the issue as more important . In reality, mass media only shows the audience what it comprehends as an important issue. Print or broadcast news will then take away the audience’s ability to think for themselves.

OJ Simpson

Media experts contend that the OJ Simpson case was a prime example of media agenda-setting. It captivated the country–and news outlets–for years.

Agenda-setting theory was formally developed by Dr. Max McCombs and Dr. Donald Shaw in a study on the 1968 presidential election. In the 1968 “Chapel Hill study,” McCombs and Shaw demonstrated a strong correlation between what 100 residents of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, thought was the most important election issue and what the local and national news media reported was the most important issue. By comparing the salience of issues in news content with the public’s perceptions of the most important election issue, McCombs and Shaw determined the degree to which the media sways public opinion.

Agenda-setting is the media’s ability to transfer salience issues through their new agenda. This way, the public agenda can form an understanding of the salience issues. Two basic assumptions underlie most research on agenda-setting: (1) the press and the media do not reflect reality; they filter and shape it; (2) media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.

Before they attain the presidency status, Presidents are nominees for their own party. Nominees participate in nationally televised debates, and while the debates are usually restricted to the Democratic and Republican nominees, third party candidates may be invited, such as Ross Perot in the 1992 debates. Nominees campaign across the country to explain their views, convince voters and solicit contributions. Much of the modern electoral process is concerned with winning swing states through frequent visits and mass media advertising drives.

American news media are more obsessed than ever with the horse-race aspects of the presidential campaign, according to a new study. Coverage of the political campaigns have been less reflective on the issues that matter to voters, and instead have primarily focused on campaign tactics and strategy, according to a report conducted jointly by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, part of the Pew Research Center, and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Harvard University, which examined 1,742 stories that appeared from January through May 2007 in 48 news outlets.

Mass Communication

Mass communication plays an important role in our society. Its purpose is to inform the public about current and past events. Mass communication is defined in ” Mass Media, Mass Culture” as the process whereby professional communicators use technological devices to share messages over great distances to influence large audiences. Within this process, the media (a newspaper, book, television program, etc) takes control of the information we see or hear. The media then uses gatekeeping and agenda-setting to “control our access to news, information, and entertainment”. Gatekeeping is a series of checkpoints that the news has to go through before it gets to the public. Through this process, many people have to decide whether or not the news is to be seen or heard. Some gatekeepers include reporters, writers and editors. After gatekeeping comes agenda-setting. One of the most critical aspects in the concept of an agenda-setting role of mass communication is the time frame for this phenomenon. In addition, different media have different agenda-setting potential.

The Cognitive Effects of Agenda-Setting

Agenda-setting occurs through a cognitive process known as “accessibility. ” Accessibility implies that the more frequently and prominently the news media cover an issue, the more instances that issue becomes accessible in the audience’s memories. When respondents are asked about the most important problem facing the country, they answer with the most accessible news issue in memory, which is typically the issue the news media focus on the most. The agenda-setting effect is not the result of receiving one or a few messages, but is due to the aggregate impact of a very large number of messages all dealing with the same general issue. Mass-media coverage in general and agenda-setting in particular also have a powerful impact on what individuals think that other people are thinking, and hence tend to allocate more importance to issues that have been extensively covered by mass media.

10.1.6: The Rise of Adversarial Journalism

Learning Objective

Describe the rise of “gotcha journalism” and the legal recourse public figures have against such journalism

Key Points

• Adversarial journalism includes many interview tactics, such as confronting the interviewee on a confrontational topic and switching topics mid-interview.
• Editors involved in gotcha journalism often manipulate the texts of stories to their advantage.
• Many modern politicians have become aware and critical of gotcha journalism, including former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Key Term

libel

A written (notably as handbill) or pictorial statement which unjustly seeks to damage someone’s reputation.

Adversarial journalism, or gotcha journalism, is a form of journalism that seeks to uncover wrongdoings of public officials.

Gotcha journalism can include various methods such as, moving away from the agreed upon interview topic, or switching to an embarrassing subject that was agreed to be out-of-bounds. Interviewers might also confront interviewees with prepared material designed to contradict or discredit their positions. Gotcha journalism is often designed to keep the interviewee on the defensive by forcing them to explain some of their own statements taken out of context, thus effectively preventing the interviewee from clearly presenting their position.

This type of journalism is always premeditated and used to defame or discredit interviewees by portraying them as self-contradictory, malevolent, unqualified, or immoral. This effect is also achieved by replaying selected quotes from public speeches, followed by hand-picked footage or images that appear to reinforce negative images of the interviewee.

For example, a city’s mayor might give a speech in which he claims that during his tenure, employment was at a record high in his city. A news outlet may choose to replay that speech and follow it up with footage of desperate men and women at the unemployment office, and perhaps even an interview in which one of these people is asked to comment on the mayor’s speech. The interviewee, in this case, may be baited with questions that have obvious answers such as, “The mayor says unemployment is a record low; how do you respond to that? “

Other examples of gotcha journalism include misleading an interviewee about which portions of his or her statements will be aired, or misleading an audience about how an expert opinion is acquired. Take, for instance, a special feature on drug use in schools. To add sensationalism, an “expert” may be given manufactured statistics that imply that a three-fold increase in drug use is occurring in suburban schools, and asked to comment on what it might mean, if this statistic was real. The “expert” may issue a statement such as, “If this were actually happening, this trend would be alarming – thank goodness it’s not! ” To discredit this expert, upon airing, the narrator might say, “We asked Dr. John Q. Smith to comment on drug use in schools. ” Following this, would be the clip in which it appears that Dr. Smith is in denial over drugs in school. Alternatively, if Dr. Smith’s quote sides with the reporter’s case, the narrator might state, “We asked Dr. John Q. Smith what he thinks of the increase in drug use and he said, ‘this trend would be alarming. ‘”

Manipulation of quotes, images, and archival footage is typical in the editing process, especially for news magazines, and does not cross over into “gotcha” journalism until there is a deliberate attempt to mislead an interviewee, expert, or the audience. Most commonly, this manifests by finding footage of exceptions to a generalization given by a speaker or interviewee. For example, in the weeks following Hurricane Katrina public officials stated that progress was being made. A number of news outlets transmitted these statements, followed by footage of flooded homes, abandoned neighborhoods, and interviews with many people still affected by the disaster. The officials may or may not have been lying, but showing some continuing problems does not prove lack of progress in general.

In 1964, the pivotal US Supreme Court case (New York Times co. vs. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254) ended most libel protection recourse for public figures in the United States effectively clearing the way for intrusive or adversarial reportage into the public or private affairs of public figures by news media outlets whether newspapers, TV or radio. Public figures could no longer sue for libel, regardless of the bias of news media, without proof that the media had acted maliciously. An early citation indicated that “gotcha journalism” was used by Stuart K. Spencer in the Los Angeles Times in 1987. The full story is given in the book Stick It Up Your Punter by Chris Horrie. The headline was also used in a 1994 movie about the newspaper business,The Paper, which was based in part on Horrie’s book.

During the 2004 United State’s presidential election, Wall Street Journal columnist Gordon Crovitz suggested that the term “gotcha journalism” was used heavily by Republican campaign managers to diminish the credibility of journalists interviewing about the Iraq war.

Former Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin, has been especially critical of “gotcha journalism” . Her 2008 bid for Vice President was marred by numerous misstatements which she blamed on gotcha questions.

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin was very critical of adversarial journalism during her campaign bid in 2008.

10.2: Regulation of the Media

10.2.1: Regulation of the Media

Media of the United States consists of television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet-based Web sites.

Learning Objective

Describe the media landscape in the United States

Key Points

• Many media are controlled by large for-profit corporations that reap revenue from advertising, subscriptions and sale of copyrighted material.
• Critics allege that local news, media spending and coverage have suffered as a result of media concentration.
• A media conglomerate, media group or media institution is a company that owns large numbers of companies in various mass media.
• Advertising regulation refers to the laws and rules defining the ways products can be advertised in a particular region. These rules can define a number of different aspects, including placement, timing and content.

Key Terms

regulation

A law or administrative rule, issued by an organization, used to guide or prescribe the conduct of members of that organization; can specifically refer to acts in which a government or state body limits the behavior of businesses.

advertising regulation

The laws and rules defining ways products can be advertised in a particular region.

media conglomerate

A company that owns large numbers of companies in various mass media including television, radio and publishing. Media conglomerates strive for policies that facilitate control of markets across the globe.

Example

• The Walt Disney Company is America’s largest media conglomerate in terms of revenue. News Corporation, Time Warner, Viacom and CBS Corporation round out the top 5.

Introduction

Media of the United States consists of television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet-based Web sites. The U.S. also has a strong music industry. Many of the media are controlled by large for-profit corporations that reap revenue from advertising, subscriptions and sale of copyrighted material.

American media conglomerates tend to be leading global players, generating large revenues as well as large opposition. Further deregulation and convergence is under way, leading to concentration of media ownership and the emergence of multinational media conglomerates. Critics allege that local news, media spending and coverage have suffered as a result of media concentration.

A media conglomerate is a company that owns large numbers of companies in various mass media including television, radio and publishing. Media conglomerates strive for policies that facilitate control of markets across the globe. According to the 2012 Fortune 500 list, The Walt Disney Company is America’s largest media conglomerate in terms of revenue. News Corporation, Time Warner, Viacom and CBS Corporation round out the top 5. Other major players are NBCUniversal and Sony Corporation of America.

Advertising regulation refers to the laws and rules defining ways products can be advertised in a particular region . These rules can define a wide number of different aspects, including placement, timing and content. There are increasing efforts to regulate the content and influence of advertising. For example, the complete ban of advertising to children under 12 imposed by the Swedish government in 1991.

Advertisement

“Drink Coca-Cola 5¢”, an 1890s advertising poster showing a woman in fancy clothes drinking Coke. The card on the table says “Home Office, The Coca-Cola Co. Atlanta, Ga. Branches: Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Dallas”. Notice the cross-shaped color registration marks near the bottom center and top center. Someone crudely wrote on it at lower left (with an apparent leaking fountain pen) “Our Faovrite” [sic].The women who modeled for this artwork was Hilda Clark

Though that regulation continues for broadcasts originating within the country, it has been weakened by the European Court of Justice, which found that Sweden was obliged to accept foreign programming. Greece’s regulations are of a similar nature, “banning advertisements for children’s toys between 7 am and 10 pm and a total ban on advertisement for war toys. ” In the US, many communities believe that certain types of outdoor advertising blight the public realm. During the 1960s, there were attempts to ban billboard advertising in the open countryside.

10.2.2: Journalistic Standards

Journalism ethics and standards describe the principles of ethics and good practice journalists adopt in response to specific challenges.

Learning Objective

Summarize the key components of ethical journalism

Key Points

• Codes of journalism are designed to guide journalists through numerous ethical challenges, such as conflict of interest. A conflict of interest occurs when a single individual or organization adopts multiple interests, one of which could potentially corrupt the incentive to pursue another.
• According to the accuracy and standards for factual reporting, reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted and the space available, and to seek only reliable sources. In addition, events with a single eyewitness are to be reported with attribution.
• Independent fact-checking by another employee of the publisher is desirable. A fact checker is the person who checks factual assertions in non-fictional text (usually intended for publication in a periodical) to determine their veracity and correctness.
• Harm limitation addresses the question of whether all information gathered should be reported, and if so, how. This principle of limitation creates a practical and ethical dilemma by acknowledging that some attention must be given to the negative consequences of full disclosure.
• News style is the prose style used for news reporting in media such as newspapers, radio and television.
• News writing attempts to answer every basic question about a particular event– who, what, when, where, why, and often how– at the opening of the article. This method of composition is sometimes called the “inverted pyramid”.

Key Terms

fact checker

A fact checker is the person who checks factual assertions in non-fictional text (usually intended for publication in a periodical) to determine their veracity and correctness. The job requires general, wide-ranging knowledge and the ability to conduct quick and accurate research.

journalism ethics and standards

Journalism ethics and standards describe the principles of ethics and good practice journalists adopt in response to specific challenges.

conflict of interest

A situation in which someone in a position of trust, such as a lawyer, insurance adjuster, a politician, executive or director of a corporation or a medical research scientist or physician, has competing professional or personal interests.

Example

• According to the Columbia Journalism Review, the German weekly Der Spiegel runs “most likely the world’s largest fact checking operation,” employing the equivalent of eighty full-time fact checkers as of 2010.

Introduction

Journalism ethics and standards describe the principles of ethics and good practice journalists adopt in response to specific challenges. Historically and currently, journalists consider the subset of media ethics as their professional “code of ethics” or “canons of journalism”. These basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements drafted by professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations. While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements: notably, the principles of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability as they apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public.

Codes of Journalism

Codes of journalism are designed to guide journalists through numerous ethical challenges, such as conflict of interest. The codes and canons provide journalists with a framework for self-monitoring and self-correction. A conflict of interest occurs when a single individual or organization adopts multiple interests, one of which could potentially corrupt the incentive to pursue another. The United States and Europe have typically been considered pioneers in the formulation and adoption of these standards, though similar codes can be found in nearly any country that enjoys freedom of the press. While the written codes and practical standards of journalism vary somewhat from country to country and organization to organization, they tend to overlap substantially between mainstream publications and societies.

Common elements

In accordance with the accuracy and standards for factual reporting, reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted and the space available for story preparation, and to seek only reliable sources. In addition, events with a single eyewitness are to be reported with attribution. Events with two or more independent eyewitnesses may be reported as facts. Controversial facts are reported with attribution. Moreover, independent fact-checking by another employee of the publisher is desirable. A fact checker is the person who checks factual assertions in non-fictional text (usually intended for publication in a periodical) to determine their veracity and correctness. The job requires general, wide-ranging knowledge and the ability to conduct quick and accurate research. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, the German weekly Der Spiegel runs “most likely the world’s largest fact checking operation,” employing the equivalent of eighty full-time fact checkers as of 2010.

During the normal course of an assignment, a reporter might go about a variety of tasks– gathering facts and details, conducting interviews, doing research, background checks, taking photos, videotaping, recording sound. Harm limitation addresses the question of whether all information gathered should be reported, and if so, how. This principle of limitation creates a practical and ethical dilemma by acknowledging that some attention must be given to the negative consequences of full disclosure.

News Style

Ethical standards should not be confused with the common standards of quality of presentation. News style is the prose style used for news reporting in media such as newspapers, radio and television. News style requires not only a unique vocabulary and sentence structure, but also a particular manner of presentation– the situational importance of tone and intended audience, for instance. News writing attempts to answer every basic question about a particular event– who, what, when, where, why and often how– at the opening of the article. This method of composition is sometimes called the “inverted pyramid” , named for the decreasing importance of information in subsequent paragraphs.

Inverted Pyramid

The Inverted Pyramid. This story can be trimmed from the bottom without losing important details.

10.2.3: Government Regulations

A regulation is a legal provision that creates, limits, or constrains a right, creates or limits a duty, or allocates a responsibility.

Learning Objective

Describe several key debates in which the FCC is currently or has been recently involved

Key Points

• One can consider regulation as actions of conduct imposing sanctions, such as a fine, to the extent permitted by the law of the land.
• FCC works towards six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety, and homeland security.
• With the major demographic shifts occurring in the country in terms of the racial-ethnic composition of the population, the FCC has also been criticized for ignoring the issue of decreasing racial-ethnic diversity of the media.
• Network Neutrality in the United States is a hotly debated issue subject to regulatory and judicial contention among network users and access providers.

Key Terms

federal communications commission

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent regulatory agency of the United States government created by Congressional statute, with the majority of its commissioners appointed by the current president.

network neutrality

A principle proposed for user-access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions by ISPs or government on the content, sites, platforms, equipment, and modes of communication over the network.

regulation

A law or administrative rule, issued by an organization, used to guide or prescribe the conduct of members of that organization; can specifically refer to acts in which a government or state body limits the behavior of businesses.

Introduction

A regulation is a legal provision that creates, limits, or constrains a right, creates or limits a duty, or allocates a responsibility. Regulation can take many forms: legal restrictions promulgated by a government authority, contractual obligations that bind many parties, self-regulation by an industry such as through a trade association, social regulation, co-regulation, or market regulation. One can consider regulation as actions of conduct imposing sanctions, such as a fine, to the extent permitted by the law of the land.

The FCC and Regulation

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent agency of the United States government . FCC works towards six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety, and homeland security. The Commission is also in the process of modernizing itself. The inauguration of Ronald Reagan as President of the United States in 1981 accelerated an already ongoing shift in the FCC towards a decidedly more market-oriented stance. A number of regulations felt to be outdated were removed, most controversially the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. The FCC also took steps to increase competition to broadcasters, fostering broadcast alternatives such as cable television. In terms of indecency fines, there was no action taken by the FCC from FCC v. Pacifica until 1987, about 10 years later.

FCC Logo

An additional logo of the FCC.

The FCC’s mission is to create a purpose for national defense ad for the purpose of promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communications.

In the early 2000’s (decade), the FCC began stepping up censorship and enforcement of indecency regulations again, most notably following the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” that occurred during the halftime show of Super Bowl XXXVIII. However, the FCC’s regulatory domain with respect to indecency remains restricted to the public airwaves, notably VHF and UHF television and AM/FM radio. In other words, the FCC has a strong role in regulating public airwaves .

Press Coverage and film Crew at Barack Obama rally 2008

Media photographers and video crews, documenting the events onstage at a Barack Obama rally in Hartford, Connecticut.

Criticisms

With the major demographic shifts occurring in the country in terms of the racial-ethnic composition of the population, the FCC has also been criticized for ignoring the issue of decreasing racial-ethnic diversity of the media. This includes charges that the FCC has been watering down the limited affirmative action regulations it had on the books, including no longer requiring stations to make public their data on their minority staffing and hiring. In the second half of 2006, groups such as the National Hispanic Media Coalition, the National Latino Media Council, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, the National Institute for Latino Policy, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and others held town hall meetings in California, New York, and Texas on media diversity as its effects Latinos and minority communities. They documented widespread and deeply felt community concerns about the negative effects of media concentration and consolidation on racial-ethnic diversity in staffing and programming. At these Latino town hall meetings, the issue of the FCC’s lax monitoring of obscene and pornographic material in Spanish-language radio and the lack of racial and national-origin diversity among Latino staff in Spanish-language television were other major themes.

Network Neutrality in the United States is a hotly debated issue subject to regulatory and judicial contention among network users and access providers. As a de facto matter, there is a degree of network neutrality in the United States, meaning that telecommunications companies rarely offer different rates to broadband and dial-up Internet consumers based on Internet-based content or service type. However, there are no clear legal restrictions against these practices. Broadband providers often block common service ports, such as port 25 (SMTP) or port 80 (HTTP), preventing consumers (and botnets) from hosting web and email servers unless they upgrade to a “business” account. In recent years, advocates of network neutrality have sought to restrict such changes.

In 2005 and 2006, corporations supporting both sides of the issue spent large amounts of money lobbying Congress. In 2006, representatives from several major U.S. corporations and the federal government publicly addressed U.S. Internet services in terms of the nature of free market forces, the public interest, the physical and software infrastructure of the Internet, and new high-bandwidth technologies.

10.2.4: The Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent regulatory agency of the United States government.

Learning Objective

Discuss the FCC’s mandate, structure, and enforcement powers

Key Points

• In 1934, Congress passed the Communications Act, which abolished the Federal Radio Commission and transferred jurisdiction over radio licensing to a new Federal Communications Commission.
• In the early 2000s, the FCC stepped up enforcement of indecency regulations, most notably following the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” that occurred during the halftime show of Super Bowl XXXVIII.
• The FCC is directed by five commissioners appointed by the president, who designates one of the commissioners to serve as chairman.
• The FCC regulates broadcast stations, amateur radio operators and repeater stations as well as commercial broadcasting operators. Broadcast licenses are to be renewed if the station meets the “public interest, convenience, or necessity”.

Key Terms

communications act

The Communications Act abolished the Federal Radio Commission and transferred jurisdiction over radio licensing to a new Federal Communications Commission.

federal communications commission

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent regulatory agency of the United States government created by Congressional statute, with the majority of its commissioners appointed by the current president.

Introduction

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent regulatory agency of the United States government created by Congressional statute, with the majority of its commissioners appointed by the current president .

FCC Seal

Seal of the United States Federal Communications Commission.

The FCC took over wire communication regulation from the Interstate Commerce Commission. The FCC’s mandated jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. possessions. The FCC also provides varied degrees of cooperation, oversight and leadership for similar communications bodies in other countries of North America. The FCC is funded entirely by regulatory fees. It has an estimated fiscal-2011 budget of 354.2 million and 1,898 federal employees.

History

In 1934, Congress passed the Communications Act abolishing the Federal Radio Commission and transferring jurisdiction over radio licensing to a new Federal Communications Commission. Title II of the Communications Act focused on telecommunications using many concepts borrowed from railroad legislation and Title III contained provisions very similar to the Radio Act of 1927 .

FCC Commissioners inspect the latest in television (1939).

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has promised to ensure fairness in broadcasting.

In 1996, Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The legislation attempted to create more competition in local telephone service by requiring Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers to provide access to their facilities for Competitive Local Exchange Carriers. This policy has had limited success. The development of the Internet, cable services and wireless services has raised questions whether new legislative initiatives are needed. Congress has monitored developments, but as of 2009 has not undertaken a major revision of the regulation.

In the early 2000s, the FCC once again stepped up enforcement of indecency regulations, most notably following the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” that occurred during the halftime show of Super Bowl XXXVIII. However, the FCC’s regulatory domain with respect to indecency remains restricted to the public airwaves, notably VHF and UHF television and AM/FM radio.

Organization

The FCC is directed by five commissioners appointed by the president. The president designates one of the commissioners to serve as chairman. Only three commissioners may be members of the same political party. None may have a financial interest in any FCC-related business.

The Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) develops and implements the FCC’s consumer policies, including disability access; The Enforcement Bureau (EB) is responsible for enforcement of provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, along with FCC rules, orders and conditions of station authorizations; The International Bureau (IB) develops international policies in telecommunications like coordination of frequency allocation; The Media Bureau (MB) develops, recommends and administers the policy and licensing programs relating to electronic media, including cable television, broadcast television, and radio in the United States and its territories; The Wireless Telecommunications Service (WCS) deals with Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) and fixed, mobile, and broadcast services on the 700 MHz Band; The Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) develops policy concerning wireline telecommunications.

Broadcast Licensing

The FCC regulates broadcast stations, amateur radio operators, and repeater stations as well as commercial broadcasting operators. Broadcast licenses are to be renewed if the station meets the “public interest, convenience, or necessity. “

The FCC’s enforcement powers include fines and broadcast license revocation. Burden of proof would be on the complainant in a petition to deny. Fewer than 1% of station renewals are not immediately granted, and only a small fraction of those are ultimately denied. While the FCC maintains control of the written and Morse testing standards, it no longer administers the exams, having delegated that function to private organizations.

10.3: The Media and Political Campaigns

10.3.1: Political Advertisements

Political advertising is a form of campaigning used by political candidates to reach and influence voters.

Learning Objective

Summarize the development of political advertisements on television and the Internet

Key Points

• Unlike the campaigns of the past, advances in media technology have streamlined the process, giving candidates more options to reach even larger groups of constituents with very little physical effort.
• Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson all successfully utilized the medium of television for their political advertising campaigns.
• The growth of cable television networks and the Internet allowed candidates to reach new demographics, tailor their advertisements to particular audiences, and communicate directly with supporters and constituents.

Key Terms

constituent

a resident of a place represented by an elected official

narrowcasting

advertisements which are tailored to target specific audiences

Political advertising is a form of campaigning used by political candidates to reach and influence voters. It can include several different mediums and span several months over the course of a political campaign. Unlike the campaigns of the past, advances in media technology have streamlined the process, giving candidates more options to reach even larger groups of constituents with very little physical effort.

Political advertising has changed drastically over the last several decades. During the 1952 Presidential elections, Dwight D. Eisenhower was the first candidate to extensively utilize television commercials, creating forty twenty-second spots to answer questions from everyday Americans. During the 1960 elections, both candidates – Vice President Richard Nixon and Senator John F. Kennedy – utilized television, although Kennedy’s televised speech about his Catholic heritage and American religious tolerance is considered by many to be more memorable.

One of the first negative political advertisements was titled “The Daisy Girl” and was released by Lyndon Johnson’s campaign during the 1964 election. The commercial showed a young girl picking the petals off a daisy, while a voice off camera began a countdown to a nuclear explosion. The ad ended with an appeal to vote for Johnson, “because the stakes are too high for you to stay home.” Though the ad ran for under a minute and only aired once, it helped Johnson win the electoral votes of 44 states. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, political attack ads became even more prevalent, with Presidents Nixon, Carter, Reagan and George H. W. Bush all utilizing the method against their opponents .

President Lyndon B. Johnson

Lyndon B. Johnson, who successfully utilized negative political advertising in the famous “Daisy ad” during the 1964 election

The growth of cable television networks heavily influenced political advertising in the 1992 election between incumbent President George H. W. Bush and Governor Bill Clinton, particularly in reaching new target demographics such as women and young voters. The 2004 election saw yet another, and possibly the biggest, change yet in political advertising–the growth of the Internet. Web-based advertising was easily distributed by both incumbent President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry’s campaigns, and both campaigns hired firms who specialized in the accumulation of personal data. This resulted in advertisements which were tailored to target specific audiences for the first time (a process known as narrowcasting). The 2008 election was notable for Senator Barack Obama’s use of the Internet to communicate directly and personally with supporters and constituents, a tactic that would help in his eventual victory.

10.3.2: Television Debates

From 1960 onward, televised debates have become an important aspect of every presidential election.

Learning Objective

Name three key moments in the history of televised presidential debates

Key Points

• The first general election presidential debate was held on September 26, 1960, between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
• The 1976 presidential debates would lead to a victory for Jimmy Carter after a foreign policy gaffe made by incumbent Gerald Ford.
• During the 1980 debates, former actor Ronald Reagan came across much better than President Jimmy Carter, a fact which would lead to Reagan’s landslide victory.

Key Term

incumbent

Being the current holder of an office or a title.

Televised debates have become an important aspect of every presidential election. The first general election presidential debate was held on September 26, 1960, between Democratic nominee U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon, the Republican nominee.

With an estimated 70 million viewers watching, the first Kennedy-Nixon debate demonstrated the impact of this new medium. During the debate, Nixon looked sickly, underweight and tired. In contrast, Kennedy appeared confident and relaxed. As a result, many of those who watched the debate unfold on television believed that Kennedy had won. For the remaining three debates, Nixon regained his lost weight, wore television makeup and appeared more forceful than his initial appearance .

Kennedy-Nixon Debate

The Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960 was the first televised presidential debate.

It was not until 1976 that a second series of televised presidential debates was held during the general election campaign season. These debates, between Governor Jimmy Carter, the Democratic nominee, and Republican incumbent President Gerald Ford, also demonstrated their dramatic effect. Ford had already cut into Carter’s large lead in the polls, and was generally viewed as having won the first debate on domestic policy. However, in a second debate on foreign policy, Ford made what was widely viewed as a major blunder when he stated, “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and there never will be under a Ford administration. ” After this, Ford’s momentum stalled, and Carter won a very close election.

Televised debates were a major factor again in 1980. Earlier in the election season, President Carter had a lead over opponent Governor Ronald Reagan. In the debates, with years of experience in front of a camera as an actor, Reagan came across much better than Carter. This would eventually help to propel Reagan to a landslide victory.

10.3.3: News Coverage

Media coverage strongly influences people’s perception of politics, society, and culture.

Learning Objective

Name some of the central critiques of American news organizations

Key Points

• Perhaps the most important political function of the media is to put together a set of national priorities.
• Agenda setting may be limited within a domestic political context because of the competition for audience interest.
• American news media emphasizes more than ever the “horse race” aspects of the presidential campaign. This has led to criticism that audiences are not being given more substantive information about policy.

Key Term

horse race

An exciting and arduous competition (as in a political campaign).

Media coverage strongly influences people’s perception of politics, society, and culture. The political analyst and consultant Gary Wasserman attests that media institutions’ “most important political function” is to play the role of an “agenda setter,” where they “[put] together an agenda of national priorities – what should be taken seriously, what lightly, what not at all. “

Agenda-setting is somewhat limited within domestic politics. Due to the commercialized context within which they work, media institutions must compete for audience interest and can often not afford to ignore an important issue which another television station, newspaper, or radio station is willing to pick up. In regards to foreign policy, agenda-setting could take place in areas in which very few Americans have direct experience of the issues at hand. In addition, the U.S. media has been accused of prioritizing domestic news over international news, as well as focusing on U.S. military action abroad over other international stories.

American news media emphasizes more than ever the “horse race” aspects of the presidential campaign, according to a new study. Coverage of the political campaigns have been less reflective on the issues that matter to voters. Instead, the media has focused primarily on campaign tactics and strategy, according to a report conducted jointly by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, part of the Pew Research Center, and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. The report examined 1,742 stories that appeared from January through May 2007 in 48 news outlets. Almost two-thirds of all stories in U.S. news media, including print, television, radio and online, focused on the political aspects of the campaign, while only one percent focused on the candidates’ public records. Only 12 percent of stories seemed relevant to voters’ decision-making. The rest of the stories focused more on tactics and strategy. Many criticize this shift in emphasis for depriving audiences of substantive information about candidates’ policy platforms .

News Coverage

Press tables at a Barack Obama rally.

10.3.4: The Internet, Blogging, and Podcasting

The growth of the Internet and its associated technologies has made a profound impact on contemporary political campaigns.

Learning Objective

Describe the various ways recent developments in technology have shaped political activity

Key Points

• The internet is now a core element of modern political campaigns. Communication technologies such as e-mail, web sites, and podcasts for various forms of activism to enable faster communications by citizen movements and deliver a message to a large audience.
• Political blogs, generally a series of discrete posts about political issues in which readers may submit comments (thus reinforcing its interactive nature), have become prominent method of covering politics.
• The 2004 presidential election between incumbent President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry was the first to heavily utilize web-based advertising, with advertisements tailored toward different target audiences.
• Internet-based activism for a wide variety of political causes has also increased due to the growth of social media technologies, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
• New media has been incredibly successful at reaching the younger population while helping all populations organize and promote action.

Key Terms

social media

Interactive forms of media that allow users to interact with and publish to each other, generally by means of the Internet.

blog

A website that allows users to reflect, share opinions, and discuss various topics in the form of an online journal while readers may comment on posts. Most blogs are written in a slightly informal tone (personal journals, news, businesses, etc. ) Entries typically appear in reverse chronological order.

Introduction

The growth of the Internet and its associated technologies has had a profound impact on contemporary political campaigns.

The 2004 presidential election between incumbent President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry was the first to heavily utilize web-based advertising, with advertisements tailored toward different target audiences. President Barack Obama’s victory in 2008 was partially attributed to his campaign’s use of direct communication through the Internet with supporters and constituents . When discussing the 2004 U.S. presidential election candidates, Carol Darr, director of the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., said of the candidates which benefited from use of the Internet to attract supporters: “They are all charismatic, outspoken mavericks and insurgents. Given that the Internet is interactive and requires an affirmative action on the part of the users, as opposed to a passive response from TV users, it is not surprising that the candidate has to be someone people want to touch and interact with. “

Campaigns and the internet

President Obama’s campaign, depicted here, relied heavily on the use of the internet. He used the internet to connect with his constituents and win votes.

Political blogs, generally a series of discrete posts about political issues in which readers may submit comments (thus reinforcing its interactive nature), have become prominent method of covering politics. Though the medium was often originally associated with individuals operating outside the formal political and media establishment, political blogs have unquestionably shaped the actions of political leadership and voter behavior. In the United States and many other countries, the most prominent bloggers have now become an accepted fixture in the political milieu.

Podcasts, a type of digital media consisting of an episodic series of audio, video, PDF, or ePub files subscribed to and downloaded through web syndication or streamed online to a computer or mobile device, have also become a popular way to convey political messages.

The Impact of the Internet on Political Campaigns

The internet is now a core element of modern political campaigns. Communication technologies such as e-mail, web sites, and podcasts for various forms of activism to enable faster communications by citizen movements and deliver a message to a large audience. These Internet technologies are used for cause-related fundraising, lobbying, volunteering, community building, and organizing. Individual political candidates are also using the internet to promote their election campaign. In a study of Norwegian election campaigns, politicians reported they used social media for marketing and for dialogue with voters. Facebook was the primary platform for marketing and Twitter was used for more continuous dialogue. However, despite the opening of communications brought by the internet, elections have become more expensive due to the inevitable reliance on high-tech for all purposes in a campaign.

Signifying the importance of internet political campaigning, Barack Obama’s presidential campaign relied heavily on social media, and new media channels to engage voters, recruit campaign volunteers, and raise campaign funds. The campaign brought the spotlight on the importance of using internet in new-age political campaigning by utilizing various forms of social media and new media (including Facebook, YouTube and a custom generated social engine) to reach new target populations. The campaign’s social website, my.BarackObama.com, utilized a low cost and efficient method of mobilizing voters and increasing participation among various voter populations. This new media was incredibly successful at reaching the younger population while helping all populations organize and promote action.

Internet-based activism for a wide variety of political causes has also increased due to the growth of social media technologies such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. These technologies enable faster communication by grassroots citizen movements and the delivery of local information to a large audience. For example, the Internet became the catalyst for protests such as the 2011 uprisings in Arab countries and the Occupy Wall Street movement in the United States, as those involved increasingly relied on social media to organize and stay connected.

10.4: Media Bias

10.4.1: Media Bias

Media bias is the bias of journalists and news producers in the selection of events and stories that are reported, and how they are covered.

Learning Objective

Summarize the different types of bias affecting journalism and various attempts to correct them

Key Points

• Political bias has been a feature of the mass media since its birth following the invention of the printing press. Historians have found that publishers often served the interests of powerful social groups.
• Like newspapers, the broadcast media—radio and television—have been used as a mechanism for propaganda from their earliest days, a tendency made more pronounced by the initial ownership of the broadcast spectrum by national governments.
• The most commonly discussed forms of bias occur when the media support or attack a particular political party, candidate, or ideology; however, other common forms of bias exist, including advertising bias, corporate bias, mainstream bias, sensationalism, and concision bias.
• A technique used to avoid bias is the round table, an adversarial format in which representatives of opposing views comment on an issue. This approach theoretically allows diverse views to appear in the media.
• Another technique used to avoid bias is disclosure of affiliations that may be considered a possible conflict of interest. This is especially apparent when a news organization is reporting a story with some relevancy to the news organization itself or to its ownership individuals or conglomerate.

Key Terms

media bias

A bias in journalistic reporting, in programming selection, etc., in mass communications media.

sensationalism

The use of sensational subject matter, style, or methods, or the sensational subject matter itself; behavior, published materials, or broadcasts that are intentionally controversial, exaggerated, lurid, loud, or attention-grabbing. Especially applied to news media in a pejorative sense that they are reporting in a manner to gain audience or notoriety at the expense of accuracy and professionalism.

round table

An adversarial format in which representatives of opposing views comment on an issue. This approach theoretically allows diverse views to appear in the media.

Example

• Sensationalism is a type of editorial bias in mass media where events and topics in news stories and pieces are over-hyped to increase viewership or readership numbers. Sensationalism may include reporting about generally insignificant matters and events that don’t influence overall society and biased presentations of newsworthy topics in a sensationalist, trivial, or tabloid manner. Examples include press coverage about the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky scandal, Casey Anthony Trial, Tonya Harding’s role in the attack of Nancy Kerrigan, the Elian Gonzalez affair, and the O.J. Simpson murder case.

Introduction

Media bias is the bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media, concerning the selection of events and stories that are reported, and how they are covered. The term “media bias” implies a pervasive or widespread bias contravening the standards of journalism, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist or article. The direction and degree of media bias in various countries is widely disputed.

Practical limitations to media neutrality include the inability of journalists to report all available stories and facts, and the requirement that selected facts be linked into a coherent narrative. Because it is impossible to report everything, selectivity is inevitable. Government influence, including overt and covert censorship, biases the media in some countries, for example North Korea and Burma. Market forces that result in a biased presentation include the ownership of the news source, concentration of media ownership, the selection of staff, the preferences of an intended audience, and pressure from advertisers.

History of Bias in Mass Media

Political bias has been a feature of the mass media since its birth following the invention of the printing press. The expense of early printing equipment restricted media production to a limited number of people. Historians have found that publishers often served the interests of powerful social groups. In the nineteenth century, journalists began to recognize the concept of unbiased reporting as an integral part of journalistic ethics. This coincided with the rise of journalism as a powerful social force. Even today, though, the most conscientiously objective journalists cannot avoid accusations of bias. Like newspapers, the broadcast media (radio and television, ) have been used as a mechanism for propaganda from their earliest days, a tendency made more pronounced by the initial ownership of the broadcast spectrum by national governments. Although a process of media deregulation has placed the majority of the Western broadcast media in private hands, there still exists a strong government presence, or even monopoly, in the broadcast media of many countries across the globe. At the same time, the concentration of media in private hands, and frequently among a comparatively small number of individuals, has also led to accusations of media bias .

Percent of Media Citations by Ideology Graph

Studies done by FAIR, a progressive media watchdog organization, argue that the majority of media citations come from conservative and centrist sources.

Ronald Reagan as Radio Announcer 1934-37

Ronald Reagan as a WHO Radio Announcer in Des Moines, Iowa. 1934-37.

Types of Bias

The most commonly discussed forms of bias occur when the media support or attack a particular political party, candidate, or ideology; however, other common forms of bias exist, including advertising bias, corporate bias, mainstream bias, sensationalism, and concision bias. Advertising bias refers to when stories are selected or slanted to please advertisers; corporate bias refers to when stories are selected or slanted to please corporate owners of media; mainstream bias refers to a tendency to report what everyone else is reporting, and to avoid stories that will offend anyone. Sensationalism is a type of editorial bias in mass media in which events and topics in news stories and pieces are over-hyped to increase viewership or readership numbers. Sensationalism may include reporting about generally insignificant matters and events that don’t influence overall society, as well as biased presentations of newsworthy topics in a sensationalist, trivial, or tabloid manner. Examples include press coverage about the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky scandal, Casey Anthony Trial, Tonya Harding’s role in the attack of Nancy Kerrigan, the Elian Gonzalez affair, and the O.J. Simpson murder case. Finally, concision bias refers to a tendency to report views that can be summarized succinctly, crowding out more unconventional views that take time to explain.

Efforts to Correct Bias

A technique used to avoid bias is the round table, an adversarial format in which representatives of opposing views comment on an issue. This approach theoretically allows diverse views to appear in the media. However, the person organizing the report still has the responsibility to choose people who really represent the breadth of opinion, to ask them non-prejudicial questions, and to edit or arbitrate their comments fairly. When done carelessly, a point/counterpoint can be just as unfair as a simple biased report, by suggesting that the “losing” side lost on its merits.

Another technique used to avoid bias is the disclosure of affiliations that may be considered a possible conflict of interest. This is especially apparent when a news organization is reporting a story with some relevancy to the news organization itself or to its ownership individuals or conglomerate. Often this disclosure is mandated by the laws or regulations pertaining to stocks and securities. Commentators on news stories involving stocks are often required to disclose any ownership interest in those corporations or in its competitors.

10.5: News Coverage

10.5.1: Print Media

The main form of print media is the newspaper, which is a scheduled publication containing news of current events, and informative articles.

Learning Objective

Recognize the function and style of the newspaper as a format of media coverage

Key Points

• The emergence of the new media branch in the 17th century has to be seen in close connection with the spread of the printing press from which the publishing press derives its name.
• Advances in printing technology related to the Industrial Revolution enabled newspapers to become an even more widely circulated means of communication.
• By the late 1990s, the 24-hour television channels and the Internet posed an ongoing challenge to the business model of newspapers in developed countries. Paid circulation has declined, while advertising revenue has been shifting from print to new media, resulting in a general decline of profits.
• However, in the rest of the world, cheaper printing and distribution, increased literacy, the growing middle class and other factors have more than compensated for the emergence of electronic media by allowing newspapers in those regions to continue to grow.

Key Terms

print media

newspaper, magazines and other printed material that distributes news and information

Newspaper

A newspaper is a scheduled publication containing news of current events, informative articles, diverse features, editorials, and advertising.

Hearst Corporation

The Hearst Corporation was one of the large news media corporations of the first part of the 20th century.

Newspaper

The main form of print media is the newspaper. A newspaper is a scheduled publication containing news of current events, informative articles, diverse features, editorials, and advertising . It usually is printed on relatively inexpensive, low-grade paper such as newsprint. By 2007, there were 6,580 daily newspapers in the world selling 395 million copies a day. The worldwide recession of 2008, combined with the rapid growth of web-based alternatives, caused a serious decline in advertising and circulation, as many papers closed or sharply reduced operations.

The New York Times

The front page of the New York Times on Armistice Day, November 11, 1918.

General-interest newspapers typically publish stories on local and national political events and personalities, crime, business, entertainment, society and sports. Most traditional papers also feature an editorial page containing editorials written by an editor and columns that express the personal opinions of writers. The newspaper is typically funded by paid subscriptions and advertising.

The emergence of this new media branch in the 17^th century has to be seen in close connection with the spread of the printing press from which the publishing press derives its name. The German-language Relation aller Fürnemmen und gedenckwürdigen Historien, printed from 1605 on wards by Johann Carolus in Strasbourg, is often recognized as the first newspaper.

By the early 19^th century, many cities in Europe, as well as North and South America, published newspaper-type publications though content was vastly shaped by regional and cultural preferences. Advances in printing technology related to the Industrial Revolution enabled newspapers to become an even more widely circulated means of communication. In 1814, The Times (London) acquired a printing press capable of making 1,100 impressions per minute.

Soon, the printing press was adapted to print on both sides of a page at once. This innovation made newspapers cheaper and thus available to a larger part of the population. In 1830, the first penny press newspaper came to the market: Lynde M. Walter’s Boston Transcript. Penny press papers cost about one sixth the price of other newspapers and appealed to a wider audience. In France, Émile de Girardin started “La Presse” in 1836, introducing cheap, advertising-supported dailies to France.

In the early days of the newspaper business newspapers were often owned by press barons, and were used for gaining a political voice. After 1920 most major newspapers became parts of chains run by large media corporations such as Gannett, The McClatchy Company, Hearst Corporation, Cox Enterprises, Landmark Media Enterprises LLC, Morris Communications, The Tribune Company, Hollinger International, News Corporation, and Swift Communications.

However, newspapers have played an important role in the exercise of freedom of expression. Whistle-blowers and those who “leak” stories of corruption in political circles often choose to inform newspapers before other mediums of communication, relying on the reputation of newspaper editors to expose the secrets and lies that relate to the public. However, there have been many circumstances of the political autonomy of newspapers being curtailed. Recent research has examined the effects of a newspaper’s closing on the reelection of incumbents, voter turnout, and campaign spending.

By the late 1990s, the availability of news via 24-hour television channels and then the Internet posed an ongoing challenge to the business model of most newspapers in developed countries. Paid circulation has declined, while advertising revenue — which makes up the bulk of most newspapers’ income — has been shifting from print to the new media, resulting in a general decline of profits. Many newspapers around the world launched online editions in an attempt to follow or stay ahead of their audience.

The future of newspapers in countries with easy access to the Internet has been widely debated as the industry has faced soaring newsprint prices, slumping ad sales, the loss of much classified advertising, and precipitous drops in circulation. In recent years the number of newspapers slated for closure, bankruptcy or severe cutbacks has risen—especially in the United States, where the industry has shed a fifth of its journalists since 2001. Revenue has plunged while competition from media on the Internet has threatened older print publishers .

U.S. Newspaper Advertising Revenue

This graph depicts the fall of print advertising revenue and the rise of online advertising revenue.

The debate has become more urgent lately, as a deepening recession has shaved profits, and as once-explosive growth in newspaper web revenues has leveled off, forestalling what the industry hoped would become an important source of its revenue. At issue is whether the newspaper industry faces a cyclical trough, or whether new technology has rendered newspapers obsolete in their traditional format.

However, in the rest of the world, cheaper printing and distribution, increased literacy, the growing middle class and other factors have more than compensated for the emergence of electronic media by allowing newspapers in those regions to continue to grow.

Major American newspapers include: New York Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post. Major American news magazines include: Newsweek, TIME, and U.S. News & World Report.

10.5.2: Radio News

Stations dedicated to news will often feature newscasts, or bulletins, usually at the top of the hour, between 3 and 8 minutes in length.

Learning Objective

Explain the role of radio news in media coverage and recent trends in radio news

Key Points

• Many stations brand themselves as news radio but only run continuous news during the morning and afternoon drive times. These stations are properly identified as talk radio stations.
• Some National Public Radio stations brand themselves as news and information stations, which means that in addition to running the NPR news magazines like Morning Edition and All Things Considered, they run other information programs such as Fresh Air, Talk of the Nation, and the BBC World Service.
• The standard format was to start each half hour with world and national news from a network, then switch to locally-anchored area news, filling out the half hour with sports, business news, and features.
• In 1994, an effort similar to NIS was launched by the Associated Press. It was officially known as AP All-News Radio and had many affiliates from coast to coast. The Associated Press discontinued the all-news format in July 2005.

Key Terms

Arthur W. Arundel

Arthur W. Arundel is credited with creating the first 24-hour all-news station, radio or television, in the United States in January 1961 on his owned and operated WAVA station in Washington.

NIS

In 1975, the NBC Radio Network shut down its profitable weekend music and information service NBC Monitor to launch the News & Information Service (NIS), the first all-news radio network.

All-News Radio

All-news radio, or talk radio is a radio station where the station’s entire schedule is dedicated to newscasts.

Radio News

Radio station newscasts can range from as little as a minute to as much as the station’s entire schedule, such as the case of all-news radio, or talk radio. Stations dedicated to news or talk will often feature newscasts, or bulletins, usually at the top of the hour, usually between 3 and 8 minutes in length. They can be a mix of local, national, and international news, as well as sport, entertainment, weather, and traffic, or they may be incorporated into separate bulletins. All-news radio stations exist in some countries, primarily located in major metropolitan areas such as New York City, Toronto, and Chicago, which often broadcast local, national, and international news and feature stories on a set time schedule.

All-news radio is a radio format devoted entirely to discussion and broadcast of news. It is available in both local and syndicated forms, and is carried in some form on both major US satellite radio networks. Some all-news stations may carry sports, public affairs programs, simulcasts of TV news magazine, political affairs shows like 60 Minutes and Face the Nation, or national radio shows revolving around news such as the CBS News Weekend Roundup. Many stations brand themselves as news radio but only run continuous news during the morning and afternoon drive times. These stations are properly identified as talk radio stations. Also, some National Public Radio stations brand themselves as News and Information stations, which means that in addition to running the NPR news magazines like Morning Edition and All Things Considered, they run other information programs such as Fresh Air, Talk of the Nation, and the BBC World Service .

NPR

National Public Radio, one of the News and Information stations.

History

Broadcasting pioneer Arthur W. Arundel is credited with creating the first 24-hour all- news station, radio or television, in the United States in January 1961 on his owned and operated WAVA in Washington. The station’s success was largely driven by the the fact that the nation’s capital was riveted to news of the Vietnam War and the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Robert F. Kennedy. Arundel helped other stations in New York and Chicago also to convert to his all-news format and then met direct competition from Washington Post-owned WTOP in 1969.

All-news has for years been a top-rated radio format in New York, Washington, D.C., and other cities, but as big city traffic worsens and people work longer hours that increase the urgency of planning their day ahead, the focus of such stations has increasingly been on traffic and weather, often updated every 10 minutes. Attempts at long-form commercial all-news stations, such as Washington Post Radio, have been largely unsuccessful.

The Rise of Conservative Talk Radio

Conservative talk radio (or right talk) is a talk radio format in the United States devoted to expressing conservative viewpoints of issues, as opposed to progressive talk radio. In 1987, the FCC abolished the Fairness Doctrine, and AM radio began to make changes. The changes paved the way for syndicated personality Rush Limbaugh and others like him to rise to prominence by “offering a voice for the ‘silent majority'” that he believed had gone unheard by the mainstream media. Within the next decade, conservative talk radio schedules had developed the most listener loyalty (highest ratings) and performed particularly well when compared with most mixed or liberal/progressive talk radio. By 1991, Limbaugh had become the number one most syndicated radio host and AM radio had been revived.

The September 11, 2001 attacks brought on a wave of nationalism and a desire to rally around the United States and its government, which was led at the time by the Republican Party. This environment led to a large increase in national conservative talk radio hosts: The Glenn Beck Program, The Sean Hannity Show, The Laura Ingraham Show, Batchelor and Alexander and The Radio Factor all launched into national syndication at this time. Conservative talk radio includes personalities, both local and nationally-syndicated, such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and many others. As of 2013, Limbaugh and Hannity are the most listened-to radio programs of any format in the United States, and other conservative talk shows also rank highly. [2] Conservative talk is heard almost entirely on commercial radio; public radio in the United States has historically been perceived as having a more liberal lean, and noncommercial community radio is generally very progressive in ideology.

10.5.3: Television News

A news bulletin or newscast is a television program that provides updates on world, national, or local news events.

Learning Objective

Discuss the structure, content and style of television news

Key Points

• Newscasts differ in content, tone, and presentation style depending on the format of the channel on which they appear as well as their time slot. In most parts of the world, national television networks will have network bulletins featuring national and international news.
• The top rating shows will often be in the evening at “prime time”, but there are also often breakfast time newscasts of two to three hours in length. Rolling news channels broadcast news 24 hours a day.
• Television news is very image-based, showing video of many of the events that are reported.

Key Terms

Newscasts

Newscasts consist of several reporters or guest commentators being interviewed by an anchor, known as a “two-way. ” There may also be breaking news stories which will present live rolling coverage.

Television News

Television news refers to disseminating current events via the medium of television.

Television news

Television news refers to disseminating current events via the medium of television. A “news bulletin” or a “newscast” are television programs lasting from seconds to hours that provide updates on world, national, regional, or local news events. Television news is very image-based, showing video of many of the events that are reported. Television channels may provide news bulletins as part of a regularly scheduled news program. Less often, television shows may be interrupted or replaced by breaking news (“news flashes”) to provide news updates on current or sudden events of great importance. Walter Kronkite is one of the iconic figures in television anchoring .

Walter Cronkite

Walter Cronkite, the iconic anchor of CBS Evening News.

Structure, content and style

Newscasts, also known as bulletins or news programs, differ in content, tone, and presentation style depending on the format of the channel on which they appear as well as their timeslot. In most parts of the world, national television networks will have network bulletins featuring national and international news. The top rating shows will often be in the evening at “prime time”, but there are also often breakfast time newscasts of two to three hours in length. Rolling news channels broadcast news 24 hours a day. Local news may be presented by stand-alone local TV stations, local stations affiliated with national networks, or by local studios which “opt-out” of national network programming at specified times. Different news programming may be aimed at different audiences, depending on age, socio-economic group, or demographic. “Magazine-style” television shows may mix news coverage with topical lifestyle issues, debates, or entertainment content.

Newscasts consist of several reporters or guest commentators being interviewed by an anchor, known as a “two-way. ” There may also be breaking news stories which will present live rolling coverage.

Packages will usually be filmed at a relevant location and edited in an editing suite in a newsroom or a edit suite in a location some distance from the newsroom. They may also be edited in mobile editing trucks, or satellite trucks, and transmitted back to the newsroom. Live coverage will be broadcast from a relevant location and sent back to the newsroom via fixed cable links, microwave radio, production truck, satellite truck, or online streaming. Most news shows are broadcast live.

In the early twenty-first century news programs, especially those of commercial networks, tended to become less oriented toward hard news, and often regularly included “feel-good stories” or humorous reports as the last items on their newscasts, as opposed to news programs transmitted thirty years earlier, such as the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite. From their beginnings until around 1995, evening television news broadcasts continued featuring serious news stories right up to the end of the program, as opposed to later broadcasts with such anchors as Katie Couric, Brian Williams, and Diane Sawyer.

10.5.4: New Media

An important promise of new media is the “democratization” of the creation, publishing, distribution and consumption of media content.

Learning Objective

Explain the influence of the new media on politics and social movements

Key Points

• The rise of new media has increased communication between people all over the world and the Internet. It has allowed people to express themselves through blogs, websites, pictures, and other user-generated media.
• Some are also skeptical of the role of new media in social movements. Many scholars point out unequal access to new media as a hindrance to broad-based movements, sometimes even oppressing some people within a movement.
• New media changes continuously because it is constantly modified and redefined by the interaction between users, emerging technologies, and cultural changes.

Key Terms

Zapatista Army of International Liberation

The Zapatista Army of International Liberation of Chiapas, Mexico were the first major movement to make widely recognized and effective use of new media for communiques and organizing in 1994.

Virtual Communities

“Virtual communities” are being established online and transcend geographical boundaries, eliminating social restrictions.

new media

New media refers to on-demand access to content any time, any where, on any digital device, as well as the interactive user feedback, creative participation, and community formation around the media content.

New media refers to on-demand access to content any time, any where, on any digital device, as well as the interactive user feedback, creative participation, and community formation around the media content. Another important promise of new media is the “democratization” of the creation, publishing, distribution, and consumption of media content. illustrates the interactive form of communication that may exist in emerging social media.

Communication Diagram

This diagram illustrates the interactive form of communication that may exist in social media.

Most technologies described as “new media” are digital, often having characteristics of being manipulated, networkable, dense, compressible, and interactive. Some examples may be the Internet, websites, computer multimedia, video games, CD-ROMS, and DVDs. Facebook is an example of the social media model, in which most users are also participants.

There is growing consensus that new media will:

• Alter the meaning of geographic distance.
• Allow for a huge increase in the volume of communication.
• Provide the possibility of increasing the speed of communication.
• Provide opportunities for interactive communication.
• Allow forms of communication that were previously separate to overlap and interconnect.

Consequently it has been the contention of scholars such as Douglas Kellner and James Bohman that new media, and particularly the Internet, provide the potential for a democratic postmodern public sphere, in which citizens can participate in well informed, non-hierarchical debate. Contradicting these positive appraisals of the potential social impact of new media are scholars such as Ed Herman and Robert McChesney who have suggested that the transition to new media has seen a handful of powerful transnational telecommunications corporations achieve a level of global influence which was previously unimaginable.

The rise of new media has increased communication between people all over the world and the Internet. It has allowed people to express themselves through blogs, websites, pictures, and other user-generated media.

“Virtual communities” are being established online and transcend geographical boundaries, eliminating social restrictions. While this perspective suggests that the technology drives – and therefore is a determining factor – in the process of globalization, arguments involving technological determinism are generally frowned upon by mainstream media studies. Instead academics focus on the multiplicity of processes by which technology is funded, researched and produced, forming a feedback loop when the technologies are used and often transformed by their users, which then feeds into the process of guiding their future development.

Social movement media has a rich and storied history that has changed at a rapid rate since new media became widely used. The Zapatista Army of International Liberation of Chiapas, Mexico were the first major movement to make widely recognized and effective use of new media for communiques and organizing in 1994. Since then, new media has been used extensively by social movements to educate, organize, communicate, coalition build, share cultural products, and more. People are taking advantage of the Internet to produce a grassroots globalization, one that is anti-neoliberal and centered on people rather than the flow of capital. Of course, some are also skeptical of the role of new media in social movements. Many scholars point out unequal access to new media as a hindrance to broad-based movements, sometimes even oppressing some people within a movement.

New media has also recently become of interest to the global espionage community as it is easily accessible electronically in database format and can therefore be quickly retrieved and reverse engineered by national governments. Particularly of interest to the espionage community are Facebook and Twitter, two sites where individuals freely divulge personal information that can then be sifted through and archived for the automatic creation of dossiers on both people of interest and the average citizen.

New media changes continuously because it is constantly modified and redefined by the interaction between users, emerging technologies, and cultural changes.

10.5.5: Journalists

A journalist collects, writes, and distributes news and other information, and his or her work is referred to as journalism.

Learning Objective

Discuss the role of journalists in producing and distributing news and information

Key Points

• Journalism has developed a variety of ethics and standards. While objectivity and a lack of bias are considered important, some types of journalism, such as advocacy journalism, intentionally adopt a non-objective viewpoint.
• The radio industry has undergone a radical consolidation of ownership, with fewer companies owning the thousands of national stations, resulting in more “niche” formats and the sharing of resources within clusters of stations, de-emphasizing local news and information.
• Convergence is the sharing and cross-promoting of content from a variety of media, which in theory might all converge and become one medium eventually. In broadcast news, the Internet is a key part of this convergence.

Key Terms

Broadcast Journalism

Broadcast journalism is journalism published through the radio, the television, or the Internet.

Journalist

A journalist collects, writes, and distributes news and other information. A journalist’s work is referred to as journalism.

Reporter

A reporter is a type of journalist who researches, writes, conducts interviews, and makes reports.

Journalist

A journalist collects, writes, and distributes news and other information. A journalist’s work is referred to as journalism. A reporter is a type of journalist who researches, writes, conducts interviews, and makes reports. Reporters may split their time between working in a newsroom and going into the field to witness events or to conduct interviews. Reporters may be assigned a specific beat or area of coverage. Depending on the context, the term journalist may include various types of editors, editorial writers, columnists, and visual journalists, such as photojournalists.

Journalism has developed a variety of ethics and standards. While objectivity and a lack of bias are often considered important, some types of journalism, such as advocacy journalism , intentionally adopt a non-objective viewpoint.

Journalists may expose themselves to danger, particularly when reporting in areas of armed conflict or in states that do not respect the freedom of the press. Organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders publish reports on press freedom and advocate for journalistic freedom. As of November 2011, the Committee to Protect Journalists reports that 887 journalists have been killed worldwide since 1992. The Committee to Protect Journalists also reports that as of December 1, 2010, 145 journalists were jailed worldwide for their work. Current numbers are even higher. The five countries with the largest number of currently-imprisoned journalists are Burma (13), Eritrea (17), Iran (34), China (34), and Turkey (95).

Broadcast journalism is journalism published through the radio, the television, or the Internet. Radio was the first medium for broadcast journalism. Many of the first radio stations were co-operative non-profit community radio ventures. Eventually, radio pioneered advertising as a method to pay for its programs.

Programming can be locally produced, broadcast by a radio network, or aired by syndication. In radio news, stories include “sound bites”, which are the recorded sounds of events themselves, introduced by the anchor or host.

The radio industry has undergone a radical consolidation of ownership, with fewer companies owning the thousands of national stations. Large media conglomerates own most of the radio stations in the United States. This has resulted in more “niche” formats and the sharing of resources within clusters of stations, which de-emphasize local news, such as information pertaining to local emergencies. In addition, these conglomerates greatly narrow the range of political views expressed.

Television news is considered by many to be the most influential medium for journalism. For most of the American public, local news and national TV newscasts are their primary news sources. Television journalism viewership has become fragmented due to the emergence of 24-hour cable news channels such as Cable News Network (CNN) in 1980 and Fox News Channel as well as MSNBC in the 1990s.

Convergence is the sharing and cross-promoting of content from a variety of media, which in theory might all converge and become one medium eventually. In broadcast news, the Internet is a key part of this convergence. Frequently, broadcast journalists also write text stories for the Web, usually accompanied by the graphics and sound of the original story. Web sites also offer the audience an interactive form where they can learn more about a story, can be referred to related articles, and can offer comments on the publication.

A newscaster (short for “news broadcaster”) is a presenter of news bulletins. This person may perform electronic news gathering (ENG) as well as a compile the script for a news bulletin with a television producer.

Newsroom WHIO

The anchor delivers the news from a news desk, which is located on a news set.

Prior to the television era, radio broadcasts often mixed news with opinion and each presenter strove for a distinctive style. These presenters were referred to as commentators. The last major figure to present commentary in the news broadcast format in the US was Paul Harvey. Today, commentary is generally presented in the talk show format. The term “newscaster” came into common use to distinguish presenters of straight news broadcasts from commentators.

In the United States and Canada, news anchors present material prepared for a news program and, at times, must improvise commentary for live presentation . Many anchors are also write and edit the news for their programs. The term “anchorman” was used to describe Walter Cronkite’s role at the Democratic and Republican National conventions.

Walter Cronkite

Walter Cronkite, the iconic anchor of CBS Evening News, on location during the Vietnam War.

10.5.6: Blogs, Podcasts, and Cyberspace

Blogs and podcasts are forms of media that exist within cyberspace and encourage interactions among people.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast blogs and podcasts as formats of new media

Key Points

• An early milestone in the importance of blogs came in 2002, when bloggers focused on comments by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. Blogging helped to create a political crisis that forced Lott to step down as majority leader.
• Podcasts, which are audio or video files, are a horizontal form of media: producers are consumers and consumers become producers and engage in conversations with each other. This allows online social interactions.
• In current usage “cyberspace” stands for the global network of interdependent information technology infrastructures, telecommunications networks, and computer processing systems. The term has become a conventional means to describe anything associated with the Internet.

Key Terms

blog

A blog is a discussion or informational site published on the internet and consisting of posts typically displayed in reverse chronological order.

Podcast

A podcast is a type of digital media consisting of an episodic series of audio, video, PDF, or ePub files subscribed to and downloaded through web syndication or streamed online to a computer or mobile device.

Cyberspace

Cyberspace is the electronic medium of computer networks in which online communication takes place.

Cyberspace

Cyberspace is the electronic medium of computer networks in which online communication takes place . Now ubiquitous, in current usage the term “cyberspace” stands for the global network of interdependent information technology infrastructures, telecommunications networks, and computer processing systems. The term has become a conventional means to describe anything associated with the Internet and the diverse Internet culture, such as blogs, podcasts, or social media. The United States government recognizes the interconnected information technology and the interdependent network of information technology infrastructures operating across this medium as part of the US National Critical Infrastructure.

Cyberspace describes the flow of digital data through the network of interconnected computers. It is not “real,” since one cannot spatially locate it as a tangible object, yet “real” in its effects.

Blogs

A blog is a discussion or informational site published on the internet consisting of posts typically displayed in reverse chronological order. Until 2009, blogs were usually the work of a single individual, occasionally of a small group, and often were themed on a single subject. More recently “multi-author blogs” (MABs) have developed. MABs from newspapers, other media outlets, universities, think tanks, interest groups, and similar institutions account for an increasing quantity of blog traffic. The rise of Twitter and other “micro-blogging” systems helps integrate MABs and single-author blogs into societal news streams.

Although not a requirement, most good quality blogs are interactive, allowing visitors to leave comments and even message each other on the blogs. It is this interactivity that distinguishes them from other static websites. In that sense, blogging can be seen as a form of social networking. Indeed, bloggers do not only produce content to post on their blogs, but also build social relations with their readers and other bloggers.

Many blogs provide commentary on a particular subject, others function as personal online diaries, and still others function more as online brand advertising of a particular individual or company. A typical blog combines text, images, and links to other blogs, Web pages, and other media related to its topic. Microblogging is another type of blogging, featuring very short posts. In education, blogs can be used as instructional resources.

Blogs and Politics

An early milestone in the importance of blogs in politics came in 2002, when bloggers focused on comments by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott . Senator Lott, at a party honoring Senator Strom Thurmond, praised Thurmond by suggesting the United States would have been better off had Thurmond been elected president. Lott’s critics saw these comments as a tacit approval of racial segregation, a policy advocated by Thurmond’s 1948 presidential campaign. This view was reinforced by documents and recorded interviews dug up by bloggers. Though Lott’s comments were made at a public event attended by the media, no major media organizations reported on his controversial comments until after blogs broke the story. Blogging helped to create a political crisis that forced Lott to step down as majority leader.

Similarly, blogs were among the driving forces behind the “Rathergate” scandal. Dan Rather presented documents on the CBS show 60 Minutes that conflicted with accepted accounts of President Bush’s military service record. Bloggers declared the documents to be forgeries and presented evidence and arguments in support of that view. Consequently, CBS apologized for what it said were inadequate reporting techniques. More often, however, news blogs tend to react to material already published by the mainstream media. Meanwhile, an increasing number of experts began blogging, making blogs a source of in-depth analysis.

By 2004, the role of blogs became increasingly mainstream, as political consultants, news services, and candidates began using them as tools for outreach and opinion forming. Blogging was established by politicians and political candidates to express opinions on war and other issues and cemented blogs’ role as news sources.

Podcast

A podcast is a type of digital media consisting of an episodic series of audio, video, PDF, or ePub files subscribed to and downloaded through web syndication or streamed online to a computer or mobile device. Podcasting is both a converged medium bringing together audio, the web, and portable media players, and a disruptive technology that has caused some in the radio business to reconsider certain established practices and preconceptions about audiences, consumption, production, and distribution. It is very much a horizontal media form: producers are consumers and consumers become producers and engage in conversations with each other.

Senator Trent Lott

The Trent Lott-Strom Thurmond scandal was first picked up and publicized by early political blogs. It marked one of the first times in which mainstream media followed a story publicized in blogs.

9.1: Voting as Political Participation

9.1.1: Voting as Political Participation

Learning Objective

Discuss the importance of voting as a process of political participation.

Key Points

• From the 1860s to present day, voter registration laws have gradually been reformed to make voter registration easier, increasing the amount of voters who are able to register. Online registration and same-day registration has also increase the percentage of eligible voters who are registered.
• The rate of voter turnout depends on the type of election: state and local elections have the lowest turnout, midterm elections have slightly higher turnouts, and presidential elections have the highest turnout.
• While over 90% of Americans believe voting is a civic duty, many do not vote, often due to informal barriers such as the hassle of registering to vote.

Key Terms

voter turnout

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. Exactly who is eligible varies by country, and should not be confused with the total adult population.

vote

To cast a vote; to assert a formalised choice in an election.

voter registration

Voter registration is the requirement in some democracies for citizens and residents to check in with central registry specifically for the purpose of being allowed to vote in elections.

Voting

Voting is the most prominent form of political participation, and in fact, for many people, it is the primary means of participating in politics. A unique and special political act, voting allows for more people’s views to be represented than any other activity. Every citizen gets one vote that counts equally . Expanded voter registration means that more and more people have been able to participate, and voter turnout trends indicate how many people exercise their right to vote as a primary means of political participation.

History of Voting in the United States

This painting from 1846 depicts a polling judge administering an oath to a voter. Since America’s founding, voting has been a primary avenue for citizen participation in politics.

Voter Registration: The First Step to Participation

In order to participate in voting, citizens must be registered. To register, citizens must meet eligibility requirements and have filed the necessary paperwork that permits them to vote in a given locality. Eligibility requirements require voters to be eighteen years of age, and states can enforce residency requirements that mandate the number of years a person must live in a place before being eligible to vote. The composition of the electorate has changed radically throughout American history. The pool of eligible voters has expanded from primarily white, male property owners at the founding, to include black men after the Civil War, women after 1920, and eighteen- to twenty-year-olds after 1971.

Voter registration laws were implemented in the 1860s by states and big cities to ensure that only citizens who met legal requirements could vote. Over time, residency requirements were relaxed. Beginning in the 1980s, some states, including Maine, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, made it possible for people to register on Election Day. Turnout in states that have Election Day registration averages ten points higher than in the rest of the country. The United States is one of the few democracies that requires citizens to register themselves rather than having the government take responsibility for automatically registering them.

Significant steps have been taken to make registration easier, and to ensure more people can participate in elections. In 1993, Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, also known as the “motor voter” law, allowing citizens to register at motor vehicle and social service offices. “Motor voter’s” success in increasing the ranks of registered voters differs by state depending on how well the program is publicized and executed. Voter registration also has increased as a result of online registration. Rock the Vote (RTV), a nonpartisan youth mobilization organization, established the first online voter registration initiative in 1992 with official backing from the Congressional Internet Caucus. RTV registered over 2 million new voters in 1992, 80% of whom cast a ballot, and signed up over 2.5 million voters in 2008.

Voter Turnout

Over 90 percent of Americans agree with the principle that citizens have a duty to vote. Still, many people do not vote regularly. Social, cultural, and economic factors can keep people from voting, or sometimes barriers to voting are informal. The United States holds a large number of elections, each governed by specific rules and schedules. With so many elections, people can become overwhelmed, confused, or just plain tired of voting.

How many people actually participate in elections often depends on the type of election. A large number of elections are held in the United States every year, including local elections, elections for county and statewide offices, primaries, and general elections. Only a small number of people, generally under one-quarter of those eligible, participate in local, county, and state elections. Midterm elections, in which members of Congress run for office in nonpresidential-election years, normally draw about one-third of eligible voters. Young voters are less likely to turn out in midterm elections than older citizens. In 2010, only about 23 percent of eligible eighteen- to twenty-nine-year-olds cast a ballot. Voter turnout in presidential elections is generally higher than for lower-level contests; usually more than half the eligible voters cast a ballot .

Voter Turnout by Sex and Age (2008)

This is a chart illustrating voter turnout by sex and age for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Notice the higher turnout rates for women, and for older people.

Voter turnout in the current era has not fluctuated much since voting participation during universal suffrage in 1920. Forty-nine percent of the voting-age public cast a ballot in the 1924 presidential contest, the same percentage as in 1996. Turnout in presidential elections in the 1960s was over 60 percent. More voters were mobilized during this period of political upheaval and people focused on issues of race relations, social welfare, and the Vietnam War. Turnout was lower in the 1980s and 1990s, when the political climate was less tumultuous. There has been a steady increase in turnout since the 2000 presidential election, in which 51 percent of the voting-age public cast a ballot. Turnout in the 2008 election was greater than usual, at 57 percent .

2008 Election

Participation in the 2008 presidential election was greater than usual, as people were motivated by the open race and the candidate choices.

9.1.2: Other Forms of Political Participation

Learning Objective

Describe several different ways in which citizens can participate in the political process

Key Points

• New media and technology, such as social networking sites, blogs, online campaign donations, have provided new avenues for political organization and participation.
• Citizens can participate in civil society, which is an important part of political participation, through activities like volunteering, attending events associated with causes (like a sporting event or a concert), or joining an interest group or civic organization.
• Citizens can also protest, riot, or refuse to vote to demonstrate dissatisfaction with certain elements of their political system.
• Citizens also participate in politics by being directly involved in campaigns. Citizens can run for office themselves, donate money or time to candidates, or discuss political issues and campaigns with friends and family.

Key Terms

protest

A protest is an expression of objection, by words or by actions, to particular events, policies, or situations. Protests can take many different forms, from individual statements to mass demonstrations. Protesters may organize a protest as a way of publicly making their opinions heard in an attempt to influence public opinion or government policy.

civil society

All of the institutions, voluntary organizations, and corporate bodies that are less than the state but greater than the family.

social media

Interactive forms of media that allow users to interact with and publish to each other, generally by means of the Internet.

Far more people participate in politics by voting than by any other means, yet there are many other ways to take part in politics.

Contacting Public Officials

Expressing opinions to leaders is one avenue of political participation. The number of people contacting public officials at all levels of government has risen markedly over the past three decades. Seventeen percent of Americans contacted a public official in 1976. By 2008, 44 percent of the public had contacted their member of Congress about an issue or concern. E-mail has made contacting public officials cheaper and easier than the traditional method of mailing a letter.

Donating Money, Time, and Resources to a Campaign

The number of people who give money to a candidate, party, or political organization has increased substantially since the 1960s. Over 25 percent of the public gave money to a cause and 17 percent contributed to a presidential candidate in 2008. Direct mail and e-mail solicitations make fundraising easier, especially when donors can contribute through candidate and political-party websites. A positive side effect of fundraising campaigns is that people are made aware of candidates and issues through appeals for money.

During campaigns, people may work for political parties or candidates, organize campaign events, and discuss issues with family and friends . Generally, about 15 percent of Americans participate in these types of campaign activities in an election year. New media offer additional opportunities for people to engage in campaigns. People can blog or participate in discussion groups related to an election. They can use social media sites, like Facebook, to recruit supporters, advertise for campaign events, or encourage friends to donate money to a candidate.

Participating in campaigns

Making phone calls during a campaign can be an important way for citizens to participate in politics.

Running for Office

Another avenue for political participation is running for office. Being a public official requires a great deal of dedication, time, energy, and money. About 3 percent of the adult population holds an elected or appointed public office.

Participating by Protesting

Political protest activity represents another sphere of political participation. Protests involve unconventional, and sometimes unlawful, political actions that are undertaken to gain rewards from the political and economic system. Protest behavior can take many forms. People can engage in nonviolent acts of civil disobedience where they deliberately break a law that they consider to be unjust. This tactic was used effectively during the 1960s civil rights movement . Other forms of protest behavior include marking public spaces with graffiti, demonstrating, and boycotting. Extreme forms of protest behavior include acts that cause harm, like bombing a building or rioting. Members of social movements may resort to rioting when they perceive that there are no conventional alternatives for getting their message across.

March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, 1963

Interest groups may attempt to influence policy through public opinion campaigns, demonstrating that the electorate favors a particular policy stance.

Being a Part of Civil Society

About half the population takes part in national and community political affairs by joining an interest group, issue-based organization, civic organization, or political party. Organizations with the goal of promoting civic action on behalf of particular causes, or single-issue groups, have proliferated. These groups are as diverse as the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which supports animal rights, to the Concord Coalition, which seeks to protect Social Security benefits.

Even activities that on the surface do not seem to have much to do with politics can be a form of political participation. Coaching a little league team, volunteering at a nursing home, or working at a homeless shelter all represent participation in civil society, the community of individuals who volunteer and work cooperatively outside of formal governmental institutions. Civil society depends on social networks, based on trust and goodwill, that form between friends and associates and allow them to work together to achieve common goals. Community activism is thriving among young people who realize the importance of service that directly assists others. Almost 70 percent of high school students and young adults aged eighteen to thirty report that they have been involved in community activities .

Volunteering as political participation

Volunteering is another form of political participation and a crucial part of a healthy civil society.

Participating in Support Activities

People also can take part in support activities, which are more passive forms of political involvement. They may attend concerts or participate in sporting events associated with causes, such as the “Race for the Cure” for breast cancer. These events are designed to raise money and awareness of societal problems, such as poverty and health care. Support activities can lead to active participation, as people learn about issues through these events and decide to become involved.

Symbolic Participation and Symbolic Non-Participation

People also can engage in symbolic participation, routine or habitual acts that show support for the political system. People salute the flag and recite the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of a school day and they sing the national anthem at sporting events. Symbolic acts are not always supportive of the political system. For example, some people may refuse to vote to express their dissatisfaction with government.

9.2: Why People Vote

9.2.1: Socioeconomic Factors

Depending on socioeconomic factors like wealth, education, or occupation, people are more or less likely to vote.

Learning Objective

Describe the relationship between socioeconomic status and voting behavior

Key Points

• Wealthier people are more likely to vote, as they generally possess the resources and time to be active in politics.
• Of all the socioeconomic factors impacting voter turnout, education has the greatest impact. The more educated a person is, the more likely they are to vote, as they have a better understanding of how the system works, how to influence the system, and why participation is important.
• A person is more or less likely to vote depending on their occupation. Managerial or professional workers are more likely to vote, and the unemployed are the least likely group to vote.

Key Terms

voter turnout

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. Exactly who is eligible varies by country, and should not be confused with the total adult population.

socioeconomic status

Socioeconomic status (SES) is a combined economic and sociological measurement of a person’s work experience and of an individual’s or family’s economic and social position in relation to others, based on income, education, and occupation.

vote

To cast a vote; to assert a formalised choice in an election.

Introduction

Socioeconomic status (SES) is determined by an individual’s level of education, income, and occupation. Socioeconomic factors significantly affect whether or not individuals develop the habit of voting. Voters and political activists generally are more educated and better off financially than the general population. Because of this, these people have the best chance of having their views represented in government. Meanwhile, those who rely the most on government programs and policies, such as recipients of public assistance, often have fewer opportunities to participate and are less engaged with the process of electing representatives.

Income and Voting

Independently, income has some effect on whether or not people vote. Wealthier people are more likely to vote, regardless of their educational background . Wealthier and better educated people tend to vote more often, participate more in political activities, and donate more money to causes than poorer or less educated people. They also have greater access to the resources that facilitate political activity, including contact with people in powerful positions.

Voter Turnout by Income (2008)

This is a figure illustrating the different rates of voting in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election by income. The higher income, the more likely a person is to vote.

Education and Voting

The most important socioeconomic factor affecting voter turnout is education . The more educated a person is, the more likely he or she is to vote. Studies show that this is true, even controlling for other factors that are closely associated with education level, such as income and class. Education has the strongest impact on participation, as it provides people with background knowledge as to how the political system works and how the action of voting is connected with the realities of their lives. Educated people develop the skills that allow them to follow and understand national and international events through the mass media. They are likely to form opinions about political issues and engage in discussions. The most popular political blogs, such as Daily Kos and Huffington Post, are produced and read by well-educated people. Education also prepares people to deal with the bureaucratic aspects of participation, such as registering to vote or organizing petition drives. Eighty-three percent of people with a graduate school education voted in the 2008 presidential election. In comparison, only 39% of those without a high school diploma voted that year. The 2010 midterm elections were decided primarily by people with at least some college experience. Less than 5% of voters had no high school education, 16% were high school graduates, 29% had some college education, and 50% were college graduates.

Voter Turnout by Educational Attainment –2008 Presidential Election

Educational attainment, an indicator of social class, can predict one’s level of political participation. Those with high educational attainment are more likely to vote in elections than those with little education.

Occupation and Voting

People’s occupations also are related to their participation and their likelihood to vote. People in managerial and professional positions are the most politically active, followed by craftspersons, service workers, and laborers. Many managers and professionals follow politics as part of their jobs. The unemployed are the least inclined to participate in politics through voting, however, because they may rely on governmental services to survive, they are frequently among those most immediately affected by the outcome of elections.

9.2.2: Additional Factors: Gender, Age, Religion, Race, and Ethnicity

Certain factors like age, gender, race, and religion help describe why people vote and who is more likely to vote.

Learning Objective

Describe the voting patterns of various demographic subsets of the American electorate

Key Points

• Traditionally people ages 30 to 65 are most likely to vote, but recently young people have been coming out to the polls more frequently, in part due to mobilization via social media.
• Since the 1980s, women have voted as much or more than men, removing the idea that there is a gender gap in certain types of political participation like voting.
• Different ethnic groups also have unique voting trends. African-American voters vote as much as other voters of the same socioeconomic status, and Asian voters have lower voter turnout rates. Latinos tend to vote less than other groups, but their vote has been rising in importance.
• People may vote due to religious convictions or socially conservative viewpoints, such as those voters who identify with the Christian right. Voters identifying with the Christian right have high turnout rates and vote frequently.

Key Terms

Youth vote

The youth vote is a political term used primarily in the United States to describe 18 to 29-year-olds and their voting habits.

Christian right

Christian right is a term used in the United States to describe right-wing Christian political groups that are characterized by their strong support of socially conservative policies.

gender gap

A measurable difference between the behaviors of men and women.

Age and Political Participation

Political participation differs notably by age . People between the ages of 35 and 65 are the most politically active. At this stage in life, people are more likely than younger people to have established homes, hold steady jobs, and be settled into communities. Those with stable community roots often have strong incentives and greater resources for becoming involved in politics. Senior citizens, people age 65 and older, also have high turnout rates of around 70 percent.

Historically, young people have been less likely to vote as they often lack the money and time to participate. However, the youth vote has been on the rise: turnout among 18 to 24-year-olds was at 36 percent in 2000, but this rose to 47 percent in 2004 and 51 percent in 2008. This rise in youth vote is partly a result of voter registration and mobilization efforts by groups like Rock the Vote. An important factor in the increase of younger voters in 2008 was the greater appeal of a younger, non-white candidate in Barack Obama. According to the Pew Research Center, 66% of voters under 30 chose Obama in 2008. New technology, especially the internet, is also making it easier for candidates to reach the youth. Websites such as Facebook and YouTube not only allow students acquire information about the polls, but also allow them to share their excitement over the polls and candidates.

Gender and Political Participation

Political scientists and journalists often talk about the gender gap in participation, which assumes women lag behind men in their rates of political engagement . However, the gender gap is closing for some forms of participation, such as voting. Since 1986, women have exceeded the turnout rate for men in presidential elections; 66 percent of women cast a ballot in 2008 compared with 62 percent of men. This may be due to the political prominence of issues of importance to women, such as abortion, education, and child welfare.

Race, Ethnicity, and Voting: African Americans

Participation and voting differs among members of racial and ethnic groups . Discriminatory practices kept the turnout rate of African-Americans low until after the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Poll taxes, literacy tests, and intimidation kept black voters from the polls. Eventually, civil rights protests and litigation eliminated many barriers to voting. Today, black citizens vote at least as often as white citizens who share the same socioeconomic status. Collectively, African Americans are more involved in the American political process than other minority groups in the United States, indicated by the highest level of voter registration and participation in elections among these groups in 2004. Sixty-five percent of black voters turned out in the 2008 presidential election compared with 66 percent of white voters.

Race, Ethnicity and Voting: Latinos

The Latino population in the United States has grown to over 47 million people from diverse countries of origin. Although this group forms a substantial political bloc, only 49 percent of eligible Latino voters voted in the 2008 presidential election. Language is one barrier to Latino participation. Candidates recognize that Latinos constitute a large and growing voting bloc and have begun campaigning in Spanish. During the 2000 presidential election campaign, candidate George W. Bush ran nearly as many ads in Spanish as in English. The 2008 presidential candidates’ websites, as well as the 2010 congressional candidates, featured extensive Spanish-language content .

Reaching the Latino Vote

Candidates routinely aim campaign ads at the fast-growing Latino and Asian American populations.

Race, Ethnicity, and Voting: Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

According to the U.S. Census, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are the fastest growing and most diverse ethnic group, yet their rates of participation are lower than other groups. In 2008, 48 percent of Asian Americans turned out to vote. Some argue that cultural factors, such as a strong tie to their ethnic culture, contribute to the lower levels of Asian American and Pacific Islander voting. However, Asian Americans who have been victims of hate crimes or consider themselves to be part of a deprived group find their way to the polls in greater numbers.

Religious Convictions and Voting

Oftentimes, religious convictions motivate voters. The most prominent example of this in American politics is the Christian right, which consists of right-wing Christian political groups that are characterized by their strong support of socially conservative policies. In the U.S., the Christian right is an informal coalition formed around a core of white evangelical Protestants that draws support from other groups who share their goals. Voters who are part of the Christian right hold socially conservative positions on issues including school prayer, stem cell research, homosexuality, contraception, abortion, and pornography. About 15% of the electorate in the United States supports the Christian right. Much of the Christian right’s power within the American political system is attributed to their extraordinary turnout rate at the polls. The voters that identify with the Christian right are highly motivated and driven to deliver a viewpoint on issues they care about.

9.2.3: Party Identification

Some people are motivated to vote because they identify very strongly with one party.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between two ways of understanding the stability of party identification

Key Points

• Since the 1960s, more people have chosen to be independents rather than identify with either Republicans or Democrats, which means that less and less people vote based on their identification with a specific party.
• Some argue that a person’s party identity is a relatively fixed social identity, formed by personal experiences, family beliefs, or social environment. Others claim that party identity is flexible, and that people change their party identity according to their experiences and rational choice.
• Party identification is not just an individual identity; it can also be important for groups. Social, economic, racial, and other similar groups can become aligned to certain parties, and then vote according to that party identification.
• When people identify very strongly with one party, they tend to vote for that party consistently. This can lead to straight-ticket voting.

Key Terms

independent

A candidate or voter not affiliated with any political party, a free thinker, free of a party platform.

straight-ticket voting

The practice of voting for candidates of the same party for multiple positions. The finished voting ballot would consist of all Democrats or all Republicans, for example.

party identification

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports (by voting or other means).

Party Self-Identification

Oftentimes, people vote according to what party they identify with. A person’s partisan identification is defined as a long-term attachment to a particular party. Americans are not required to formally join party organizations as is the case with other democracies. Instead, people self-identify as Republicans, Democrats, or members of minor parties. They also can declare themselves independent and not aligned with any political party. People who identify with a political party either declare their allegiance by joining the party or show their support through regular party-line voting at the polls.

Party Identity: A Fixed Social Identity?

Some researchers view party identification as “a form of social identity,” in the same way that a person identifies with a religious or ethnic group. In this view, party identification develops as a consequence of personal, family, social, and environmental factors. Childhood influence is one of main driving factors behind formation of party identification. During childhood, the main political influence comes from parents, other close family members, and close surroundings such as the immediate community. Children remember events that happened during their childhood and associate them with the political party, whether or not they were connected with those events. For example, a child growing up in the 1970s would associate the Republican party with the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration or a child growing up in the 1990s would associate the Democratic party with the sex scandal of the Clinton administration. Although these parties might or might not embrace the issues that happened during that administration, a child could forever associate the party with those memorable events.

During adulthood, people can begin to adjust their party loyalties according to their personal experiences. The longer an individual holds a party identification, the stronger that attachment to the party becomes. Because of this pattern, older adults are more likely to hold strong party attachments, and less likely to change them than young adults.

Party Identity: A Changing Choice?

Other researchers consider party identification to be more flexible and more of a conscious choice. They see it as a position and a choice based on the continued assessment of the political, economic, and social environment. People can easily switch their party affiliation or distance themselves from parties entirely.

Increase in Independents

Since the 1960s, there has been a gradual decline in identification with political parties and a rise in the number of independents, which means less and less people are motivated to vote along party lines alone. In 2000, more people identified as independents (40 percent of the voting population) than affiliated with either the Democratic (34 percent) or Republican (24 percent) parties for the first time in history. The proportion of people registering as independents increased 57 percent between 1990 and 1998, while those registering as Democrats declined by 14 percent and as Republicans by 5 percent. In 2011, 31 percent of the population identified as Democrats, 29 percent as Republican, and 38 percent as independents .

Party Identification, 2004

This chart indicates the number of citizens registered as Republicans, Democrats, or Independents. The number of people identifying as independents is rising, indicating that less people are voting solely along traditional party lines.

As voter identification with political parties has declined, so has dedication to the two-party system. According to a national survey, citizens have more trust in product brands, such as Nike, Levis, Honda, and Clorox, than in the Democrats and Republicans. Since the 1980s, Americans have become skeptical about the two major parties’ ability to represent the public interest and to handle major issues facing the country, such as crime, the environment, and saving Social Security. At the same time, support for third parties, like Libertarians, has increased over the last decade. A social movement grouped under the umbrella of the “Tea Party” emerged in 2010 but its adherents never created an officially recognized political party. Still, the two-party system continues to dominate the political process as a viable multiparty alternative has not emerged .

Voting Along Party Lines

This chart indicates the results of the 2008 presidential election. Dark red districts supported Republican for President and Congress; red districts supported a Republican for President, and Democrat for Congress. Dark blue indicates districts that supported Democrat for President and Congress; blue indicates districts that supported Democrat for President and a Republican for Congress.

Groups and Party Identification

Party coalitions consist of groups that have long-term allegiances to a particular political party. Regions of the country establish loyalties to a specific party as a result of the party’s handling of a war, a major social problem, or an economic crisis. Social, economic, ethnic, and racial groups also become aligned with particular parties, and then vote according to that party identification. For example, Catholics and labor union members in the Northeast form a part of the Democratic coalition. White fundamentalist Protestants are a component of the Republican coalition. Parties count on coalition members to vote for them consistently in elections.

Strong Party Identification and Voting Patterns

Those people who identify with a party tend to vote for their party’s candidate for various offices in high percentages. Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, strong Democrats and strong Republicans respectively, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party’s nominee for office, and are typically the voters who practice straight-ticket voting.

9.2.4: Political Ideology

People can be motivated to vote based on their political ideology, or how they think government, economy, and society should be structured.

Learning Objective

Describe the ideological spectrum of the American electorate

Key Points

• Voters typically agree with one of the main political ideologies (liberalism, conservatism or moderates) and they vote according to the beliefs of that particular ideology.
• Libertarians are less organized and well-known than conservatives, liberals or moderates, but are a significant minority ideology. They believe in social liberties, but conservative economic policies.
• Moderates fall somewhere in between liberalism and conservatism on the spectrum of political ideologies. Approximately 35% of Americans identified as moderates in 2010, and these voters tend to vote either Republican, Democrat, or neither.
• Liberals believe in progressive social policies and more government provision of positive rights, such as healthcare or education. Liberals tend to vote Democrat, and in 2010, roughly 25% of Americans identified as liberals.
• Conservatives prefer to maintain the status quo and believe in socially conservative policies, as well as limited government intervention in the economy. This is a prominent ideology in US politics, as roughly 40% of Americans self-identify as conservatives.

Key Terms

conservative

A political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional social institutions; often exemplified by the Republican Party in US politics.

liberal

One with liberal views, supporting individual liberty (see Wikipedia on Liberalism for a description of the various and diverging trends of liberalism).

political ideology

A political ideology is a certain ethical set of ideals that explains how society should work, and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. It focuses on type of government and economy.

Voting Based on Ideology

Sometimes, people vote based on their political ideology. The ideological position a person or party takes may be described in terms of what kinds of social and economic policies they would like to see implemented. Political ideologies in the United States vary considerably. Persons in the U.S. generally classify themselves either as adhering to positions along the political spectrum as liberal-progressive, moderate, or conservative, but there are several subgroups of all of these three. Among those who do identify as either liberal or conservative, few identify as “far left” or “far right. ” Most Americans either identify as “moderate” or as “somewhat” liberal or conservative.

Conservatives and Liberals

Modern American liberalism aims at the preservation and extension of human, social and civil rights as well as the government guaranteed provision of positive rights. American conservatism commonly refers to a combination of economic liberalism and social conservatism and to an extent, libertarianism. It aims at protecting traditional values (especially on social issues) while promoting the concept of small government.

In the U.S., the Democratic Party generally represents liberal ideals, while the Republican Party commonly represents conservative ideals. The size of ideological groups varies slightly depending on the poll. Gallup/USA Today polling in June 2010 revealed that 42% of those surveyed identify as conservative, 35% as moderate, while 20% identify as liberal . In another polling in June 2010, 40% of American voters identify themselves as conservatives, 36% as moderates and 22% as liberals, with a strong majority of both liberals and conservatives describing themselves as closer to the center than to the extremes .

Percentage of LIberals in the US

Percent of self-identified liberals in the United States, broken down by state, according to Gallup, August 2010. The darkest colors to lightest colors, respectively, indicate the greatest percentages of people identifying as liberals. (The darkest color represents 28% and above, while the lightest color is under 14%).

Political Ideology Trends

This chart, using Gallup Poll data, depicts trends in US political ideologies from 1992-2012.

Liberalism and conservatism are the most common ideologies in the U.S., apart from those who identify as moderate. Individuals embrace each ideology to widely varying extents. Liberals and progressives commonly advocate strong civil liberties, social progressivism, cultural pluralism, government ensuring of positive rights (education, health care, etc.) and a mixed economy. Conservatives commonly defend the notional status quo of some point in the past, believing that the US has deviated significantly from it, and advocate more traditional stands on social issues, protection of gun rights and much less government intervention.

Moderates

Moderates, who may be left or right leaning, incorporate different aspects from liberalism and conservatism into their personal perspective. According to recent polls, moderates are commonly identified as the second largest group, closely trailing conservatives, constituting between 36% and 39% of the population. Moderates are commonly defined through limiting the extent to which they adopt liberal and conservative ideas. CNN exit polls have found moderates to be rather evenly divided between the country’s two main parties. Even though liberals as a whole tend to be the most educated ideological demographic (as indicated by Pew research), moderates tend to become increasingly conservative with increased economic prosperity, causing the professional class to be split between Republicans and Democrats.

Libertarians

While often not mentioned in major polls and less organized than liberal or conservatives, libertarians are a significant minority, constituting roughly 13% of the electorate. Libertarians commonly hold liberal views on social issues but conservative views on economic issues. Since the 1980s, a majority of libertarians have favored the Republican Party, although in recent years, the margin favoring the Republicans has begun to shrink because of the libertarians’ opposition to many recent Republican supported social issues.

Typological Groups

In a 2005 study, the Pew Research Center identified nine typological groups. Three groups were identified as part of “the left,” “the middle,” and “the right. ” In this categorization system, “the right” roughly represents the Republican base, those on “the left” the Democratic base and those in “the middle” independents. Within the left are the largely secular and anti-war “Liberals”, the socially conservative but economically left “Conservative Democrats”, and the economically “Disadvantaged Democrats” who favor extended government assistance to the needy. In “the middle” are the optimistic and upwardly mobile “Upbeats”, the discouraged and mistrusting “Disaffecteds,” and the disenfranchised “Bystanders. ” The right compromises the highly pro-business “Enterprisers,” the highly religious “Social Conservatives” (also known as the Christian right), and the “Pro-Government Conservatives” who are largely conservative on social issues but support government intervention to better their economic disposition.

9.2.5: The Candidates

Oftentimes, people vote based on specific candidate’s characteristics, experiences, or likeability.

Learning Objective

Discuss partisan dealignment and the factors that make it more prevalent

Key Points

• While party loyalty, political ideologies, and specific policy issues are important to voters, candidates’ personal popularity may also be a crucial factor for voters.
• In recent years, more and more voters are identifying as independents. This partisan dealignment means that more and more people do not base their votes on party identification, and may be more likely to vote based on short-term criteria like the likeability of a specific candidate.
• Campaigns attempt to create an image for their candidate. By presenting a candidate in the right way, campaigns hope to make their candidate look like a more attractive and desirable choice than the opponent.

Key Terms

partisan dealignment

Dealignment, in political science, is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation, without developing a new one to replace it.

mass media

The mass media are all those media technologies that are intended to reach a large audience by mass communication, which includes broadcast media and print media.

candidate

A person who is running in an election or who is applying to a position for a job.

While identifying with and believing strongly in a particular party or political ideology can be important in explaining why and how people vote, these factors seldom decide elections alone. A candidate’s image and her position on issues are also very important, particularly when independents and undecided voters hold the balance.

Partisan Dealignment

Party identities become less important when voters base their decisions on short-term, election-specific factors, such as the leadership qualities of a candidate. This is often called a partisan dealignment. A partisan dealignment may be occurring today, as more people are identifying as independents and more voters choose based on personal traits of candidates, such as honesty. Mass media can contribute to partisan dealignment by focusing attention on candidates’ personalities and scandals, which are short-term factors that can influence vote choice.

Candidates’ Images and Voting

Voters often vote based on candidates’ images or likeability . Candidate images consists of the background, experiences, and personal qualities of people running for elected office. Campaigns strive to present an image of their candidate that fits the public’s expectations of the office sought, especially in comparison with the opponent, who is often portrayed as less qualified. Voters expect the president to have leadership skills and to be principled, decisive, and honest. Other qualities, such as military service and compassion, may be deemed by the public and the media to be important as well. Candidate images are not entirely malleable. Age, gender, race, and military service cannot be changed easily, but they can be manipulated by selective accounting and shrewd presentation of the facts. Images are easiest to create early in a campaign when many people may not know much about a candidate. The public acceptance of a candidate’s possible images tends to depend on the media’s depictions. Oftentimes, voters will make decisions about who to vote for based on their perception of a specific candidate’s personality, leadership traits, or family values.

Candidate Image

The media’s depictions of presidential candidates Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore during the 2000 presidential election influenced public perceptions. Bush was depicted as being unintelligent by news organizations that compiled lists of his gaffes and malapropisms. Gore was construed as being dishonest for allegedly claiming that he invented the Internet. When people decide to vote based on candidates rather than party identification or political ideology, candidate image can be very important.

9.2.6: Policy Preferences

In some elections, voters are motivated to vote a certain way based on specific policy preferences, which is called issue voting.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between issue voting and party voting and the reason(s) a voter would opt for one or the other

Key Points

• Issue voting can be complex for voters because candidate’s views may not match their own, or voters may have multiple issues or policies that concern them equally.
• Issue based voting is often contrasted with voting based solely on party identification. Low-information elections often have more votes cast simply along party lines, while votes in higher-information elections (like presidential elections) may be based more in specific policy preferences.
• Voters who vote based on policy preferences must be able to identify different opinions on a particular issue, form their own opinion, and then be able to identify which party or candidate best matches their opinion.

Key Terms

party voting

The type of voting that describes when voters cast their vote based on their self-identification with a particular political party.

issue voting

The type of voting that occurs when voters cast their vote based on political issues.

candidate

A person who is running in an election or who is applying to a position for a job.

Issue Voting

Rather than voting based on political ideologies, political parties, or candidates, sometimes voters cast votes based on specific policy preferences. In “issue voting,” voters cast their vote based primarily on specific political issues . In the context of an election, issues include “any questions of public policy which have been or are a matter of controversy and are sources of disagreement between political parties.” According to the theory of issue voting, voters vote based on policy preferences; they compare the candidates’ respective principles against their own in order to decide who to vote for.

Issue Voting: Education

Some voters cast their ballots according to specific policy issues, for example, education reform.

A voter does not need to have an in-depth understanding of every issue or know how a candidate stands on every issue, rather a voter should have a sense of which candidate he or she agrees with the most. Voters use many different tactics to rationalize their view on a particular issue. Some people look at what has happened in the past and predict how they think a particular issue will affect them in the future.

Issue voting is often contrasted with party voting. A 2010 University of California, Davis study found that voters switch between issue voting and party voting depending on how much information is available to them about a given candidate. Low-information elections, such as those for congressional candidates, would thus be determined by party voting, whereas presidential elections, which tend to give voters much more information about each candidate, have the potential to be issue-driven.

A voter’s understanding of parties’ principles is strengthened and developed over time as a person gains experience with more political events. In order for an issue to create the foundation for party choice, a voter must first be concerned about a particular issue and have some knowledge about that issue.

In order for a person to be an issue voter, they must be able to recognize that there is more than one opinion about a particular issue, have formed a solid opinion about it, and be able to connect their opinion to a specific political party. According to some studies, only 40 to 60 percent of the informed population even perceives party differences, and can thus partake in party voting. This would suggest that it is quite common for individuals to develop opinions of issues without the aid of a political party.

Complications with Issue Voting

Many factors can complicate issue voting. Firstly, issues are not always dichotomous; there are often many stances one could take. Voters must often settle for the candidate whose stances are closest to their own. This can prove difficult when two or more candidates have similar opinions, or when candidates have positions that are equally far from a voter’s beliefs. For example, education spending is a topic that is difficult to issue vote on. A voter may have a drastically different opinion from the available candidates on how much money should be spent on schools. This differing of opinion could lead the individual to vote based on party affiliation instead. More importantly, the nation does not have to have a high level of consensus for some campaign issues to be more salient than others.

A second complexity is that, oftentimes, problems do not line up on linear bases. That is, some issues may make it hard to even determine the candidate with the closest position. For example, in the 1980 United States presidential election, the growing threat of Communism in the Eastern Hemisphere was a salient issue for voters. There were many proposed solutions to this problem. For instance, Ronald Reagan endorsed military intimidation through increased spending and innovation (the Reagan doctrine), Jimmy Carter proposed diplomatic efforts to keep peace, and the independent John Anderson advocated a return to the containment strategy. None of these answers are mutually-exclusive, and they cannot be linearly plotted. The voter instead had to choose the candidate whose opinion represented the closest mix of possible solutions to his or her own.

A third problem complication of issue voting is if there are multiple issues that are equally salient to the voter. A candidate may have a similar position to a given voter on one issue, but may take a considerably different stance on another. During 2008 United States presidential election, the two issues the dominated attention were the economy and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq . Many viewed these issues as equally salient, and had a hard time picking one issue to vote on.

Issue Voting: War in Afghanistan

Some voters vote for a candidate based on that candidate’s stance on a particular issue, such as the war in Afghanistan or healthcare.

9.3: Voter Turnout

9.3.1: Voter Turnout

The significance of voter turnout, the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election, has been debated by scholars.

Learning Objective

Describe competing understandings of voter-turnout measurements

Key Points

• After increasing for many decades, there has been a trend of decreasing voter turnout in most established democracies since the 1960s.
• In any large election, the chance of any one vote determining the outcome is low, especially some say, in the United States’ Electoral College.
• The Electoral College is an example of an indirect election, consisting of 538 electors who officially elect the President and Vice President of the United States.
• High voter turnout is often considered to be desirable, though among political scientists and economists specializing in public choice, the issue is still debated.
• Assuming that low turnout is a reflection of disenchantment, a poll with very low turnout may not be an accurate reflection of the will of the people. Conversely, if low turnout is a reflection of contentment of voters about likely winners, then low turnout is as legitimate as high turnout.

Key Terms

electoral college

A body of electors empowered to elect someone to a particular office

voter turnout

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. Exactly who is eligible varies by country, and should not be confused with the total adult population.

Example

• A high turnout is generally seen as evidence of the legitimacy of the current system. Dictators have often fabricated high turnouts in showcase elections for this purpose. For instance, Saddam Hussein’s 2002 referendum was claimed to have had 100% participation.

Voter Turnout

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. After increasing for many decades, there has been a trend of decreasing voter turnout in most established democracies since the 1960s. Certain factors are leading to the decrease in the number of voters such as disenchantment, indifference, or contentment. Another contributor to lower overall turnout, is the larger percentage of the population who are simply not eligible to vote; non-citizens, incarcerated and non-self-registered individuals. Despite significant study of the issue, scholars are divided on reasons for the decline. Its cause has been attributed to a wide array of economic, demographic, cultural, technological, and institutional factors. There have been many efforts to increase turnout and encourage voting.

Reasons for Voting

In any large election the chance of any one vote determining the outcome is low. Some studies show that a single vote in a voting scheme such as the Electoral College in the United States has an even lower chance of determining the outcome. The Electoral College is an example of an indirect election, consisting of 538 electors who officially elect the President and Vice President of the United States. The number of electors is equal to the total voting membership of the United States Congress, 435 Representatives and 100 Senators, plus three electors from the District of Columbia. Other studies claim that the Electoral College actually increases voting power. 

Electoral College

The Electoral College map shows the results of the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) won the popular vote in 28 states and the District of Columbia (denoted in blue) to capture 365 electoral votes. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) won the popular vote in 22 states (denoted in red) to capture 173 electoral votes. Nebraska split its electoral vote when Senator Obama won the electoral vote from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district; the state’s other four electoral votes went to Senator McCain.

Voter Turnout in the United States

Graph of Voter turnout in the United States presidential elections from 1824 to 2008.

The Significance of Voter Turnout

High voter turnout is desirable, though the issue is still debated among political scientists and economists specializing in public choice. A high turnout is generally seen as evidence of the legitimacy of the current system. Dictators have often fabricated high turnouts in showcase elections for this purpose. For instance, Saddam Hussein’s 2002 referendum was claimed to have had 100% participation. Opposition parties sometimes boycott votes they feel are unfair or illegitimate, or if the election is for a government that is considered illegitimate. For example, the Holy See instructed Italian Catholics to boycott national elections for several decades after the creation of the State of Italy. In some countries, there are threats of violence against those who vote, such as during the 2005 Iraq elections. However, some political scientists question the view that high turnout is an implicit endorsement of the system. Mark N. Franklin contends that in European Union elections opponents of the federation, and of its legitimacy, are just as likely to vote as proponents.

Assuming that low turnout is a reflection of disenchantment or indifference, a poll with very low turnout may not be an accurate reflection of the will of the people. On the other hand, if low turnout is a reflection of contentment of voters about likely winners or parties, then low turnout is as legitimate as high turnout, as long as the right to vote exists. Still, low turnouts can lead to unequal representation among various parts of the population.

The decline in voting has also accompanied a general decline in civic participation, such as church attendance, membership in professional, fraternal, and student societies, youth groups, and parent-teacher associations. At the same time, some forms of participation have increased. People have become far more likely to participate in boycotts, demonstrations, and to donate to political campaigns.

Federal law restricts how much individuals and organizations may contribute to political campaigns, political parties, and other FEC-regulated organizations. Corporations and unions are barred from donating money directly to candidates or national party committees. Lobbyists often assist congresspersons with campaign finance by arranging fundraisers, assembling PACs, and seeking donations from other clients. Many lobbyists become campaign treasurers and fundraisers for congresspersons.

9.3.2: Factors Affecting Voter Turnout

Many causes have been proposed for the decline in voting, including demographics, voter fatigue and voter suppression, among other things.

Learning Objective

Describe several possible reasons for declines in voter participation rates

Key Points

• Wealth and literacy have some effect on turnout, but are not reliable measures.
• Demographics also have an effect. Older people tend to vote more than youths, so societies where the average age is somewhat higher, such as Europe; have higher turnouts than somewhat younger countries such as the United States.
• Making voting compulsory has a direct and dramatic effect on turnout. Simply making it easier for candidates to stand through easier nomination rules is believed to increase voting.
• In politics, voter fatigue is the apathy that the electorate can experience under certain circumstances, one of which could be (in exceptional circumstances) that they are required to vote too often.
• Voter suppression is a strategy to influence the outcome of an election by discouraging or preventing people from exercising their right to vote.

Key Terms

voter fatigue

voter fatigue is the apathy that the electorate can experience under certain circumstances, one of which could be that they are required to vote too often.

voter suppression

Voter suppression is a strategy to influence the outcome of an election by discouraging or preventing people from exercising their right to vote.

Example

• Voter suppression instead attempts to reduce the number of voters who might vote against the candidate or proposition advocated by the suppressors. For example, in the southern United States before and during the civil rights movement, white southerners used many methods to prevent minorities from voting. These included literacy tests, a poll tax, and if all else failed, intimidation by threats of violence.

Introduction

High voter turnout is often considered to be desirable, though among political scientists and economists specialising in public choice, the issue is still debated. A high turnout is generally seen as evidence of the legitimacy of the current system. Assuming that low turnout is a reflection of disenchantment or indifference, a poll with very low turnout may not be an accurate reflection of the will of the people. On the other hand, if low turnout is a reflection of contentment of voters about likely winners or parties, then low turnout is as legitimate as high turnout, as long as the right to vote exists. Still, low turnouts can lead to unequal representation among various parts of the population. In developed countries, non-voters tend to be concentrated in particular demographic and socioeconomic groups, especially the young and the poor.

Reasons for Decline

Many causes have been proposed for this decline; a combination of factors is most likely. When asked why they do not vote, many people report that they have too little free time. However, over the last several decades, studies have consistently shown that the amount of leisure time has not decreased. Wealth and literacy have some effect on turnout, but are not reliable measures. For example, the United Nations Human Development Index shows some correlation between higher standards of living and higher turnout. The age of a democracy is also an important factor. Elections require considerable involvement by the population, and it takes some time to develop the cultural habit of voting, and the associated understanding of and confidence in the electoral process. Demographics also have an effect. Older people tend to vote more than youths, so societies where the average age is somewhat higher, such as Europe; have higher turnouts than somewhat younger countries such as the United States.

Institutional factors have a significant impact on voter turnout. Rules and laws are also generally easier to change than attitudes, so much of the work done on how to improve voter turnout looks at these factors. Making voting compulsory has a direct and dramatic effect on turnout. Simply making it easier for candidates to stand through easier nomination rules is believed to increase voting. Ease of voting is a factor in rates of turnout. In the United States and most Latin American nations, voters must go through separate voter registration procedures before they are allowed to vote. This two-step process quite clearly decreases turnout. U.S. states with no, or easier, registration requirements have larger turnouts.

In politics, voter fatigue is the apathy that the electorate can experience under certain circumstances, one of which could be (in exceptional circumstances) that they are required to vote too often. Voter fatigue and voter apathy should be distinguished from what arises when voters are not allowed or unable to vote, or when disenfranchisement occurs. Similarly, voter suppression is a strategy to influence the outcome of an election by discouraging or preventing people from exercising their right to vote . It is distinguished from political campaigning in that campaigning attempts to change likely voting behavior by changing the opinions of potential voters through persuasion and organization.

Voter Supression

Voters at voting booths in the United States in 1945

Voter suppression instead attempts to reduce the number of voters who might vote against the candidate or proposition advocated by the suppressors. This suppression can be in the form of unfair tests or requirements to vote. For example, in the southern United States before and during the civil rights movement, white southerners used many methods to prevent minorities from voting. These included literacy tests, a poll tax, and if all else failed intimidation by threats of violence. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 put a stop to literacy tests and any other methods of preventing people from voting. Excluding convicted from voting and re-including them only on case-by-case decisions by State Governors, as is the case in numerous U.S. states, can lead to voter suppression and can induce biased voting, as there can be a class bias in the state’s decision.

9.3.3: Low Voter Turnout

Low voter turnout is often considered to be undesirable; there is much debate over the factors that affect turnout and how to increase it.

Learning Objective

Summarize the difficulties involved in measuring voter turnout

Key Points

• There are difficulties in measuring both the numerator, the number of voters who cast votes, and the denominator, the number of voters eligible to vote.
• For the numerator, it is often assumed that the number of voters who went to the polls should equal the number of ballots cast, which in turn should equal the number of votes counted.
• Voting age population (VAP) refers to the set of individuals that have reached the minimum voting age for a particular geography or political unit.
• Over the last 40 years, voter turnout has been steadily declining in the established democracies. This trend has been significant in the United States, Western Europe, Japan and Latin America.
• Before the late 20th century, suffrage — the right to vote — was so limited in most nations that turnout figures have little relevance to today. One exception was the United States, which had near universal white male suffrage by 1840.

Key Terms

numerator

In voter turnout, the numerator refers to the number of voters who cast votes.

denominator

The denominator refers to the number of voters eligible to vote.

suffrage

The right or chance to vote, express an opinion, or participate in a decision.

Example

• Voter turnout varies considerably between countries. It tends to be lower in the United States, Asia and Latin America than most of Europe, Canada and Oceania. Western Europe averages a 77% turnout, and South and Central America around 54% since 1945.

Introduction

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. After increasing for many decades, there has been a trend of decreasing voter turnout in most established democracies since the 1960s. In general, low turnout may be due to disenchantment, indifference, or contentment. Low turnout is often considered to be undesirable, and there is much debate over the factors that affect turnout and how to increase it. In spite of significant study into the issue, scholars are divided on reasons for the decline. Its cause has been attributed to a wide array of economic, demographic, cultural, technological, and institutional factors.

Measuring Turnout

Differing methods of measuring voter turnout can contribute to reported differences between nations. There are difficulties in measuring both the numerator, the number of voters who cast votes, and the denominator, the number of voters eligible to vote.

For the numerator, it is often assumed that the number of voters who went to the polls should equal the number of ballots cast, which in turn should equal the number of votes counted, but this is not the case. Not all voters who arrive at the polls necessarily cast ballots. Some may be turned away because they are ineligible, some may be turned away improperly, and some who sign the voting register may not actually cast ballots. Furthermore, voters who do cast ballots may abstain, deliberately voting for nobody, or they may spoil their votes, either accidentally or as an act of protest.

In the United States, it has been common to report turnout as the sum of votes for the top race on the ballot, because not all jurisdictions report the actual number of people who went to the polls nor the number of undervotes or overvotes . Overvote rates of around 0.3 percent are typical of well-run elections, but in Gadsden County Florida, the overvote rate was 11 percent in November 2000.

Voter Turnout in the United States

Graph of Voter turnout in the United States presidential elections from 1824 to 2008.

The voting age population (VAP) refers to the set of individuals that have reached the minimum voting age for a particular geography or political unit. The presumption is that they are therefore generally eligible to vote, although other additional factors may cause them to be ineligible, such as lack of citizenship or a prior felony conviction. In estimating voter turnout the voting age population for a political unit is often used as the denominator for the number of individuals eligible to vote in a given election; this method has been shown to lose inaccuracy when a larger percentage of the VAP is ineligible to vote. In the United States individuals become eligible to vote in political elections at age 18.

Trends of Decreasing Turnout

Over the last 40 years, voter turnout has been steadily declining in the established democracies. This trend has been significant in the United States, Western Europe, Japan and Latin America. It has been a matter of concern and controversy among political scientists for several decades. The decline in voting has also accompanied a general decline in civic participation, such as church attendance, membership in professional, fraternal, and student societies, youth groups, and parent-teacher associations. At the same time, some forms of participation have increased. People have become far more likely to participate in boycotts, demonstrations, and to donate to political campaigns.

Before the late 20^th century, suffrage — the right to vote — was so limited in most nations that turnout figures have little relevance to today. One exception was the United States, which had near universal white male suffrage by 1840. The U.S. saw a steady rise in voter turnout during the century, reaching its peak in the years after the Civil War. Turnout declined from the 1890s until the 1930s, then increased again until 1960 before beginning its current long decline. Globally, voter turnout has decreased by about five percentage points over the last four decades.

International Differences.

Voter turnout varies considerably between countries. It tends to be lower in the United States, Asia and Latin America than most of Europe, Canada and Oceania. Western Europe averages a 77% turnout, and South and Central America around 54% since 1945 . The differences between nations tend to be greater than those between classes, ethnic groups, or regions within nations. Confusingly, some of the factors that cause internal differences do not seem to apply on a global level. For instance, nations with better-educated populaces do not have higher turnouts. There are two main causes of these international differences—culture and institutions—although there is much debate over the relative impact of the various factors.

9.3.4: Attempts to Improve Voter Turnout

Generally, rules and laws are easier to change than attitudes, and thus the task of improving voter turnout must consider these factors.

Learning Objective

Identify different measures that increase voter turnout

Key Points

• The salience of an election, the effect that a vote will have on policy, and its proportionality, how closely the result reflects the will of the people, are two structural factors that also are likely to have important effects on turnout.
• Compulsory voting is a system in which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day.
• Mark N. Franklin argues that salience, the perceived effect that an individual vote will have on how the country is run, has a significant effect on turnout.
• Ease of voting is a factor in rates of turnout. In the United States and most Latin American nations, voters must go through separate voter registration procedures before they are allowed to vote. This two-step process quite clearly decreases turnout.
• Other methods of improving turnout include making voting easier through more available absentee polling, such as increasing the number of possible voting locations, lowering the average time voters have to spend waiting in lines, or requiring companies to give workers some time off on voting day.
• Some countries have considered Internet voting as a possible solution. In other countries, such as France, voting is held on the weekend, when most voters are away from work. Therefore, the need for time off from work as a factor in voter turnout is greatly reduced.

Key Terms

salience

Salience is the perceived effect that an individual vote will have on how the country is run and has a significant effect on turnout.

compulsory voting

Compulsory voting is a system in which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day. If an eligible voter does not attend a polling place, he or she may be subject to punitive measures, such as fines, community service, or perhaps imprisonment if fines are unpaid or community service not performed.

Example

• Voting may be seen as a civic right rather than a civic duty. While citizens may exercise their civil rights, they are not compelled to. Furthermore, compulsory voting may infringe on other rights. For example, most Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that they should not participate in political events. Forcing them to vote ostensibly denies them their freedom of religious practice. In some countries with compulsory voting, Jehovah’s Witnesses and others may be excused on these grounds. If however they are forced to go to the polling place, they can still use a blank or invalid vote.

Introduction

Institutional factors have a significant impact on voter turnout. Rules and laws are also generally easier to change than attitudes, so much of the work done on how to improve voter turnout looks at these factors. Making voting compulsory has a direct and dramatic effect on turnout. Simply making easier nomination rules for candidates is believed to increase voting. Conversely, adding barriers, such as a separate registration process, can suppress turnout. The salience of an election, the effect that a vote will have on policy, and its proportionality, how closely the result reflects the will of the people, are two structural factors that also are likely to have important effects on turnout.

Compulsory Voting

Compulsory voting is a system by which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day. If an eligible voter does not attend a polling place, he or she may be subject to punitive measures, such as fines, community service, or perhaps imprisonment if fines are unpaid or community service is not performed . Compulsory voting ensures a large voter turnout. This means a victorious candidate or party clearly represents a majority of the population, not just the politically motivated individuals who would vote without this requirement. This helps ensure that governments do not neglect people in sections of society who are less active politically. Victorious political leaders of compulsory systems may claim a higher degree of political legitimacy than those of non-compulsory systems with lower voter turnout. Political scientist Arend Lijphart writes that compulsory voting has been found to increase voting by 7-16% in national elections and by even more in local and provincial elections and elections to the European Parliament.

Map of Compulsory Voting Countries

Red: Compulsory voting, enforced. Pink: Compulsory voting, not enforced. Orange: Compulsory voting, enforced (only men). Light Orange: Compulsory voting, not enforced (only men). Yellow: the country had compulsory voting in the past.

Any compulsion affects the freedom of an individual, and the fining of recalcitrant non-voters is an additional impact on a potential recalcitrant voter. Voting may be seen as a civic right rather than a civic duty. While citizens may exercise their civil rights, they are not compelled to. Furthermore, compulsory voting may infringe on other rights. For example, most Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that they should not participate in political events. Forcing them to vote ostensibly denies them their freedom of religious practice. In some countries with compulsory voting, Jehovah’s Witnesses and others may be excused on these grounds. If however they are forced to go to the polling place, they still can use a blank or invalid vote.

Salience

Mark N. Franklin argues thatsalience, the perceived effect that an individual vote will have on how the country is run, has a significant effect on turnout. He presents Switzerland as an example of a nation with low salience. The nation’s administration is highly decentralized, so that the federal government has limited powers. The government invariably consists of a coalition of parties, and the power wielded by a party is far more closely linked to its position relative to the coalition than to the number of votes it received. Important decisions are placed before the population in a referendum. Individual votes for the federal legislature are thus unlikely to have a significant effect on the nation, which probably explains the low average turnouts in that country.

Ease of Voting

Ease of voting is a factor in rates of turnout. In the United States and most Latin American nations, voters must go through separate voter registration procedures before they are allowed to vote. This two-step process quite clearly decreases turnout. U.S. states with no or easier registration requirements have larger turnouts. Other methods of improving turnout include making voting easier through improved access to polls—for example, through:

• increasing the number of possible voting locations
• lowering the average time voters have to spend waiting in lines
• extending voting hours
• requiring companies to give workers some time off on voting day

Other options include:

• more available absentee polling
• mail-in voting
• Internet voting

In other countries, like France, voting is held on the weekend, when most voters are away from work. Therefore, the need for time off from work as a factor in voter turnout is greatly reduced.

9.3.5: The Effect of Low Voter Turnout

Assuming that low turnout is a reflection of disenchantment, a poll with very low turnout may be an inaccurate reflection of the electorate.

Learning Objective

Analyze two different ways of understanding levels of voter turnout

Key Points

• If low turnout is a reflection of contentment of voters about likely winners or parties, then low turnout is as legitimate as high turnout, as long as the right to vote exists.
• Voter turnout varies considerably between countries. It tends to be lower in the United States, Asia, and Latin America than most of Europe, Canada, and Oceania.
• For instance, nations with better-educated populaces do not have higher turnouts. There are two main causes of these international differences—culture and institutions—although there is much debate over the relative impact of the various factors.

Key Term

voter turnout

Voter turnout is the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot in an election. Exactly who is eligible varies by country, and should not be confused with the total adult population.

Example

• Western Europe averages a 77% turnout, and South and Central America averages around 54% since 1945.

Implications of High and Low Voter Turnout

High voter turnout is often considered to be desirable, though among political scientists and economists specialising in public choice, the issue is still debated. A high turnout is generally seen as evidence of the legitimacy of the current system. Dictators have often fabricated high turnouts in showcase elections for this purpose. Assuming that low turnout is a reflection of disenchantment or indifference, a poll with very low turnout may not be an accurate reflection of the will of the people . On the other hand, if low turnout is a reflection of contentment of voters about likely winners or parties, then low turnout is as legitimate as high turnout, as long as the right to vote exists. Still, low turnouts can lead to unequal representation among various parts of the population. In developed countries, non-voters tend to be concentrated in particular demographic and socioeconomic groups, especially the young and the poor.

Voter Turnout

Voters lining up outside a Baghdad polling station during the 2005 Iraqi election. Voter turnout was considered high despite widespread concerns of violence.

Voter Turnout across the World

Voter turnout varies considerably between countries. It tends to be lower in the United States, Asia, and Latin America than most of Europe, Canada, and Oceania. Western Europe averages a 77% turnout, and South and Central America averages around 54% since 1945. The differences between nations tend to be greater than those between classes, ethnic groups, or regions within nations. Confusingly, some of the factors that cause internal differences do not seem to apply on a global level. For instance, nations with better-educated populaces do not have higher turnouts. There are two main causes of these international differences—culture and institutions—although there is much debate over the relative impact of the various factors.

9.4: Trends in Voting

9.4.1: African Americans

For a large part of the history of the US, black voters were blocked from voting either directly or indirectly.

Learning Objective

Explain the institutional barriers that prevented African Americans from participating in American politics

Key Points

• For a large part of the history of the US, Black voters were blocked from voting, either directly or through political practices that targeted Black voters indirectly.
• At the end of the Civil War, amendments to the US Constitution banned slavery in the US as well as affirmed the citizenship of Black residents. Finally, the fifteenth amendment, ratified in 1870, banned any state from denying the right to vote to any adult male citizen based on his race.
• While the fifteenth amendment provided legal protection for voting rights based on race, there were other means that could be used to block Black citizens from voting. During the Jim Crow era, politicians created new institutions to suppress the vote of Black residents.
• In the 1950s and 1960s, the civil rights movement came into its own as a widespread social movement. Groups fought for improved opportunities for African American people, and tried to defend existing rights that were being denied, such as voting rights.
• After the Civil Rights movement average voter turnout for African Americans remained below national averages. A disproportionate amount of African Americans remain in low-income communities where rates of voting are lower.

Key Terms

Fifteenth Amendment

an addition to the U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1870, which prohibits the federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen’s “race, color, or previous condition of servitude”

disenfranchise

to deprive someone of a franchise, generally their right to vote

Jim Crow

Southern United States racist and segregationist policies in the late 1800’s and early to mid 1900’s, taken collectively.

African Americans

For a large part of US history Black voters were blocked from voting, either directly or through political practices that targeted Black voters indirectly.

Today, the average participation of African American voters is still somewhat lower than white voters, but there is great variety within these voting patterns.

There are different explanations for voting patterns. Institutional approaches look at the ways in which legal documents and organizations impact the ability to vote. Others examine the question of rationality in voting: does voting serve the self-interest of any given individual, and what are the interests or issues that might change someones voting patterns? A behavioral approach focuses on the actions of individuals and groups, taking voting as one part of a larger bundle of political activities. In examining African American voting patterns it is helpful to consider all of these factors.

Civil War and Institutional Barriers

During the period before the Civil War, enslaved Black people, and many free Blacks and free people of color were barred from voting. At the end of the war, the fifteenth amendment, ratified in 1870, banned any state from denying the right to vote to any adult male citizen based on his race.

During the early Reconstruction period, Black residents voted in large numbers . In many states the enslaved population had been larger than the free population. Coupled with a strong set of shared interests, there was a great deal of incentive for Black citizens to vote.

The First Vote

This contemporary print depicts the first Black voters in the US exercising their new rights.

Jim Crow Era and Disenfranchisement

While the fifteenth amendment provided legal protection for voting rights based on race, during the Jim Crow era, politicians created new institutions to suppress the vote of Black residents.

Early on, violence and intimidation was used to keep Black voters away from the polls. States then began to pass official voter suppression legislation. These included poll taxes requiring payment before voting, and literacy and understanding tests, strict residency requirements and new voter registration rules.

While these rules did not specifically restrict Black citizens from voting, Black people who were freed slaves and their descendants were disproportionately poor, less educated or illiterate, and so more likely to have their voting rights limited by these provisions. Although it is important to note that poor white residents were also disenfranchised by many of these provisions. In some cases, states added character or grandfather clauses to permit poor or illiterate white residents to continue voting.

Civil Rights

During the early parts of the 1900s, the NAACP brought forward several successful cases to challenge state voter suppression laws. In the 1950s and 1960s, the civil rights movement became a widespread social movement. Groups fought for improved opportunities for African American people, and tried to defend existing rights that were being denied. Civil rights leaders organized communities through churches and other community groups, and attracted the support of many white activists from northern states.

The African-American Civil Rights Movement encompasses social movements in the United States whose goal was to end racial segregation and discrimination against black Americans and enforce constitutional voting rights to them. This article covers the phase of the movement between 1955 and 1968, particularly in the South.

The movement was characterized by major campaigns of civil resistance. Between 1955 and 1968, acts of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience produced crisis situations between activists and government authorities. Federal, state, and local governments, businesses, and communities often had to respond immediately to these situations that highlighted the inequities faced by African Americans.

In 1962, the twenty-fourth amendment to the Constitution prohibited congress or states from restricting voting through poll taxes. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed. In 1965, the Voting Rights Act established federal oversight of election regulations, and banned voter qualifications or prerequisites that limited the right to vote on account of race or color. This act removed a large institutional barrier to voting and helped to further protect voting rights.

2008 and Beyond

The 2008 presidential election was historic, with Barack Obama as the Democratic candidate, and the first non-white presidential candidate for a major party. Obama had a Kenyan-born Black father, a white mother from the Midwest, and strong connections in the African American community in Chicago. Aside from the fact that Obama won an overwhelming percent of the African American vote, there was also high levels of African American voter turnout during this election. This was in part because of self-interest and a desire for representation, but was also the result of strong community organizing. Once again, grassroots groups and social movement leaders worked to register voters and get them to the polls.

9.4.2: Latinos

On average, Latino citizens continue to vote at significantly lower rates than non-Latino white voters.

Learning Objective

Summarize the voting trends among Latino voters in U.S. politics

Key Points

• While Latino voters should not be thought of as a homogenous group, there are still some general trends for the group. On average, Latino citizens continue to vote at significantly lower rates that non-Latino white voters.
• There are low rates of naturalization in the US, along with weak political institutions that might facilitate the incorporation of Latino citizens as voters.
• However, in recent years, a larger number of organizations that serve immigrant and Latino communities have become involved in political participation.
• The Language Minority Provision of the Voting Rights Act, first introduced in 1975, aims to lower the cost of participation for Latino voters by requiring election material be provided in Spanish where appropriate.

Key Term

naturalization

Naturalization is the acquisition of citizenship and nationality by somebody who was not a citizen of that country at the time of birth.

Latinos

Latino communities make up one of the fastest growing groups in the US. Latino voters are a diverse group which include long-established Tejano and Californio, Puerto Rican and Chicano voters, as well as the Cuban-American community which makes up a large bloc of voters in Miami. However, recently naturalized citizens from South and Central America, and their children, make up the largest group of Latino voters in the US.

Latino Voting Trends

While Latino voters should not be thought of as a homogenous group, there are still some general trends for the group. On average Latino citizens continue to vote at significantly lower rates that non-Latino white voters.

There are many potential approaches that can be taken to explain variations in voting rates. Institutional approaches look at the ways in which legal documents and organizations shape the ability to vote. Others examine the question of the rationality of voting: does voting serve the self-interest of any given individual, and what are the interests or issues that might change someone’s voting patterns? A behavioral approach focuses more on the actions of individuals and groups, taking voting as one part of a larger bundle of political activities.

The US has comparatively low rates of naturalization for immigrant residents. As such, people may live for many years in the US without being able to vote. Additionally, the weaker electoral institutions in the US, including more decentralized election processes and a weaker party system, mean that there are few institutions working to actively incorporate newly naturalized citizens or second generation citizens into the voting process.

Additionally, many Latino political activists, who are more visible in their political participation, have often been quite different from the average Latino. For example, these activists are generally less in need of government supports, and less likely to advocate for such programs. They are, therefore, not good candidates for the type of community organizing that could rally new voters around their own interests.

However, in recent years, a larger number of organizations that serve immigrant and Latino communities have become involved in political participation . These groups are advocating for resources, supports and rights. They are also encouraging the political participation of Latino residents through voter registration drives, and partnerships with other organizations, such as unions, that have traditionally been involved in voter mobilization.

Immigrant Rights and Civil Rights

Organizations serving immigrant communities are starting to encourage more political participation, including voting.

Language Minority Voting Rights

One important institutional change aimed at lowering the cost for Latino voter participation is the Language Minority Provision of the Voting Rights Act, first introduced in 1975, and then amended in 1992 and 2006. This provision is aimed at upholding the principals of the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the US constitution, by attempting to eliminate language-based barriers to voting.

This provision has been shown to have a significant impact on improving rates of voting by Latino citizens.

9.4.3: Asian Americans

The diversity and polarization of the Asian American community makes it difficult to generalize their voting patterns.

Learning Objective

Explain the levels of political participation by Asian Americans in the United States

Key Points

• This diversity and polarization makes it difficult to generalize the voting patterns for the Asian American community. In some areas voting rates are significantly higher than the US average, or the rate for non-Latino white voters. In others it is significantly lower.
• Differences are related to indicators such as income and education. Like most other groups in the US, Asian Americans with more education and higher income tend to vote more.
• Other indicators for voting participation among Asian Americans are the political climate for both their home country and their local community.
• The Language Minority Provision of the Voting Rights Act is an important institutional change aimed at increasing the rates of voting in Asian American communities. Introduced in 1975 it requires election material be provided in several languages from Asia, where appropriate.

Key Term

disenfranchisement

Explicit or implicit revocation of, or failure to grant the right to vote, to a person or group of people.

Asian Americans

It might come as a surprise to find that California was one of the last states to ratify the fifteenth amendment to the US constitution, which prohibited any state from limiting a male citizen’s right to vote based on race. However, in the late 1800s many politicians in California were adamant that migrants from China and their descendants should be prohibited from voting. Like African American communities in southern states, Asian American communities have faced a long history of voter discrimination and disenfranchisement in the US .

Political Participation

Asian American communities have a long history of both disenfranchisement and political participation in the US.

Today the Asian American community in the US is quite diverse, with longstanding Chinese and Japanese communities particularly on the west coast, along with large Pacific Islander populations both on the west coast and in Hawaii. The Asian American community is also one of the fastest growing groups in the country in large part because of new immigration. The three largest groups are made of people who have emigrated from China, India and the Philippines. These newly naturalized citizens and their children make up the largest group of Asian American voters.

In addition to being a diverse group, the Asian American community is also highly polarized in terms of its socioeconomic profile. Some Asian Americans have very high income, while others have very low income. This diversity and polarization makes it difficult to generalize the voting patterns for the Asian American community. In some areas voting rates are significantly higher than the US average, or the rate for non-Latino white voters. In others it is significantly lower.

Differences are related to indicators such as income and education. Like most other groups in the US, Asian Americans with more education and higher income tend to vote more. Other indicators for voting participation among Asian Americans are the political climate for both their home country and their local community.

Language Minority Voting Rights

One important institutional change aimed at increasing the rates of voting in Asian American communities is the Language Minority Provision of the Voting Rights Act. It was first introduced in 1975, and later amended in 1992 and 2006. This provision is aimed at upholding the principles of the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to the US constitution by attempting to eliminate language-based barriers to voting. This provision holds that election documents, such as voting notices and ballots, must be provided in the minority language alongside English, where appropriate.

9.4.4: Women vs. Men

In 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution gave women the right to vote and, today, women vote at similar rates to men.

Learning Objective

Explain the historical causes for women’s greater participation in American politics

Key Points

• For a large part of the history of the US, women were denied their right to vote. Women were not able to vote in elections until the Nineteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. Ratified in 1920, this amendment prohibited any citizen from being denied the right to vote based on their sex.
• In spite of this long-term institutional barrier to voting, women today vote at similar rates to men. Women also do not generally vote as a bloc, and instead tend to be as diverse in their voting patterns as men.
• The high rates of women’s involvement in elections, in spite of being excluded from voting for so long, can be partially explained by women’s high rates of involvement in other forms of political participation.
• Women share many of the same interests as men in comparable positions, and so, similarly to men, women with more education and higher income will tend to vote at higher rates than other women.

Key Terms

suffrage

The right or chance to vote, express an opinion, or participate in a decision.

bloc

a group of voters or politicians who share common goals

Women Versus Men

There are a variety of theories that help to explain who votes. Institutional approaches look at the ways in which legal documents and organizations impact and shape the ability to vote. Other approaches examine the question of the rationality of voting: does voting serve the self-interest of any given individual, and what are the interests or issues that might change someone’s voting patterns? A behavioral approach focuses more on the actions of individuals and groups, taking voting as one part of a larger bundle of political activities. It is useful to combine these ideas when thinking about women’s and men’s voting patterns.

For a large part of the history of the United States, women were denied their right to vote. Women were not allowed to vote in all elections until the Nineteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. Ratified in 1920, this amendment prohibited any citizen from being denied the right to vote based on their sex.

In spite of this long-term institutional barrier to voting, women today vote at similar rates to men. Women also do not generally vote as a bloc, and instead tend to be as diverse in their voting patterns as men. Characteristics such as race, ethnicity, age and socioeconomic status tend to predict voting patterns better than gender. Even when considering so-called “women’s issues”, such as reproductive choices and rights or equal pay legislation, women do not vote as a bloc. Instead, while they may identify these issues as more important than men, women tend to be split over the correct solutions to a problem. However, there are exceptions, such as around any questions of war and/or the use of violence.

The high rates of women’s involvement in voting (in spite of being excluded from voting for so long) can be partially explained by women’s high involvement in other forms of political participation. This includes the suffrage movement that saw women organizing and campaigning to win women the right to vote. Additionally, women share many of the same interests as men in comparable positions, and so, similarly to men, women with more education and higher income will vote at higher rates than women in different positions.

Suffragettes

Women across the US organized for decades to gain the right to vote for women.

While women vote at a similar rate to men, they are underrepresented in other forms of political participation, such as joining organizations like political parties and running for public office.

9.4.5: Religious Identity and Politics

Within the United States, religious identity plays a significant role in political participation and voting.

Learning Objective

Identify the role that religion plays in political participation and voting in the United States

Key Points

• Since the election of a Catholic President in 1960, John F. Kennedy, Catholics have split about 50-50 between the two major parties in national elections.
• For most of the 20th century, the vast majority of Jews in the United States have been aligned with the Democratic Party, though towards the end of the 20th century and into the 21st century, Republicans have launched initiatives to woo American Jews.
• One-fifth of the U.S. public–and a third of adults under 30–are religiously unaffiliated today, according to national polls.

Key Term

Evangelical

Pertaining to a movement in Protestant Christianity that stresses personal conversion and the authority of the Bible (evangelicalism).

Within the United States, religious identity plays a significant role in political participation and voting .

Religious identity

Religious identity plays a significant role in political participation

In 1776, Catholics comprised less than 1% of the population of the new nation, but their presence grew rapidly after 1840 with immigration from Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, and elsewhere in Catholic Europe from 1840 to 1914, and also from Latin America in the 20^th century. Catholics now comprise 25% to 27% of the national vote, with over 68 million members today. From the mid-19^th century until 1964 Catholics were solidly Democratic, with about 80%-90% of them voting democrat. But since the election of a Catholic president in 1960, John F. Kennedy, Catholics have split about 50-50 between the two major parties in national elections.

The Jewish community constitutes about 1.4 – 2.1% of the U.S. population. While earlier Jewish immigrants from Germany tended to be politically conservative, the wave of Eastern European Jews who arrived in the U.S. starting in the 1880s were generally more liberal and soon became the political majority. For most of the 20^th century since 1936, the vast majority of Jews in the United States have been aligned with the Democratic Party. Towards the end of the 20^th century and into the 21^st century, Republicans have launched initiatives to woo American Jews away from the Democratic Party.

Today one-fifth of the U.S. public–and a third of adults under 30–are religiously unaffiliated according to national polls. Exit polls suggest that white Americans without religion vote Democratic at roughly the same rates as they vote Republican. According to exit polls in the 2008 Presidential Election, 71% of non-religious whites voted for Democratic candidate Barack Obama, while 74% of white Evangelical Christians voted for Republican candidate John McCain. This can be compared with the 43–55% share of white votes overall.

A comprehensive study by Harvard University professor Robert Putnam found that religious Americans are three to four times more likely than their nonreligious counterparts to “work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes–including secular ones. “

9.4.6: Age and Participation

Political participation differs notably by age; in general, older citizens are more likely to turn out in elections than younger ones.

Learning Objective

Explain the reasons for people’s level of participation in politics

Key Points

• People between the ages of thirty-five and sixty-five are the most politically active.
• People under the age of thirty are among the least involved in mainstream forms of participation, as younger people often lack the money and time to participate.
• While younger people turn out in elections less often than older people, youth voting has been on the rise in presidential elections since 2004.

Key Terms

social media

Interactive forms of media that allow users to interact with and publish to each other, generally by means of the Internet.

turnout

attendance; crowd

Political participation differs notably by age. People between the ages of thirty-five and sixty-five are the most politically active. People at this stage of life are more likely than younger people to have established homes, hold steady jobs, and be settled into communities. Those with stable community roots often have strong incentives and greater resources for becoming involved in politics.

People under the age of thirty are among the least involved in mainstream forms of participation, as younger people often lack the money and time to participate. Voter turnout among eighteen- to twenty-four-year-olds dropped from 50 percent in 1972, the first presidential election year after the voting age was lowered to eighteen, to 36 percent in 2000. Turnout among senior citizens, people sixty-five and older, increased to nearly 70 percent in that same time period.

While younger people turn out in elections less often than older people, youth voting has been on the rise in presidential elections since 2004. Young voter turnout rose to 47 percent in 2004 and 51 percent in 2008, partly as a result of voter registration and mobilization efforts by groups like Rock the Vote. The youth vote contributed to the success of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, as young volunteers provided countless hours of campaign support. The growth of Internet technologies, particularly social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, has also made it easier for candidates to reach younger voters who may not read traditional newspapers or watch television news and increase their turnout .

President Barack Obama

Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns were successful partly as a result of youth participation.

8.1: Elections

8.1.1: Types of Elections

Learning Objective

Identify the different types of elections in American democracy

Key Points

• In a parliamentary system, a general election is an election in which all or most members of a given political body are chosen.
• A by-election is an election held to fill a political office that has become vacant between regularly scheduled elections.
• A primary election is an election that narrows the field of candidates before the general election. Primary elections are one means by which a political party nominates candidates for the next general election.
• In the case of closed primaries, only party members can vote. By contrast, in an open primary all voters may cast votes on a ballot of any party.
• A referendum is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal, usually a piece of legislation which has been passed into law by the local legislative body and signed by the pertinent executive official(s).
• A recall election is a procedure by which voters can remove an elected official from office through a direct vote before his or her term has ended.

Key Terms

general election

An election, usually held at regular intervals, in which candidates are elected in all or most constituencies or electoral districts of a nation.

referendum

A direct popular vote on a proposed law or constitutional amendment.

primary election

A preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

Example

• Political careers are often made at the local level: Boris Yeltsin, for instance, as the top official in Moscow, was able to prove his effectiveness and eventually become President of Russia after the collapse of the USSR. When he fought his first contested local election, he demonstrated a willingness to put his policies to the ballot.

Types of Elections

In a parliamentary system, a general election is an election in which all or most members of a given political body are chosen . The term is usually used to refer to elections held for a nation’s primary legislative body, as distinguished from by-elections and local elections. In this system, members of parliament are also elected to the executive branch. The party in government usually designates the leaders of the executive branch.

Afghan Elections, 2005

An Afghan man casts his ballot at a polling station in Lash Kar Gah, Helmand Province, September 18, 2005. Polling stations were busy, but orderly, across the city.

A by-election is an election held to fill a political office that has become vacant between regularly scheduled elections. Usually, a by-election occurs when the incumbent has resigned or died. Local elections vary widely across jurisdictions. In an electoral system that roughly follows the Westminster model, a terminology has evolved with roles such as mayor or warden to describe the executive of a city, town, or region, although the actual means of elections may vary. Political careers are often made at the local level: Boris Yeltsin, for instance, as the top official in Moscow, was able to prove his effectiveness and eventually become President of Russia after the collapse of the USSR. When he fought his first contested local election, he demonstrated a willingness to put his policies to the ballot.

Primary Elections

A primary election is an election that narrows the field of candidates before the general election. Primary elections are one means by which a political party nominates candidates for the next general election. Primaries are common in the United States, where their origins are traced to the progressive movement to take the power of candidate nomination away from party leaders and give it to the people. In the case of closed primaries, only party members can vote. By contrast, in an open primary all voters may cast votes on a ballot of any party. The party may require them to express their support to the party’s values and pay a small contribution to the costs of the primary.

Referendum and Recall

A referendum is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal, usually a piece of legislation which has been passed into law by the local legislative body and signed by the pertinent executive official(s) . A referendum may result in the adoption of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, a law, the recall of an elected official, or simply a specific government policy. Similarly, a recall election is a procedure by which voters can remove an elected official from office through a direct vote before his or her term has ended. Recalls, which are initiated when sufficient voters sign a petition, have a history dating back to the ancient Athenian democracy and are a feature of several contemporary constitutions.

Montenegro Referendum

In 2006, a referendum in the Republic of Montenegro took place.

8.1.2: The Purpose of Elections

Learning Objective

Discuss the nature of elections in democratic forms of government

Key Points

• An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.
• The universal use of elections as a tool for selecting representatives in modern democracies is in contrast with the practice in the democratic archetype, ancient Athens.
• Where universal suffrage exists, the right to vote is not restricted by gender, race, social status, or wealth.
• Citizens become eligible to vote after reaching the voting age, which is typically eighteen years old as of 2012 in the United States. Most democracies no longer extend different rights to vote on the basis of sex or race.
• Compulsory voting is a system in which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day.

Key Terms

suffrage

The right or chance to vote, express an opinion, or participate in a decision.

election

A process of choosing a leader, members of parliament, councillors or other representatives by popular vote.

compulsory voting

Compulsory voting is a system in which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day. If an eligible voter does not attend a polling place, he or she may be subject to punitive measures, such as fines, community service, or perhaps imprisonment if fines are unpaid or community service not performed.

Example

• Suffrage is typically only for citizens of the country, though further limits may be imposed. However, in the European Union, one can vote in municipal elections if one lives in the municipality and is an EU citizen; the nationality of the country of residence is not required.

Purposes of Elections

Definition

An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office. Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has operated since the 17^th century. Elections fill offices in the legislature, sometimes in the executive and judiciary, and for regional and local government. This process is also used in many other private and business organizations, from clubs to voluntary associations and corporations.

Presidential Elections in Poland

Presidential Election 2005 in Poland (second round of voting, Oct.23rd).

History of Elections

The universal use of elections as a tool for selecting representatives in modern democracies is in contrast with the practice in the democratic archetype, ancient Athens. As the elections were considered an oligarchic institution and most political offices were filled using sortition, also known as allotment, by which officeholders were chosen by lot.

Elections were used as early in history as ancient Greece and ancient Rome, and throughout the Medieval period to select rulers such as the Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope. In ancient India, around 920 AD, in Tamil Nadu, Palm leaves were used for village assembly elections. The palm leaves with candidate names, will be put inside a mud pot, for counting. Ancient Arabs also used election to choose their caliphs, Uthman and Ali, in the early medieval Rashidun Caliphate; and to select the Pala king Gopala in early medieval Bengal.

Suffrage

The question of who may vote is a central issue in elections. The electorate does not generally include the entire population; for example, many countries prohibit those judged mentally incompetent from voting, and all jurisdictions require a minimum voting age. Suffrage is the right to vote gained through the democratic process. Citizens become eligible to vote after reaching the voting age, which is typically eighteen years old as of 2012 in the United States. Most democracies no longer extend different rights to vote on the basis of sex or race.

Graph of Voter Turnout in U.S. Presidential Elections, 1824-Present

Between 1824 and 1840, voter turnout when from about 26% to 80%. This extremely sharp rise was caused by the removal of property qualifications from the right to vote.

Where universal suffrage exists, the right to vote is not restricted by gender, race, social status, or wealth. It typically does not extend a right to vote to all residents of a region. Distinctions are frequently made in regard to citizenship, age, and occasionally mental capacity or criminal convictions. Suffrage is typically only for citizens of the country, though further limits may be imposed. However, in the European Union, one can vote in municipal elections if one lives in the municipality and is an EU citizen; the nationality of the country of residence is not required. In some countries, voting is required by law. If an eligible voter does not cast a vote, he or she may be subject to punitive measures such as a small fine. Compulsory voting is a system in which electors are obliged to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day. If an eligible voter does not attend a polling place, he or she may be subject to punitive measures such as fines, community service, or perhaps imprisonment if fines are unpaid or community service not performed.

Universal Suffrage

Suffrage universel dédié à Ledru-Rollin, painted by Frédéric Sorrieu in 1850. This lithography pays tribute to French statesman Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin for establishing universal male suffrage in France in 1848, following the French Revolution of 1848.

8.1.3: Types of Ballots

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the different types of ballots used for elections

Key Points

• A ballot box is a temporarily sealed container with a narrow slot in the top sufficient to accept a ballot paper in an election. The ballot box is also designed to prevent anyone from accessing the votes cast until the close of the voting period.
• Ranked ballots allow voters to rank candidates in order of preference, while ballots for first-past-the-post systems only allow voters to select one candidate for each position. In party-list systems, lists may be open or closed.
• The secret ballot is a voting method in which a voter’s choices in an election or a referendum are anonymous.
• In the United States today, the term ballot reform generally refers to efforts to reduce the number of elected offices.

Key Terms

secret ballot

The voting system involving ballots available only at official polling places, prepared at public expense, containing the names of all candidates, and marked in secret at the polling places.

ballot

A paper or card used to cast a vote.

ballot box

A sealed box with a slit, into which a voter puts his completed voting slip.

Example

• Ballot design can aid or inhibit clarity in an election. Poor designs lead to confusion and potentially chaos if large numbers of voters spoil or mismark a ballot. The butterfly ballot used in Florida in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election is a good example. This was a ballot paper that has names down both sides, with a single column of punch holes in the center, which has been likened to a maze. The use of a butterfly ballot led to widespread allegations of mismarked ballots.

Introduction

A ballot is a device used to cast votes in an election, and may be a piece of paper or a small ball used in secret voting. Each voter uses one ballot, and ballots are not shared. In the simplest elections, a ballot may be a simple scrap of paper on which each voter writes in the name of a candidate, but governmental elections use pre-printed ballots to protect the secrecy of the votes. The voter casts his or her ballot in a box at a polling station. A ballot box is a temporarily sealed container, usually square box though sometimes a tamper resistant bag, with a narrow slot in the top sufficient to accept a ballot paper in an election. The ballot box is also designed to prevent anyone from accessing the votes cast until the close of the voting period .

Haitians voting in the 2006 elections.

Clear sided ballot boxes used in the Haitian general election in 2006.

Types of Voting Systems

Depending on the type of voting system used in the election, different ballots may be used. Ranked ballots allow voters to rank candidates in order of preference, while ballots for first-past-the-post systems only allow voters to select one candidate for each position. In party-list systems, lists may be open or closed.

The secret ballot is a voting method in which a voter’s choices in an election or a referendum are anonymous. The key aim is to ensure that the voter records a sincere choice by forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation or bribery. This system is one means of achieving the goal of political privacy. However, the secret ballot may increase the amount of vote buying where it is still legal. A political party or its affiliates could pay lukewarm supporters to turn out and pay lukewarm opponents to stay home, therefore reducing the costs of buying an election.

The United States uses a long and short ballot . Before the Civil War, a larger number of elected offices required longer ballots, and at times the long ballot undoubtedly resulted in confusion and blind voting, though the seriousness of either problem can be disputed. Progressivists attacked the long ballot during the Progressive Era. In the United States today, the term ballot reform generally refers to efforts to reduce the number of elected offices .

Butterfly Voters View

Perspective view of the infamous Florida butterfly ballot, reconstructed in 3-D from a reproduction in a Florida newspaper, to show how hard it is to identify which hole links to which name in “real life”, rather than the flat way it is usually displayed.

The Polling (Painting)

The Polling by William Hogarth (1755). Before the secret ballot was introduced, voter intimidation was commonplace.

8.1.4: Winning an Election: Majority, Plurality, and Proportional Representation

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the voting systems of majority rule, proportional representation and plurality voting

Key Points

• A voting system is a method by which voters make a choice between options, often in an election or on a policy referendum.
• Majority rule is a decision rule that selections the option which has a majority, that is, more than half the votes. It is the binary decision rule used most often in influential decision-making bodies, including the legislatures of democratic nations.
• Proportional representation (PR) is a concept in voting systems used to elect an assembly or council. Proportional representation means that the number of seats won by a party or group of candidates is proportionate to the number of votes received.
• The plurality voting system is a single-winner voting system often used to elect executive officers or to elect members of a legislative assembly that is based on single-member constituencies.

Key Terms

majority rule

A decision rule whereby the decisions of the numerical majority of a group will bind on the whole group.

plurality

A number of votes for a single candidate or position which is greater than the number of votes gained by any other single candidate or position voted for, but which is less than a majority of valid votes cast.

voting systems

A voting system is a method by which voters make a choice between options, often in an election or on a policy referendum.

Example

• The most common system, used in Canada, the lower house (Lok Sabha) in India, the United Kingdom, and most elections in the United States, is simple plurality, first-past-the-post or winner-takes-all.

Introduction

A voting system is a method by which voters make a choice between options, often in an election or on a policy referendum. A voting system contains rules for valid voting, and how votes are counted and aggregated to yield a final result. Common voting systems are majority rule, proportional representation, or plurality voting with a number of variations and methods such as first-past-the-post or preferential voting. The study of formally defined voting systems is called social choice theory, a subfield of political science, economics, and mathematics.

Majority Rule

Majority rule is a decision rule that selects the option which has a majority, that is, more than half the votes. It is the binary decision rule used most often in influential decision-making bodies, including the legislatures of democratic nations. Some scholars have recommended against the use of majority rule, at least under certain circumstances, due to an ostensible trade-off between the benefits of majority rule and other values important to a democratic society. Being a binary decision rule, majority rule has little use in public elections, with many referendums being an exception. However, it is frequently used in legislatures and other bodies in which alternatives can be considered and amended in a process of deliberation until the final version of a proposal is adopted or rejected by majority rule.

Proportional Representation

Proportional representation (PR) is a concept in voting systems used to elect an assembly or council. Proportional representation means that the number of seats won by a party or group of candidates is proportionate to the number of votes received . For example, under a PR voting system if 30% of voters support a particular party then roughly 30% of seats will be won by that party. Proportional representation is an alternative to voting systems based on single member districts or on bloc voting; these non-PR systems tend to produce disproportionate outcomes and to have a bias in favor of larger political groups. PR systems tend to produce a proliferation of political parties, while single member districts encourage a two-party system.

German federal election, 2005

Seats won by each party in the 2005 German federal election, an example of a proportional voting system.

Plurality Voting System

The plurality voting system is a single-winner voting system often used to elect executive officers or to elect members of a legislative assembly that is based on single-member constituencies . This voting method is also used in multi-member constituencies in what is referred to as an exhaustive counting system where one member is elected at a time and the process repeated until the number of vacancies is filled. In political science, the use of the plurality voting system alongside multiple, single-winner constituencies to elect a multi-member body is often referred to as single-member district plurality (SMDP).

Plurality ballot

An example of a plurality ballot.

8.1.5: Electoral Districts

Learning Objective

Analyze how apportionment, malapportionment and gerrymandering affect the political process

Key Points

• In an electoral district, the constituents are the voters who reside within the geographical bounds of an electoral district.
• District magnitude is the number of representatives elected from a given district to the same legislative body.
• Apportionment is the process of allocating a number of representatives to different regions, such as states or provinces, and is generally done on the basis of population. Malapportionment occurs when voters are under or over-represented due to variation in district population.
• Gerrymandering is the manipulation of electoral district boundaries for political gain.

Key Terms

apportionment

The act of apportioning or the state of being apportioned

gerrymandering

The practice of redrawing electoral districts to gain an electoral advantage for a political party.

electoral district

A district represented by one or more elected officials.

Example

• Apportionment is generally done on the basis of population. Seats in the United States House of Representatives, for instance, are reapportioned to individual states every 10 years following a census, with some states that have grown in population gaining seats. The United States Senate, by contrast, is apportioned without regard to population; every state gets exactly two senators.

Definition

An electoral district is a distinct territorial subdivision for holding an election for one or more seats in a legislative body. Generally, only voters who reside within the geographical bounds of an electoral district, the constituents, are permitted to vote in an election held there. The term “constituency” can be used to refer to an electoral district or to the body of eligible voters within the represented area. In Australia and New Zealand, electoral districts are called “electorates,” but elsewhere the term generally refers to the body of voters.

In the United States, there are several types of districts:

• Congressional districts
• states
• state representative districts
• city council districts

An election commission is a body charged with overseeing the implementation of election procedures. The exact name used varies from country to country, including such terms as “electoral commission”, “central election commission”, “electoral branch” or “electoral court”. Election commissions can be independent, mixed, judicial or governmental. They may also be responsible for electoral boundary delimitation. In federations there may be a separate body for each subnational government. In the executive model the election commission is directed by a cabinet minister as part of the executive branch of government, and may include local government authorities acting as agents of the central body. Countries with this model include Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia and the United States.

District Magnitude

District magnitude is the number of representatives elected from a given district to the same legislative body. A single-member district has one representative, whereas a multi-member district has more than one. Proportional representation voting systems inherently require multi-member districts, and the larger the district magnitude the more proportional a system tends to be. Under proportional representation systems, district magnitude is an important determinant of the makeup of the elected body.

The geographic distribution of minorities also affects their representation — an unpopular nationwide minority can still secure a seat if they are concentrated in a particular district. District magnitude can vary within the same system during an election. In the Republic of Ireland, for instance, national elections to Dáil Éireann are held using a combination of 3, 4, and 5 member districts. In Hong Kong, the magnitude ranged from 3 to 5 in the 1998 election, but from 5 to 9 in the 2012.

Apportionment and Redistricting

Apportionment is the process of allocating a number of representatives to different regions, such as states or provinces. Apportionment changes are often accompanied by redistricting, the redrawing of electoral district boundaries to accommodate the new number of representatives. This redrawing is necessary under single-member district systems, as each new representative requires his or her own district.

Apportionment is generally done on the basis of population. Seats in the United States House of Representatives, for instance, are reapportioned to individual states every 10 years following a census, with some states that have grown in population gaining seats. The United States Senate, by contrast, is apportioned without regard to population; every state gets exactly two senators. Malapportionment occurs when voters are under or over-represented due to variation in district population.

Gerrymandering is the manipulation of electoral district boundaries for political gain. By creating a few “forfeit” districts where voters vote overwhelmingly for rival candidates, gerrymandering politicians can manufacture more narrow wins among the districts they seek to win . Gerrymandering effectively concentrates wasted votes among opponents while minimizing wasted votes among supporters. Gerrymandering is typically done under voting systems with single-member districts .

Gerrymandering in Illinois

Another example of Illinois gerrymandering is the 17th congressional district in the western portion of the state. Notice how the major urban centers are anchored and how Decatur is nearly isolated from the primary district.

Gerrymandering in Ohio

An example of “cracking” style of gerrymandering. The urban (and mostly liberal) concentration of Columbus, Ohio, located at the center of the map in Franklin County, is split into thirds, with each segment attached to—and outnumbered by—largely conservative suburbs.

Swing Seats and Safe Seats

Sometimes, particularly under non-proportional winner-take-all voting systems, electoral districts can be prone to landslide victories. A safe seat is one that is very unlikely to be won by a rival politician due to the makeup of its constituency. Conversely, a swing seat is one that could easily swing either way. In United Kingdom general elections, the voting in a relatively small number of swing seats usually determines the outcome of the entire election. Many politicians aspire to have safe seats.

8.2: The Modern Political Campaign

8.2.1: Assembling a Campaign Staff

It is essential to gather a specialized and politically driven staff that helps run political campaigns in elections.

Learning Objective

Describe the organizational structure of a major modern political campaign

Key Points

• Successful campaigns usually require a campaign manager to coordinate the campaign’s operations.
• Activists are the ‘foot soldiers’ who are loyal to the cause. They are the true believers who will carry the run by volunteer activists.
• Political consultants advise campaigns on virtually all of their activities from research to field strategy.
• There are different departments created while assembling the staff in order to structure all of the campaign roles.

Key Terms

pollster

A professional whose primary job is conducting pre-election polls.

consultant

A person whose occupation is to be consulted for their expertise, advice, or help in an area or specialty. Alternatively, a party whose business is to be similarly consulted.

quadrennial

Happening every four years.

activist

A person who is politically active in the role of a citizen; especially, one who campaigns for change

Example

• In the United States larger campaigns hire consultants to serve as strategists. The campaign manager focuses mostly on coordinating the campaign staff. Campaign managers will often have deputies who oversee various aspects of the campaign at a closer level.

Organization

In a modern political campaign, the campaign organization will have a coherent structure and staff like any other large business. Political campaign staff is the people who formulate and implement the strategy needed to win an election. Many people have made careers out of working full-time for campaigns and groups that support them. However, in other campaigns much of the staff might be unpaid volunteers.

Campaign Manager

Successful campaigns usually require a campaign manager to coordinate the campaign’s operations. Apart from a candidate, the campaign manger is often a campaign’s most visible leader. Modern campaign managers may be concerned with executing strategy rather than setting it, particularly if the senior strategists are typically outside political consultants such as primarily pollsters and media consultants.

Activists

Activists are the ‘foot soldiers’ loyal to the cause. They are the true believers who will carry the run by volunteer activists. These volunteers and interns may take part in activities such as canvassing door-to-door and making phone calls on behalf of the campaign.

Caricature of Woman Suffrage 1869

This is a satirical caricature of the possible consequences of giving women the vote. The two candidates “Susan Sharp-tongue the Celebrated Man-Tamer” (dressed in circus-performer costume) and “Miss Hangman for Sheriff” canvass for women’s votes (in 1869 women could not vote anywhere in the United States, except as a newly-established experimental innovation in the remote territory of Wyoming). At the right, a sharp-featured woman brandishes a fist threateningly at her husband, who holds the baby. In the 1860’s chignons were a fashionable hairstyle worn by most women and often supplemented with a roll of artificial hair. The artist has caricatured this hairstyle.

Political Consultants

Political campaigns in the United States are not merely a civic ritual and an occasion for political debate. Campaigns are a multi-billion dollar industry, dominated by professional political consultants using sophisticated campaign management tools. Though the quadrennial presidential election attracts the most attention, the United States has a huge number of elected offices. There are wide variations between different states, counties, and municipalities on which offices are elected and under what procedures. Moreover, unlike democratic politics in much of the rest of the world, the U.S. has relatively weak parties. While parties play a significant role in fundraising and occasionally in drafting people to run, the individual candidates themselves ultimately control campaigns

Campaign Departments and Their Respective Purposes

The field department focuses on the “on-the-ground” organizing that is required in order to personally contact voters through canvassing, phone calls, and building local events. Voter contact helps construct and clean the campaign’s voter file in order to help better target voter persuasion and identify which voters a campaign most wants to bring out on Election Day. The field department is generally also tasked with running local “storefront” campaign offices as well as organizing phone banks and staging locations for canvasses and other campaign events.

The communications department oversees both the press relations and advertising involved in promoting the campaign in the media. They are responsible for the campaign’s message and image among the electorate. This department must approve press releases, advertisements, phone scripts, and other forms of communication before they can be released to the public.

The finance department coordinates the campaign’s fundraising operation and ensures that the campaign always has the money it needs to operate effectively. The techniques employed by this department vary based on the campaign’s needs and size. Small campaigns often involve casual fundraising events and phone calls from the candidate to donors asking for money. Larger campaigns will include everything from high-priced sit-down dinners to e-mail messages to donors asking for money.

The legal department makes sure that the campaign is in compliance with the law and files the appropriate forms with government authorities. In Britain and other Commonwealth countries, such as Canada and India, each campaign must have an official agent who is legally responsible for the campaign. The official agent is obligated to make sure the campaign follows all rules and regulations. This department will also be responsible for all financial tracking including bank reconciliations, loans, and backup for in-kind donations.

The technology department designs and maintains campaign technology such as voter file, websites, and social media. While local (county, city, town, or village) campaigns might have volunteers who know how to use computers, state and national campaigns will have information technology professionals across the state or country handling everything from websites to blogs to databases.

The scheduling and advance department makes sure that the candidate and campaign surrogates are effectively scheduled in order to maximize their impact on the voters. This department also oversees the people who arrive at events before the candidate to make sure everything is in order. Often, this department will be a part of the field department.

On small campaigns the scheduling coordinator may be responsible for developing and executing events. The scheduling coordinator typically: a) manages the candidate’s personal and campaign schedule, b) manages the field and advance team schedules, and c) gathers important information about all events the campaign and candidate will attend.

Candidates and other members of the campaign must bear in mind that only one person should oversee the details of scheduling. Fluid scheduling is one of the main components to making a profound impact on voters.

8.2.2: The Modern Political Campaign

A modern political campaign informs citizens about a political candidate running for the elected office.

Learning Objective

Identify key moments in the history of mass campaigns in the United States

Key Points

• A political campaign is an organized effort which seeks to influence the decision making process within a specific group.
• Major campaigns in the United States are often much longer than those in other democracies. Campaigns start anywhere from several months to several years before election day.
• Campaigns often dispatch volunteers into local communities to meet with voters and persuade people to support the candidate. The volunteers are also responsible for identifying supporters, recruiting them as volunteers or registering them to vote if they are not already registered.
• Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency.
• The internet is now a core element of modern political campaigns. Communication technologies such as e-mail, web sites, and podcasts for various forms of activism to enable faster communications by citizen movements and deliver a message to a large audience.

Key Terms

lobby groups

The act of attempting to persuade a group of people that influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

referendum

A direct popular vote on a proposed law or constitutional amendment.

political campaign

It is an organized effort which seeks to influence the decision making process within a specific group.

political action committee

A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.

Example

• Signifying the importance of internet political campaigning, Barack Obama’s presidential campaign relied heavily on social media, and new media channels to engage voters, recruit campaign volunteers, and raise campaign funds. The campaign brought the spotlight on the importance of using internet in new-age political campaigning by utilizing various forms of social media and new media (including Facebook, YouTube and a custom generated social engine) to reach new target populations. The campaign’s social website, my.BarackObama.com, utilized a low cost and efficient method of mobilizing voters and increasing participation among various voter populations. This new media was incredibly successful at reaching the younger population while helping all populations organize and promote action.

Introduction

A political campaign is an organized effort which seeks to influence the decision making process within a specific group. In democracies, political campaigns often refer to electoral campaigns, where representatives are chosen or referendums are decided . In modern politics, the most high profile political campaigns are focused on candidates for head of state or head of government, often a President or Prime Minister.

Candidate for Congress

Walter Faulkner, candidate for U.S. Congress, campaigning with a Tennessee farmer. Crossville, Tennessee.

Background History

Political campaigns have existed as long as there have been informed citizens. The phenomenon of political campaigns are tightly tied to lobby groups and political parties. The first modern campaign is thought to be William Ewart Gladstone’s Midlothian campaign in the 1880’s, although there may have been earlier modern examples from the 19^th century. American election campaigns in the 19^th century created the first mass-base political parties and invented many of the techniques of mass campaigning.

Process of Campaigning

Major campaigns in the United States are often much longer than those in other democracies. Campaigns start anywhere from several months to several years before election day. Once a person decides to run, they will make a public announcement. This announcement could consist of anything from a simple press release to concerned media outlets to a major media event followed by a speaking tour. It is often well-known to many people that a candidate will run prior to an announcement being made .

John Edwards Pittsburgh 2007

2008 United States Presidential candidate John Edwards campaigning in Pittsburgh on Labor day in 2007, accepting the endorsement of the United Steelworkers and the United Mine Workers of America.

Campaigns often dispatch volunteers into local communities to meet with voters and persuade people to support the candidate. The volunteers are also responsible for identifying supporters, recruiting them as volunteers or registering them to vote if they are not already registered. The identification of supporters will be useful later as campaigns remind voters to cast their votes . Late in the campaign, campaigns will launch expensive television, radio, and direct mail campaigns aimed at persuading voters to support the candidate. Campaigns will also intensify their grassroots campaigns, coordinating their volunteers in a full court effort to win votes.

Nixon Meets Crowds at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia

President Nixon “works the crowd” at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia in the initial stages of his campaign.

Campaign Finance in the United States

Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency. Although most campaign spending is privately financed, public financing is available for qualifying candidates for President of the United States during both the primaries and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be fulfilled to qualify for a government subsidy, and those that do accept government funding are usually subject to spending limits.

In 2008—the last presidential election year—candidates for office, political parties, and independent groups spent a total of $5.3 billion on federal elections. The amount spent on the presidential race alone was $2.4 billion, and over $1 billion of that was spent by the campaigns of the two major candidates: Barack Obama spent $730 million in his election campaign, and John McCain spent $333 million. The total spent on federal elections in 2012 was approximately $7 billion. The figures for the 2016 election will not be available until 2017.

Techniques

A campaign team must consider how to communicate the message of the campaign, recruit volunteers, and raise money. Campaign advertising draws on techniques from commercial advertising and propaganda. The avenues available to political campaigns when distributing their messages is limited by the law, available resources, and the imagination of the campaigns’ participants. These techniques are often combined into a formal strategy known as the campaign plan. The plan takes account of a campaign’s goal, message, target audience, and resources available. The campaign will typically seek to identify supporters at the same time as getting its message across.

Modern Technology and the Internet

The internet is now a core element of modern political campaigns. Communication technologies such as e-mail, web sites, and podcasts for various forms of activism to enable faster communications by citizen movements and deliver a message to a large audience. These Internet technologies are used for cause-related fundraising, lobbying, volunteering, community building, and organizing. Individual political candidates are also using the internet to promote their election campaign.

Signifying the importance of internet political campaigning, Barack Obama’s presidential campaign relied heavily on social media, and new media channels to engage voters, recruit campaign volunteers, and raise campaign funds. The campaign brought the spotlight on the importance of using internet in new-age political campaigning by utilizing various forms of social media and new media (including Facebook, YouTube and a custom generated social engine) to reach new target populations. The campaign’s social website, my.BarackObama.com, utilized a low cost and efficient method of mobilizing voters and increasing participation among various voter populations. This new media was incredibly successful at reaching the younger population while helping all populations organize and promote action.

8.2.3: The Nomination Campaign

In the nomination campaign, Presidential candidates are selected based on the primaries to run in the main election.

Learning Objective

Describe the procedure by which the Electoral College indirectly elects the President

Key Points

• The modern Presidential campaign begins before the primary elections.
• Nominees campaign across the country to explain their views, convince voters and solicit contributions.
• Much of the modern electoral process is concerned with winning swing states through frequent visits and mass media advertising drives.

Key Terms

Twentieth Amendment

This amendment establishes the beginning and ending of the terms of the elected federal offices.

vice president

A deputy to a president, often empowered to assume the position of president on his death or absence

electoral college

A body of electors empowered to elect someone to a particular office

Example

• A United States presidential nominating convention is a political convention held every four years in the United States by most of the political parties who will be fielding nominees in the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

Modern Presidential Campaign and Nomination

The modern presidential campaign begins before the primary elections. The two major political parties try to clear the field of candidates before their national nominating conventions, where the most successful candidate is made the party’s nominee for president. Typically, the party’s presidential candidate chooses a vice presidential nominee, and this choice is then rubber-stamped by the convention.

Nominees participate in nationally televised debates. While the debates are usually restricted to the Democratic and Republican nominees, third party candidates may be invited, such as Ross Perot in the 1992 debates. Nominees also campaign across the country to explain their views, convince voters and solicit contributions. Much of the modern electoral process is concerned with winning “swing states” through frequent visits and mass media advertising drives.

Election and oath

Presidents are elected indirectly in the United States. A number of electors, collectively known as the Electoral College, officially select the president. On Election Day, voters in each of the states and the District of Columbia cast ballots for these electors. Each state is allocated a number of electors, equal to the size of its delegation in both Houses of Congress combined. Generally, the ticket that wins the most votes in a state wins all of that state’s electoral votes, and thus has its slate of electors chosen to vote in the Electoral College.

The winning slate of electors meet at its state’s capital on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, about six weeks after the election, to vote. They then send a record of that vote to Congress. The vote of the electors is opened by the sitting vice president, acting in his capacity as President of the Senate, and is read aloud to a joint session of the incoming Congress, which is elected at the same time as the President.

Electoral College

Electoral college map for the 2012, 2016 and 2020 United States presidential elections, using apportionment data released by the US Census Bureau.

Pursuant to the Twentieth Amendment, the President’s term of office begins at noon on January 20 of the year following the election. This date, known as Inauguration Day, marks the beginning of the four-year term of both the President and the vice president. Before executing the powers of the office, a President is constitutionally required to take the presidential oath.

8.2.4: The General Election Campaign

In the U.S., general election campaigns promote presidential candidates running for different parties.

Learning Objective

Identify the features that distinguish American elections from those in other democracies

Key Points

• In U.S. politics, general elections occur every four years and include the presidential election.
• One of the most important aspects of the major American political campaign is the ability to raise large sums of money, especially early on in the race.
• Campaigns often dispatch volunteers into local communities to meet with voters and persuade people to support the candidate.

Key Terms

general elections

In the United States, these regulation elections of candidates occur every four years and include the presidential election.

campaign

An organized effort to influence the decision making process within a specific group when seeking election to political office.

partisan

An adherent to a party or faction.

Example

• In general elections citizens can actively participate in campaigning for their preferred political party. Citizens can act as volunteers who are also responsible for identifying supporters, recruiting them as volunteers, or registering them to vote if they are not already registered. The identification of supporters is useful later on during campaigns when voters are reminded to cast their votes.

General Elections in the United States

In presidential systems, a general election refers to a regularly scheduled election, where both the president, and either “a class” of or all members of the national legislature are elected at the same time. A general election day may also include elections for local officials.

In U.S. politics, general elections occur every four years and include the presidential election. Some parallels can be drawn between the general election in parliamentary systems and the biennial elections determining all House seats. There is no analogue to “calling early elections” in the U.S., however, and the members of the elected U.S. Senate face elections of only one-third at a time at two year intervals including during a general election.

Types of Elections

The United States is unusual in that dozens of different offices are filled by election, from drain commissioner to the President of the United States. Elections happen every year, on many different dates, and in many different areas of the country.

All federal elections including elections for the President and the Vice President, as well as elections to the House of Representatives and Senate, are partisan. Elections to most but not all statewide offices are partisan-oriented, and all state legislatures except for Nebraska are partisan-oriented.

Some state and local offices are non-partisan, these often include judicial elections, special district elections (the most common of which are elections to the school board, and elections to municipal (town council, city commission, mayor) and county (county commission, district attorney, sheriff) office. In some cases, candidates of the same political party challenge each other. Additionally, in many cases there are no campaign references to political parties, but sometimes even non-partisan races take on partisan overtones.

Process of Campaigning

Major campaigns in the United States are often much longer than those in other democracies. The first part of any campaign is for a candidate to decide to run in elections. Prospective candidates will often speak with family, friends, professional associates, elected officials, community leaders, and the leaders of political parties before deciding to run. Candidates are often recruited by political parties and lobby groups interested in electing like-minded politicians. During this period, people considering running for office will consider their ability to put together the money, organization, and public image needed to get elected. Many campaigns for major office do not progress past this point, as people often do not feel confident in their ability to win. However, some candidates lacking the resources needed for a competitive campaign proceed with an inexpensive paper campaign or informational campaign designed to raise public awareness and support for their positions.

Nixon Meets Crowds at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia

President Nixon “works the crowd” at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia in the initial stages of his campaign.

Once a person decides to run, they make a public announcement. This announcement consists of anything from a simple press release, to concerned media outlets, or a major media event followed by a speaking tour.

Funding for Campaigns

One of the most important aspects of the major American political campaign is the ability to raise large sums of money, especially early on in the race. Political insiders and donors often judge candidates based on their ability to raise money. Not raising enough money early on can lead to problems later as donors are not willing to give funds to candidates they perceive to be losing, a perception based on their poor fundraising performance.

Also during this period, candidates travel around the area they are running in and meet with voters; speaking to them in large crowds, small groups, or even one-on-one. This allows voters to get a better sense of who a candidate is, rather than just relying on what they read about in the paper or see on television.

Campaigns often dispatch volunteers into local communities to meet with voters and persuade people to support the candidate. The volunteers are also responsible for identifying supporters, recruiting them as volunteers or registering them to vote if they are not already registered. The identification of supporters is useful later, as campaigns remind voters to cast their votes.

Late in the campaign, campaigns will launch expensive television, radio, and direct mail campaigns aimed at persuading voters to support their candidate. Campaigns will also intensify their grassroots campaigns, coordinating their volunteers in a full court effort to win votes.

8.3: Political Candidates

8.3.1: Eligibility

Eligibility requirements restrict who can run for a given public office.

Learning Objective

Give examples of eligibility requirements for various offices

Key Points

• Virtually all electoral systems have some eligibility requirements, such as a minimum age to run for office.
• Even within a single jurisdiction, eligibility requirements may vary by office; there are more stringent restrictions on who can run for president than on who can run for Senate in the U.S.
• The natural born citizen clause places a Constitutional limitation on who can run for president in the U.S., limiting the office to natural born citizens.

Key Terms

eligibility requirement

Statutory restrictions on who is entitled to hold a given public office.

natural born citizen

Any person who is entitled to American citizenship by birth.

Example

• The controversial “birther” movement that has questioned the validity of President Obama’s American birth certificate is an example of debate involving the natural born citizenship clause. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was born in Mexico to American parents, illustrating that natural born citizenship does not depend on place of birth, but rather whether one is entitled to citizenship at birth.

Different voting jurisdictions set different eligibility requirements for candidates to run for office. In partisan election systems, such as those in place for U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections, the only people eligible to run in a general election are those nominated by a political party or who have successfully petitioned to be on the ballot. In non-partisan elections, there may be fewer restrictions on those who can be listed on a ballot, with no requirements for party or popular support.

Virtually all electoral systems, whether partisan or non-partisan, have some minimum eligibility requirements to run for office. For example, candidates are generally required to be a certain age. In some jurisdictions, individuals may be eligible to campaign when they reach the age of legal majority, which is often 18. Elsewhere, candidates may need to be older; for example, in U.S. Presidential campaigns, candidates must be at least 35 years old.

Eligibility requirements may also vary by political office within a given jurisdiction. The President of the U.S. must be a natural-born citizen, due to the natural-born citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution . There has been some legal debate over what constitutes natural born citizenship, particularly regarding cases where an individual is born outside the U.S. to American citizens or in cases of adoption. Generally, however, natural born citizenship is understood to include anyone who is entitled to U.S. citizenship at birth, even if they are born outside of the U.S. Over the years, multiple presidential candidates have been born in foreign countries or U.S. territories, but have met the natural born citizenship eligibility requirement because they were born to American citizens.

Natural Born Citizen Clause

The U.S. Constitution limits eligibility for the office of president to individuals who are natural born citizens of the U.S.

In offices other than that of the President, eligibility requirements tend to be less stringent. For example, according to the Constitution, members of the U.S. House of Representatives must be over the age of 25 and an American citizen for at least seven years. The Senate’s minimum age requirement is 30 and nine years an American citizen. Both chambers of Congress require members to be residents of the state they seek to represent. House members are not required to live in their districts. For local offices, the requirements are often even less strict — in certain jurisdictions, local officials simply need to be current citizens over the age of 18 who have established local residency.

8.3.2: Nominating Candidates

Nomination is the process through which political candidates are chose to campaign for election to office.

Learning Objective

Describe the steps by which a candidate appears on the ballot in a general election

Key Points

• In representative democracies, candidates are nominated to run for office and then are placed on a ballot to seek election.
• In the United States, political parties are largely responsible for nominating candidates.
• In contested elections, candidates participate in primary elections to become their party’s nominee in the general election.

Key Terms

political party

A political organization that subscribes to a certain ideology and seeks to attain political power through representation in government.

primary election

A preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

nominating convention

A meeting of the major figures in a political party to outline a party platform, set party rules, select a nominee for president as well as rally supporters.

Example

• In the 2012 U.S. presidential election, Mitt Romney was the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee before the party’s national convention; he was not officially nominated by the party, but because he had won the party’s primary election, the official nomination at the convention was a mere formality.

Nomination is part of the process of selecting a candidate for election to office. In a representative democracy, such as the United States, citizens vote to elect individuals to public offices. Examples of elected officials include at the federal level, the president; at the state level, a state representative; and at the local level, a city council member. In order to have their names listed on election ballots, individuals seeking these offices must first be nominated.

In the United States, nominees are often chosen by political parties. Political parties are organizations that subscribe to a certain ideology, articulated in the party’s platform, and that seek to attain political power through representation in government. The two largest political parties in the United States are the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, but there also are smaller parties, such as the Libertarian Party and the Green Party. To nominate candidates, political parties hold primary elections. Primary elections are used to narrow the field of candidates for the general election. In a primary, several members of the same political party campaign to become their party’s nominee in the general election. In the general election, nominees from each party compete against each other to be elected to office.

In order to formally select candidates for a presidential election, American political parties hold nominating conventions . The official purpose of these conventions is to select the party’s nominee for president, as well as to adopt a statement of party principles and goals, known as the platform. In modern presidential campaigns, however, nominating conventions are largely ceremonial. Due to changes in election laws, the primary and caucus calendar, and the manner in which political campaigns are run, parties enter their conventions with presumptive nominees. During primary campaigns, state delegates are assigned to a primary candidate based on the outcome of a statewide vote. Whichever primary candidate emerges from the primary election with the most delegates becomes the party’s presumptive nominee. The presumptive nominee is not formally nominated until the national convention, but he or she is all but assured of a place on the ballot in the general election by the conclusion of the primary season.

2008 Democratic National Convention

Modern nominating conventions are largely ceremonial affairs, intended to strengthen party support of its presumptive nominee.

When candidates for national, state, or local office are not affiliated with a political party, they may be nominated as candidates if they receive a sufficient number of signatures from eligible voters (though the specific requirements vary by voting jurisdiction). In a case where an independent, or unaffiliated, candidate receives sufficient signatures, his or her name will appear on the ballot in the general election. These candidates do not need to participate in primary elections, since they are not seeking the nomination of a political party.

8.3.3: Electing Candidates

An election is a decision-making process used in a democracy to choose public office holders based on a vote.

Learning Objective

Define the electorate

Key Points

• Modern representative democracies use elections to determine a range of national, state, and local officials.
• Voting jurisdictions use different electoral systems to determine the outcome of elections, which may result in political parties receiving either a proportion of open seats or total control of a governmental body.
• The electorate is the group of eligible voters in an election, and may be limited by restrictions such as citizenship or residency requirements, age requirements, or property-owning requirements.

Key Terms

electorate

The collective people of a country, state, or electoral district who are entitled to vote.

election

A process of choosing a leader, members of parliament, councillors or other representatives by popular vote.

electoral system

The detailed constitutional arrangements and voting laws that convert the vote into a political decision.

An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office. Generally, elections consist of voters casting ballots at polling places on a scheduled election day . Elections have been the usual mechanism by which representative democracies have operated since the 17^th century. Elections may fill offices in the legislature, the executive and judiciary, and regional and local government.

Casting a Ballot

Many electoral systems require voters to cast ballots at official, regulated polling places.

Electoral systems are the detailed constitutional arrangements and voting laws that convert the vote into a political decision. The first step in determining the results of an election is to tally the votes, for which various vote counting systems and ballot types are used. Electoral systems then determine the result of the election on the basis of the tally. Most electoral systems can be categorized as either proportional or majoritarian. In a proportional electoral system, a political party receives a percentage of seats in a governmental body in proportion to the number of votes it receives. In a majoritarian system, one party receives all of the seats in question if it receives the majority of votes. Strictly majoritarian systems are rare in modern democracies due to their tendency for suppressing minority views. For example, in the United States presidential elections are dependent upon the allocation of delegates from the electoral college. The number of delegates that each state has is proportional to the state’s population, but all of a state’s delegates are assigned to the presidential candidate who wins the majority of votes in the state. This electoral system is neither strictly majoritarian nor proportional; state delegates are not allocated to candidates in proportion to the votes they receive, but neither is winning the popular vote sufficient to ensure a candidate’s election. This system is intended to provide smaller states and less densely populated regions with influence in national elections.

The question of who may vote is a central issue in elections. The electorate, or the group of people who are eligible to vote, does not generally include the entire population. For example, many countries prohibit those judged mentally incompetent from voting, and all jurisdictions require a minimum age for voting. Historically, jurisdictions have excluded groups such as women, blacks, immigrants, and non-property owners from the electorate. Most national elections require that voters are citizens, and many local elections require proof of local residency to vote.

8.3.4: Likeability of Political Candidates

Candidates run for office by orchestrating expensive campaigns designed to increase their appeal to the electorate.

Learning Objective

Identify the reasons the electorate might be drawn to a particular candidate

Key Points

• The primary trait by which voters evaluate candidates is political ideology, referring to how liberal or conservative the candidate’s views are.
• Political ideology tends to be inferred from political party membership, with the Republican and Democratic parties being seen as conservative and liberal respectively in the U.S.
• Apart from ideology, traits such as likeability and access to funds may determine a campaign’s success or lack thereof.

Key Terms

campaign

An organized effort to influence the decision making process within a specific group when seeking election to political office.

campaign message

The ideas that the candidate wants to share with the voters, often consisting of several talking points about policy issues.

likeability

The property that makes a person likeable, that allows them to be liked.

Candidates running for election to public office need to appeal to the electorate in order to acquire votes. Accordingly, candidates run campaigns aimed at establishing a popular campaign message and convincing voters of the candidate’s likeability.

In many elections, candidates are primarily differentiated by being either liberal or conservative. A candidate’s liberal or conservative ideology is usually expressed by affiliation with a political party — in the U.S. the Republican Party is understood to be conservative and the Democratic Party is understood to be liberal. A candidate’s stated political ideology may be treated as a proxy for their position on a range of policy issues. One’s stance on economic regulation, immigration, and abortion, for example, may be inferred from political party membership. In large part, this association is supported by political parties’ platforms in the U.S. At the same national convention where parties nominate candidates for president, they formalize a platform enumerating party beliefs and objectives. When a candidate for state or national office affiliates with a party, they are therefore associated with that party’s written platform.

Apart from ideology, less explicit factors such as likeability and access to resources impact candidates’ campaigns. Likeability refers to whether or not the electorate generally likes a candidate, as measured by opinion polls . Likeability is thought to play a significant role in electoral politics but is difficult to access in campaigns. Politicians may consciously attempt to augment their likeability by donating to charities, telling jokes during speeches, or posing for photos with voters. However, likeability can be difficult for politicians and political strategists to control.

Voter Opinion Poll

Polling agencies conduct surveys of potential voters during election seasons to measure how the electorate ranks the traits of candidates.

A major critique of large scale electoral politics in the U.S. and other democracies is that a candidate’s wealth has too much influence in the election’s outcome. Modern campaigns usually include television and radio ads, extensive travel, and large organizations of strategists and organizers. Thus, campaigns have become extremely expensive. Major candidates generally need to have immense personal wealth or successful fundraising networks to compete in national campaigns. Therefore, access to monetary resources is an important trait for candidates to possess.

8.4: Presidential Elections

8.4.1: Primaries and Caucuses

Primary elections and caucuses are used to narrow the field of candidates in each major political party before a general election.

Learning Objective

Summarize the primary system and how a primary differs from a caucus

Key Points

• In American politics, the two major political parties provide networks of voters and advocates and financial resources to candidates, therefore, candidates seek their nomination before entering general elections.
• Primaries and caucuses occur at the state level and allow candidates to campaign on a smaller scale to seek nomination before entering the national campaign.
• The structure of primaries and caucuses varies by state, with some contests requiring official affiliation with a party in order to cast a vote in the nominating election.

Key Terms

general election campaign

an organized effort which seeks to influence who is voted into the office of presidency and other federal and state legislative offices

closed primary

an election in which only party members are allowed to vote, and during which they choose their party’s candidates for an upcoming general election

delegate

A person authorized to act as representative for another; in politics, a party representative allocated to nominate a party candidate.

caucus

A meeting, especially a preliminary meeting, of persons belonging to a party, to nominate candidates for public office, or to select delegates to a nominating convention, or to confer regarding measures of party policy; a political primary meeting.

primary election

A preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

Example

• The Iowa caucuses are the first nominating election to occur in the presidential primary season and, therefore, they often have a significant impact on later primaries. In 2008, a win in the Iowa caucuses gave candidate Barack Obama a major boost; a win in 2000 had the same result for George W. Bush.

In America’s two-party political system, political parties rely on primary elections and caucuses to nominate candidates for general elections. Political parties provide resources to the candidates they nominate, including endorsements, social contacts, and financial support. Consequently, attaining a party nomination by winning a primary election or caucus is a necessary step to becoming a major election candidate. Primaries are held on different dates in different states and give national candidates an opportunity to campaign to smaller audiences than during the general election. The candidate who wins each state vote is granted a certain number of delegates,depending on the state’s size, and the candidate with the most party delegates becomes the party’s general election nominee. Not every election is preceded by a primary season, but most major races, such as presidential and congressional races, use primaries to narrow the field of candidates.

Primary Elections

Primaries began to be widely used in the United States during the Progressive Era in the early 1900s. The impetus behind establishing them was to give more power to voters, rather than allowing behind the scenes political maneuverers to choose major candidates. In modern elections, primaries are seen as beneficial to both voters and parties in many ways – voters are able to choose between a range of candidates who fit within a broader liberal or conservative ideology, and parties are able to withhold support of a candidate until they have demonstrated an ability to gain public support.

Primary rules vary by state, as does the importance of their outcomes. Primaries may be classified as closed, semi-closed, semi-open, or open. In a closed primary, only voters who are registered with the party holding the primary are allowed to vote. In other words, registered Republicans can only vote to choose a candidate from the Republican field, and Democrats can only vote in the Democratic primary. In a semi-closed system, voters need not register with a party before the election, therefore independent voters may choose to vote in either the Democratic or Republican primary. In an open primary system, voters can vote in either primary regardless of affiliation. Open primaries are the most controversial form in American politics. Supporters argue that open primaries give more power to the voter and less to the party, since voters are not tied to voting for a party that does not produce a good candidate. Critics, however, argue that open primaries will lead to vote raiding, a practice in which party members vote in the opposing party’s primary in an attempt to nominate a weak candidate.

Caucuses

Whereas primaries follow the same polling practices as general elections, caucuses are structured quite differently. In nominating caucuses, small groups of voters and state party representatives meet to nominate a candidate. Caucuses vary between the states in which they are held, however, generally they include speeches from party representatives, voter debate, and then voting by either a show of hands or a secret ballot . Like primaries, caucuses result in state delegates being allocated to a particular candidate, to nominate that candidate to the general election. The vast majority of states use primaries to nominate a candidate, but caucuses are notably used in Iowa, which is traditionally the first state to vote in the primary/caucus season. Since Iowa is first, it has a large impact on the primary season, as it gives one candidate from each party an advantage as they move into other state votes. Due to its small population and the small-scale, intimate structure of its caucuses, Iowa is notorious for allowing lesser- known candidates to do unexpectedly well.

Washington State Caucus

Caucuses occur in small settings and often include lively debate by party members.

8.4.2: The National Convention

Political parties hold national conventions to nominate candidates for the presidency and to decide on a platform.

Learning Objective

Compare contemporary political conventions with those in middle 19th-century

Key Points

• National party conventions are designed to officially nominate the party’s candidate and develop a statement of purpose and principles called the party platform. Informally, political parties use the conventions to build support for their candidates.
• From the point of view of the parties, the convention cycle begins with the Call to Convention. Usually issued about 18 months in advance, the Call is an invitation from the national party to the state and territory parties to convene to select a presidential nominee.
• Each party sets its own rules for the participation and format of the convention. Broadly speaking, each U.S. state and territory party is apportioned a select number of voting representatives, individually known as delegates and collectively as the delegation.
• The convention is typically held in a major city selected by the national party organization 18–24 months before the election is to be held.
• Each convention produces a statement of principles known as its platform, containing goals and proposals known as planks. Relatively little of a party platform is even proposed as public policy.
• The evening’s speeches – designed for broadcast to a large national audience—are reserved for major speeches by notable, respected public figures.

Key Terms

party platform

A statement of principles and purpose issued by a political party.

national convention

a political convention held in the United States every four years by political parties fielding candidates in the upcoming presidential election.

planks

Planks refer to the goals and proposals in the platform of a political party.

Example

• The selection of individual delegates and their alternates, too, is governed by the bylaws of each state party, or in some cases by state law. The 2004 Democratic National Convention counted 4,353 delegates and 611 alternates.

Introduction

A national convention is a political convention held in the United States every four years by political parties fielding candidates in the upcoming presidential election. National party conventions are designed to officially nominate the party’s candidate and develop a statement of purpose and principles called the party platform. Informally, political parties use the conventions to build support for their candidates.

Major political parties in the early 1830s were the first to use the political convention. These were often heated affairs, with delegates from each state playing a major role in determining the party’s national nominee . The term “dark horse candidate” was coined at the 1844 Democratic National Convention when little-known Tennessee politician James K. Polk emerged as the candidate after the leading candidates failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority vote.

Democratic National Convention (1876)

An image from a newspaper article about the 1876 Democratic National Convention in St. Louis, MO.

There is no such suspense at modern conventions. Due to primaries and increased access to national news, each party essentially knows who its candidate will be before the convention. Instead, modern conventions serve to rally support for the candidate . Conventions today are largely ceremonial events with little influence on the presidential campaign beyond how the convention is received in the press.

Democratic Party, 2008

An image of future President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden after they were officially nominated for the Democratic ticket at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Logistics

From the point of view of the parties, the convention cycle begins with the Call to Convention. Usually issued about 18 months in advance, the Call is an invitation from the national party to the state and territory parties to convene to select a presidential nominee. It also sets out the number of delegates to be awarded to each, as well as the rules for the nomination process. One reason for the late conventions has to do with campaign finance laws, which allow the candidates to spend an unlimited amount of money before the convention, but forbid fundraising after the convention, in order for the parties to receive federal campaign funds.

Each party sets its own rules for the participation and format of the convention. Broadly speaking, each U.S. state and territory party is apportioned a select number of voting representatives, individually known as delegates and collectively as the delegation. Each party uses its own formula for determining the size of each delegation, factoring in such considerations as population, proportion of that state’s Congressional representatives or state government officials who are members of the party, and the state’s voting patterns in previous presidential elections. The selection of individual delegates and their alternates, too, is governed by the bylaws of each state party, or in some cases by state law. The 2004 Democratic National Convention counted 4,353 delegates and 611 alternates.

The convention is typically held in a major city selected by the national party organization 18–24 months before the election is to be held. As the two major conventions have grown into large, publicized affairs with significant economic impact, cities today compete vigorously to be awarded host responsibilities, citing their meeting venues, lodging facilities, and entertainment as well as offering economic incentives.

Proceedings

Each convention produces a statement of principles known as its platform, containing goals and proposals known as planks. Relatively little of a party platform is even proposed as public policy. Much of the language is generic, while other sections are narrowly written to appeal to factions or interest groups within the party. Unlike electoral manifestos in many European countries, the platform is not binding on either the party or the candidate. Because it is ideological rather than pragmatic, however, the platform is sometimes itself politicized. For example, defenders of abortion lobbied heavily to remove the Human Life Amendment plank from the 1996 Republican National Convention platform, a move fiercely resisted by conservatives despite the fact that no such amendment had ever come up for debate. Given the same routines and repetition of proceedings, presidential nominating conventions have become predictable for observers of the political process.

Minor figures in the party are given the opportunity to address the floor of the convention during the daytime, when only the small audiences of C-SPAN and other cable television outlets are watching. The evening’s speeches – designed for broadcast to a large national audience—are reserved for major speeches by notable, respected public figures; the speakers at the 2004 Democratic convention included Ted Kennedy, a forty-year veteran of the United States Senate, and Jimmy Carter, a former Democratic President, while at the Republican convention speakers included Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Governor George Pataki of New York, two of the largest states in the nation.

8.4.3: The General Election Campaign

The presidential general election occurs after the primary season and is the process through which a national vote chooses the president.

Learning Objective

Describe the steps involved in conducting a presidential campaign

Key Points

• The general election campaign lasts from the end of the primary season in June until the general vote in November and is a contest between the nominated candidate from each major political party.
• General election campaigns tend to focus their efforts on swing states, or states in which there is no clear Democratic or Republican majority, because state Electoral College electors are allocated on a winner-takes-all basis.
• General election campaigns are extremely expensive, so candidates exert substantial effort to convince not only voters but also donors to support their candidacy.

Key Terms

electoral college

A set of electors who are selected to elect a candidate to a particular office, allocated based on statewide votes.

general election

An election, usually held at regular intervals, in which candidates are elected in all or most constituencies or electoral districts of a nation.

primary season

The first stage of a presidential election, in which candidates from each party compete against members from their own party for the party’s nomination.

Example

• The 2012 campaign between Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama is an example of a general election for president.

In the United States, a presidential election is held every four years and includes both a primary season and a general election. During the primary season, the two major political parties narrow the field of candidates through state votes to nominate the party’s candidate for the general election. Because parties provide candidates with voter and staff networks and material resources, they have an incentive to present a unified front and only support one candidate, hence, winning the primary season is a necessary first step to becoming a major candidate in a general election. In the primary season, candidates compete against other members of their party to win a majority of votes from voters within their own party. By contrast, in the general election, candidates from each party compete against each other, and voters are able to vote for either candidate at the polls.

The winner of a presidential general election is not simply the person who receives the majority of votes nationwide. Instead, votes are allocated indirectly through members of the Electoral College. Under this system, statewide elections take place in which voters cast ballots for candidates. Whichever candidate wins the majority of votes in the state receives that state’s Electoral College votes. Electoral College votes are divided proportionally based on state population, meaning that larger states have more influence in the election than smaller ones . Because a candidate only needs to win a majority of votes in the state to receive all of its Electoral College votes, this system has lead to election strategies in which states with a solid Republican or Democratic majority are not contested by candidates. Instead, candidates focus their campaigns on so-called “swing states. ” Swing states are those without a clear majority party, in which all of the state’s Electoral College votes are therefore up for grabs. The most notorious swing states in recent years have been Florida and Ohio, since each is generally unpredictable, and each has a significant number of Electoral College electors.

Electoral College (2008)

In the presidential general election, the winner is determined based on who receives the greatest number of votes in the Electoral College system.

Because candidates in the general election must appeal to vast numbers of voters across a large geographic range, general elections are immensely expensive. Candidates tend to fund their campaigns in part with their personal wealth but also by fundraising extensively. Fundraising may include appealing to wealthy large donors, organizing grassroots campaigns to amass small donations from large numbers of voters, or tapping into political party funds. In recent years, PACs or political action committees, have arisen to amass large funds and produce campaign advertisements on behalf of their favored candidates. A 2010 Supreme Court decision in the case known as Citizens United further paved the way for PACs to exert a large influence in general elections. According to Citizens United, contributions to PACs are not limited so long as the PACs are not directly affiliated with a candidate. Consequently, the 2012 election has witnessed a rise of “super-PACs,” political action committees with unprecedented purchasing power who have produced numerous expensive TV and print ads.

The presidential general election lasts from the end of the primary season, usually in June, until the vote on the first Tuesday of November. Since the president is the most visible elected official in the country, the election season is so long, and so much money is spent on advertising, the presidential general election has greater voter turnout than any other U.S. election. Even so, voter turnout usually hovers at or below 60% of eligible voters. In some cases, voter turnout strongly impacts the outcome of elections. As a general rule, white elderly voters turnout more reliably than any other demographic group, and they vote consistently Republican. Thus, some analysts argue that high turnout favors Democratic candidates, since the turnout increase usually indicates greater number of young and minority voters.

8.4.4: The Electoral College

The Electoral College is the 538 person body that elects the President and the Vice President of the United States.

Learning Objective

Assess the compatibility of the Electoral College system with the nation’s federalist and democratic commitments

Key Points

• The Electoral College is an example of indirect election, or a proces in which voters in an election do not actually choose between candidates for an office but rather elect persons who will then make the choice.
• American presidential elections are not decided by popular vote.
• The members of the Electoral College are divided by represented states and are scaled based on the population from each state.

Key Terms

swing state

A state which may vote Democratic or Republican, in a given election or generally; a purple state.

indirect election

a process in which voters in an election do not actually choose between candidates for an office but rather elect persons who will then make the choice.

Indirect Election

The Electoral College is an example of indirect election, when a democratic government is voted into power by a representative vote, rather than by the entirety of the electorate. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors who officially elect the President and Vice President of the United States. The number of electors equals the total voting membership of the United States Congress, with one elector for each of the current 435 Representatives and 100 Senators. The Electoral College also includes three electors from the District of Columbia, which were approved in the Twenty-third Amendment to the Constitution, in 1961. That results in 538 total electors.

Allocation of Electors

Each state is awarded the same number of electoral votes as the number of its Representatives, plus two votes to match its Senatorial count. Since the most populous states have the most seats in the House of Representatives, they also have the most electors. The six states with the most electors are California (55), Texas (38), New York (29), Florida (29), Illinois (20), and Pennsylvania (20). The seven smallest states by population in the Electoral College (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming) have three electors. Each state’s number of Representatives is determined every 10 years by the US Census, thus determining the number of electoral votes for each state.

Electoral College (2008)

In the presidential general election, the winner is determined based on who receives the greatest number of votes in the Electoral College system.

Thus, though many people do not realize it, Presidential and Vice-Presidential elections are determined not by a popular vote. Although ballots list the names of the presidential candidates, voters within the 50 states and Washington, D.C. actually choose electors for their state when they vote for President and Vice President. These presidential electors in turn cast electoral votes for those two offices. Even though the aggregate national popular vote is calculated by state officials and media organizations, the national popular vote is not the basis for electing a President or Vice President.

A faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who, for whatever reason, does not vote for the presidential or vice presidential candidate for whom he or she had pledged to vote. They may vote for another candidate or not vote at all. Faithless electors are pledged electors and thus different from unpledged electors. Although there have been 157 cases of faithlessness, faithless electors have not changed the outcome of any presidential election to date.

Exceptions

Voters in each state and the District of Columbia cast ballots selecting electors pledged to presidential and vice presidential candidates. In nearly all states, electors are awarded to the candidate who wins the most votes in that state on a winner-take-all basis. This means that if Candidate A wins 51% of the popular vote in a given state and Candidate B wins 49%, Candidate A would take all of the Electoral College votes for this state. Only Maine and Nebraska award Electoral College votes on a proportional basis. Although electors are not required by federal law to honor a pledge, in the overwhelming majority of cases they vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged.

Evaluations of the Electoral System

Critics argue that the Electoral College is inherently undemocratic and gives swing states disproportionate influence in electing the President and Vice President. Swing states are those that are up for grabs in any given election; historically, they have swung back and forth between Democrats and Republicans. However, many of them have large numbers of Electoral College votes, meaning that candidates play to voters in swing states more than in other states. Further, some maintain that it is a doctrinal problem that presidential elections in the United States are not decided by popular vote.

Campaign Attention to Swing States (2004)

These maps show the amount of attention the Bush and Kerry campaigns (considered together) gave to each state during the final five weeks of the 2004 election: At the top, each waving hand represents a visit from a presidential or vice-presidential candidate during the final five weeks of the election. (Candidates’ visits to their own home states are not counted. ) At the bottom, each dollar sign represents one million dollars spent on TV advertising by the campaigns during the same time period. This shows the influence of the Electoral College on the prominence of swing states, those with small populations but large Electoral College votes.

Proponents argue that the Electoral College is an important, distinguishing feature of federalism in the United States and that it protects the rights of smaller states. Many proponents of the Electoral College see its negative effect on third parties as a good thing. They argue that the two party system has provided stability through its ability to change during times of rapid political and cultural change. They believe it protects the most powerful office in the country from control by what these proponents view as regional minorities until they can moderate their views to win national election.

8.4.5: Presidential Candidates

Presidential candidates seek the highest office of the executive branch of government and carry out campaigns in pursuit of election.

Learning Objective

Assess the costs and benefits — to candidates and the public — of the two party system

Key Points

• The U.S. has a two party political system in which most influential presidential candidates have the endorsement of a major political party.
• Presidential candidates in the United States must conduct extensive fundraising efforts to successfully acquire advertising time and campaign staffs.
• The U.S. Constitution places restrictions on who can run for presidential office, including that they must be 35 years old and a natural-born citizen.

Key Terms

PAC

A political action committee, which is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.

candidate

A person who is running in an election or who is applying to a position for a job.

election

A process of choosing a leader, members of parliament, councillors or other representatives by popular vote.

Example

• Presidential candidates engage in debates over governing strategies and policy positions in an attempt to secure votes in the general election.

Background

In democratic countries, the head of state or the head of the executive branch of government, is often called the president. Presidents are usually elected to office by a democratic election. Elections may depend upon a candidate, or a person who is seeking presidential office, winning the popular vote. Likewise, elections can also depend on the candidate winning a certain proportion of a vote as determined by election guidelines. For example, in the United States, presidential candidates must win a majority of votes as allocated by the electoral college, which depends upon the candidate winning the popular vote in individual states rather than in the nation at large. By contrast, in France a candidate must win over 50% of the popular vote to be elected to office. This means that if there are more than two candidates in the race and they split the popular vote, there is often a runoff election to determine who becomes the president.

U.S. Presidential Candidates

The United States has generally embraced a two party political system, in which two primary candidates seek the office of president. Historically, the two parties have changed many times, but elections have usually involved a conservative and a liberal party — in modern days, the Republican and Democratic parties. There are some notable exceptions in which third party candidates had an impact on elections, such as the candidacy of Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 and Ross Perot in 1992, but by and large candidates must have the backing of a major party in order to be influential. The benefits of party membership include a pre-existing voter base, but perhaps more significantly, access to a fundraising network. The endorsement of a political party ensures that presidential candidates have access to a powerful network of political strategists and wealthy donors.

The importance of financial resources cannot be underestimated when talking about United States presidential candidates. Presidential campaigns cost substantial amounts of money because candidates need print, radio, and television ads, as well as large staffs of campaign organizers, in order to be successful. However, in recent years the role of fundraising has increased, as campaign contributions have grown. Political action committees, commonly known as PACs, are groups of donors and advocates who band together to fund advertisements and events on behalf of candidates. The 2010 Supreme Court decision in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission further paved the way for large campaign contributions by allowing unlimited contributions to so-called “super PACs,” or political action committees that are not directly connected to candidates. As a result of the decision, there is no limit on the size of allowable campaign contributions. Super PACs generally support a candidate by attaining large contributions for expensive television ads. Since they are not directly tied to candidates, super PACs often produce attack ads, or negative ads against opposing candidates, that the primary parties would not explicitly endorse.

As a result of the cost of presidential campaigns, many U.S. presidential candidates tend to be wealthy. However, there are other restrictions on candidacy that also impact who runs. The U.S. Constitution requires that candidates are natural-born U.S. citizens who are at least 35 years old at the time of election. Unofficially, presidents tend to be educated at elite institutions, and only one U.S. president has practiced a religion other than that of the mainstream protestant faith (John F. Kennedy was Catholic). Some evidence indicates that historical candidacy trends may be changing, though. For example, President Barack Obama was the first non-white U.S. president to be elected. Also, 2012 Republican candidate Mitt Romney is Mormon, which is considered by many to be a fringe protestant denomination. While no women have been elected to the highest office in the U.S., Hillary Clinton’s ran in  2008, and in 2016 was the Democratic Party’s first female nominee, indicating the “glass ceiling” may soon be shattered.

8.4.6: Campaigning: Traditional Media, New Media, and Campaign Advertisements

Campaigns seek to engage the public through traditional forms of media, such as television and the press, and more recently, social media.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast traditional and contemporary ways in which candidates interact with the media and the public

Key Points

• Presidential campaigns have always worked closely with journalists to present a particular image of the candidate.
• Today, candidates are expected to be fluent in social media. President Barack Obama used social media effectively in the 2008 election to reach out to young voters.
• Campaign television ads are used to reach broad audiences. Ads can either be positive, supporting the views of the particular candidate buying the air time, or negative, deriding the candidate’s opponent.

Key Terms

campaign advertisements

Television ads sponsored by political campaigns to reach broad audiences and convince the masses to vote for the sponsoring candidate.

social media

Interactive forms of media that allow users to interact with and publish to each other, generally by means of the Internet.

Example

• Campaigns seek to actively engage with the media in order to present a particular image of the candidate. In the 2008 campaign, Republican candidate Senator John McCain created a unique space to engage with journalists, inviting them to travel with him on his campaign bus, called “the Straight Talk Express,” in reference to his engagement with journalists

Engaging with the media is an essential part of any presidential campaign. Usually, the candidate’s campaign manager is tasked with engaging with the media. Although people often assume that candidates are elected because of their policy positions, many presidential elections are won and lost based on likability of the candidate. Americans only “get to know” a candidate through the representation of the candidate in the media.

Throughout the history of American elections, journalists have followed candidates as they advertised their positions, gave speeches, and visited American towns. This tradition continues today, with certain journalists being given the sole responsibility of following candidates. In the 2008 campaign, Republican candidate Senator John McCain created a unique space to engage with journalists, inviting them to travel with him throughout the course of his campaign on his campaign bus, called “the Straight Talk Express” in reference to his engagement with journalists.

Campaign journalism has developed with the times. With the advent of television, TV reporters were sent to cover elections. Campaign engagement with the media has changed again with the proliferation of social media. Today, candidates are expected to have Facebook and Twitter accounts and to be fluent in the language of social media. This was particularly clear by then-candidate Senator Barack Obama’s use of social media in the 2008 election. The campaign relied heavily on social media to engage voters, recruit campaign volunteers and raise funds. It brought the spotlight on the importance of using the internet in a new age of political campaigning by utilizing various forms of social media such as Facebook and YouTube to reach targeted audiences. In the 2008 and 2012 elections, Barack Obama supporters could sign up for volunteer shifts and donate funds through apps on their mobile phones. The campaign’s social website, my.BarackObama.com, utilized a low cost and efficient method of mobilizing voters and increasing participation among various voter populations. President Obama’s efforts to reach out through new media are credited with bringing in the support of young Americans and contributing to his 2008 victory . This practice has now become standard; Republican candidate Governor Mitt Romney also released an app in 2012.

President Obama Tweeting

This image shows President Obama answering tweets, demonstrating his proficiency with social media and appealing to younger voters.

But even with the rise of new media, campaigns continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars buying air time on television networks to put on campaign advertisements. Television ads have been popular because they are an effective way to reach millions of voters at once. Campaign ads can either be positive, supporting the views of the particular candidate buying the air time, or negative, deriding the candidate’s opponent. Television campaign ads have been accused of being manipulative, but have been incredibly successful in influencing voter perceptions of the candidates.

8.5: How Voters Decide

8.5.1: Party Identification

Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports.

Learning Objective

Discuss the central features that make up party identification

Key Points

• Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies.
• In the United States, political parties consist of three parts: the party as government, the party as organization, and the party as electorate.
• Some researchers view party identification as “a form of social identity”, in the same way that a person identifies with a religious or ethnic group. This identity develops early in a person’s life mainly through family and social influences.
• Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, strong Democrats and strong Republicans respectively, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party’s nominee for office.
• The same level of voting behavior can also be applied to state and local levels. While straight ticket voting has declined among the general voting population, it is still prevalent in those who are strong Republicans and strong Democrats.

Key Terms

party identification

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports (by voting or other means).

partisan

An adherent to a party or faction.

Example

• Children remember events that happened during their childhood and associate them with the political party, whether or not they were connected with those events. For example, a child growing up in the 1970s would associate the Republican party with the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration, a child growing up in the 1990s would associate the Democratic party with the sex scandal of the Clinton administration, or a child growing up in early 2000 would associate the Republican party with the Iraq War and the War on Terror.

Introduction

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports (by voting or other means). In the United States, political parties consist of three parts: the party as government (members of the party who hold public office), the party as organization (committees, leaders and activists who work to promote the party and the candidates), and the party as electorate (citizens who support the party through party identification).

Citizens in the general population who identify with a particular party make up the Party in the Electorate. Party identifiers (partisans) could be described by their support in the following ways:

• They register as a member of the particular party when registered to vote.
• They show a strong tendency to vote for candidates in their preferred party in most elections.
• When surveyed, they identify themselves as members of that particular party.
• They are inclined to support policies endorsed by the particular party.
• They volunteer for campaigns to support party candidates more than the general population.
• They have a higher voter turnout in primary elections than the general population.

Some researchers view party identification as “a form of social identity”, in the same way that a person identifies with a religious or ethnic group. This identity develops early in a person’s life mainly through family and social influences. This description would make party identification a stable perspective, which develops as a consequence of personal, family, social and environmental factors. Other researchers consider party identification to be more flexible and more of a conscious choice. They see it as a position and a choice based on the continued assessment of the political, economic and social environment. Party identification can increase or even shift by motivating events or conditions in the country.

Characterization

Party Identification is characterized in three ways. Some view party attachment as a form of social identity, which is similar to a religious or ethnic identity. Moreover, childhood influence is one of main driving factors behind formation of party identification. During childhood, the main political influence comes from parents, other close family members and close surroundings such as the immediate community. Children remember events that happened during their childhood and associate them with the political party, whether or not they were connected with those events. For example, a child growing up in the 1970s would associate the Republican party with the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration, a child growing up in the 1990s would associate the Democratic party with the sex scandal of the Clinton administration, or a child growing up in early 2000 would associate the Republican party with the Iraq War and the War on Terror. Although these parties might or might not embrace the issues that happened during that administration, a child could forever associate the party with those memorable events. Political Scientists have developed many theories to childhood influence on political party identification. David O. Sears developed a theory stating that major childhood events will influence a child at a young age and make a permanent impression.

Voting

Those people who identify with a party tend to vote for their party’s candidate for various offices in high percentages. Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, strong Democrats and strong Republicans respectively, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party’s nominee for office. In the case of voting for president, since the 1970s, party identification on voting behavior has been increasing significantly. By the late 1990s, party identification on voting behavior was at the highest level of any election since the 1950s. When voting in congressional elections, the trend is similar. Strong party identifiers voted overwhelmingly for their party’s nominee in the general election. It is important to note that each party respectively in certain elections, would have stronger voting behavior of their strongest party identifiers. For instance, in the years the Democrats dominated House and Senate elections in the 1970s and 1980s, it can be explained that their strong party identifiers were more loyal in voting for their party’s nominee for Congress than the Republicans were.

The same level of voting behavior can also be applied to state and local levels. While straight ticket voting has declined among the general voting population, it is still prevalent in those who are strong Republicans and strong Democrats. According to Paul Allen Beck and colleagues, “the stronger an individual’s party identification was, the more likely he or she was to vote a straight ticket. “

Roll Call DNC

Those people who identify with a party tend to vote for their party’s candidate for various offices in high percentages. Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, strong Democrats and strong Republicans respectively, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party’s nominee for office.

8.5.2: Issue Voting

Issue voting is the process by which voters select candidates based on how closely their views on certain issues match the voter’s own.

Learning Objective

Describe issue voting and its relationship to larger trends in the electorate

Key Points

• Issue voting occurs when voters base their decisions on how the candidates address political issues.
• The rise in issue voting can be traced to increased polarization between the Democratic and Republican parties, which has increased numbers of independents.
• Issue voting can be problematic when candidates’ stances on issues do not match the voter’s own and when candidates possess similar views on issues.

Key Terms

issue voting

The type of voting that occurs when voters cast their vote based on political issues.

party voting

The type of voting that describes when voters cast their vote based on their self-identification with a particular political party.

In contrast to party voting, issue voting is when voters base their election decisions on political issues. These issues can relate to any questions of public policy that are a source of debate between political parties. The process of issue voting involves voters comparing their opinions about how certain issues should be addressed against candidates’ stances on these issues. Individuals vote for the candidate that best matches their own views.

Voting Booth

Issue voting has affected the decisions Americans make at the voting booth.

Issue voting has become prominent in recent elections. The in issue voting rise can be traced to increasing polarization between the Democratic and Republican parties. Moderates, who account for a large segment of the American population, become more alienated as each party adopts more extreme viewpoints. Subsequently, this alienation has led to an increase in the amount of people who identify as independents in order to escape the constraints of a polarized party. The loss of party identification affiliated with being an independent generates the greater issue voting.

While issue voting has risen in recent years, many factors can complicate it. For instance, many stances can be taken on issues and voters must settle for the candidate whose views most closely match their own. This becomes difficult when the available candidates have viewpoints that are vastly different from a voter’s views. Issue voting is also challenging when candidates possess similar views on issues and there is no clear distinction between the candidates’ views and the voter’s own. When the aforementioned situations take place, a voter may revert to party voting or may base their decision off of the individual personalities of the candidates. Similarly, issue salience is when people vote on the basis of how relevant an issue is to their lives.

Most issues that are part of the national agenda can sometimes be a consequence of media agenda-setting and agenda-building. In a commercialized media context, the media can often not afford to ignore an important issue which another television station, newspaper, or radio station is willing to pick up. The media may be able to create new issues by reporting and should that should be considered seriously. Also, they can obscure issues by reporting through negligence and distraction. If persons are affected by high crime rates, or unemployment, for instance, the media can reduce the time they report on potential solutions, the nature of class-based society or other related issues. They can reduce the direct awareness of these problems in the lives of the public. The media can make the problem in essence “go away” by obfuscating it. The public can go away to another media source, so it is in the media’s commercial interest to try to find an agenda which corresponds as closely as possible to peoples’ desires. They may not be entirely successful, but the agenda-setting potential of the media is considerably limited by the competition for the viewers’ interest, readers and listeners. It is difficult to see, for instance, how an issue which is a major story to one television station could be ignored by other television stations.

8.5.3: The Candidates

Due to a decrease in party identification, the personal traits of candidates have become an influential factor in voters’ decisions.

Learning Objective

Describe how and why candidates’ personal characteristics can be relevant to an election campaign

Key Points

• Increasing numbers of independents and problems with issue voting have made the personal traits of candidates an important factor in how voters decide.
• Candidates use their own personal attributes to relate to voters and use the negative personal attributes of their opponents to dissuade voters from supporting them.
• Candidates may use their upbringing, religious affiliations, and family to appeal to voters.

Key Terms

campaign

An organized effort to influence the decision making process within a specific group when seeking election to political office.

demographic

A demographic criterion: a characteristic used to classify people for statistical purposes, such as age, race, or gender.

The personal traits of candidates have become an influential factor in voters’ decisions during recent elections. Although issues currently remain central in many voters’ election decisions, issue voting can be difficult when candidates are closely aligned in their stances on given issues. Issue voting can also be problematic when candidates’ stances differ drastically from those of voters. At the same time, the United States has witnessed increasing polarization between the Democratic and Republican Parties that has caused many voters to identify themselves as independents. This increasing lack of party identification combined with the difficulties that arise with issue voting has resulted in voting decisions based on the personality and demographic traits of candidates.

Candidates are most often evaluated on their party affiliation and stances on prominent issues. However, when the aforementioned problems with party identification and issue voting arise, the personal characteristics of candidates may enter into campaign strategies and voting decisions. Many candidates utilize demographic factors to appeal to voters. For example, candidates may emphasize the importance of their families and their upbringing in humble middle-class households as a way to relate to a wide segment of American voters . Other candidates appeal to voters through shared religious affiliations. Candidates may also emphasize their personality traits by showing how their actions have demonstrated their trustfulness and hard work.

Michelle Obama at the 2012 Democratic National Convention

First Lady, Michelle Obama, appealed to voters by emphasizing the humble background of her husband during her speech at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

At the same time, candidates also tend to emphasize the demographic and personality traits of their opponents that will create mistrust among voters. For example, candidates often air advertisements that question the honesty of their opponents while emphasizing their own fortitude and work ethic. Candidates may also emphasize the excessive wealth of their opponents as a way to show how they are out of touch with the average middle-class American.

8.6: Recent Elections

8.6.1: The 2008 Presidential Election

The 2008 U.S. presidential election possessed many unique attributes and was won in a historic landslide victory by Democrat Barack Obama.

Learning Objective

Analyze the key components of Obama’s victory in the 2008 presidential election

Key Points

• The 2008 presidential election featured many firsts, including the widespread use of the Internet in campaigning and the first African American elected to the presidency.
• The Obama victory can be attributed to a number of factors, including the Obama campaign’s abilities to both distance itself from the unpopular Bush administration and to emphasize the change and experience it would bring the White House.
• The 2008 presidential election was characterized by high levels of participation, aided by the widespread use of the Internet.
• Obama’s win set the record for the most amount of votes cast for a U.S. presidential candidate.

Key Term

swing states

States in which no single candidate or party has overwhelming support in securing the state’s electoral college votes

The 2008 Presidential Election

The 2008 U.S. presidential election was the 56^th quadrennial presidential election. Barack Obama, the junior U.S. senator from Illinois, was nominated as the Democratic candidate while John McCain, the senior U.S. senator from Arizona, was nominated as the Republican candidate. Joe Biden, U.S. senator from Delaware, was later chosen as Obama’s running mate. Meanwhile, Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, was chosen as McCain’s running mate. Barack Obama won the election by a historic majority vote .

Obama Taking Oath of Office

After winning the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama was sworn into office on January 20, 2009.

Unique Attributes

The 2008 presidential election was exceptional in many ways. It was the first U.S. presidential election in which an African American was elected president, having also been the first African American to be nominated by a major party. Obama also received the highest number of votes in the history of U.S. presidential elections. In addition, the 2008 presidential election was the first time that both major party candidates were sitting U.S. senators. The election was also characterized by high levels of public interest and engagement. Social media sites joined traditional forms of campaign activity to generate increased election interest.

Stances and Campaign Strategy

Obama’s overwhelming presidential win can be attributed to many factors. His strong opposition to the war in Iraq was a view embraced by many Americans. Meanwhile, McCain supported the war; his statement that the U.S. could be in Iraq for the next 50 to 100 years proved costly, even though it was intended as a peacetime presence. Obama was more successful than McCain in separating himself from the unpopular George W. Bush administration. The downturn in the economy provided an additional boost to the Obama campaign after McCain made comments that portrayed him as out of touch with the average American and the economic plight of the nation. The use of social media websites was another factor better handled by the Obama campaign, and one that appealed to many young voters.

In general, the Obama campaign was much more adept at emphasizing the change and experience Obama would bring to the presidency, and distancing itself from the Bush administration, than was the McCain campaign. The Obama campaign also emphasized the experience Hillary Clinton would carry as Secretary of State. Meanwhile the McCain campaign introduced Sarah Palin as the vice presidential candidate hoping to balance McCain’s more extensive experience with the potential of a relatively unknown politician. However, Palin was often painted by the media as lacking knowledge on key issues. Although Palin appealed to the conservative base of the GOP, there remained the fear that her conservative views would alienate moderates and independents.

Electoral Vote

The 2008 U.S. presidential election took place on November 4, 2008. While John McCain won the majority vote in traditionally Republican states and in his home state of Arizona, Barack Obama’s wins in his home state of Illinois, the Northeast, and the swing states of Ohio and Pennsylvania precluded a McCain victory. Obama also won some of the southern states and the contested states of Iowa and New Mexico. The projected electoral vote count came to 365 for Obama and 173 for McCain.

8.6.2: The 2010 Elections

The 2010 midterm elections, for national, state, and local governments, resulted in an overwhelming victory for the Republican Party.

Learning Objective

Explain the political forces that contributed to the Republicans success in the 2010 elections

Key Points

• During the 2010 midterm elections 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, 37 of the 100 seats in the U.S. Senate, 38 State and territorial governorships, 46 state legislatures, 4 territorial legislatures, and numerous state and local government positions were filled.
• In spite of the large number of government seats to be filled, voter turnout was much lower than it had been during the 2008 presidential election.
• The Republican Party gained several government seats and recaptured a majority in the Congress that led to a divided government.
• Factors contributing to the Republican victories included a continuing high unemployment rate, Congressional scandals, dissatisfaction with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the mobilizing ability of the Tea Party movement,, and heightened debate over immigration regulation.

Key Terms

midterm election

a type of staggered election where the members take office at the middle of the term of another set of members, or of the executive

Congress

The two legislative bodies of the United States: the House of Representatives, and the Senate.

senate

The United States Senate, “the Senate”.

house of representatives

The name of the lower house in the bicameral legislatures of several countries, also used of some singular legislative bodies in unicameral systems.

The 2010 midterm elections on November 2, 2010 filled 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and 37 of the 100 seats in the U.S. Senate. In addition, 38 state and territorial governorships, 46 state legislatures, and 4 territorial legislatures were filled. Numerous state and local races also took place during this time.

Voter turnout dropped steeply from the previous 2008 presidential election in spite of the large number of political positions to be filled. Approximately 82.5 million people voted, about one-third fewer than those who voted in 2008. However, voter turnout was still slightly higher than the last midterm elections in 2006 and more states gained than lost voters.

The Democratic Party suffered massive defeats in most national and state elections, with many seats switching over to Republican Party control. Indeed, the Republicans gained 63 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives to recapture the majority and expanded its minority in the U.S. Senate by gaining 6 seats. This caused a divided government with Democrat President Obama in office and a Republican majority in the Congress. The Republican Party additionally broke the previous majority record of 628 seats in the state legislatures, set by the Democrats in the post-Watergate elections of 1974, by gaining 680 seats in the state legislative races. The Republicans also gained control of 29 of the 50 state governorships.

The Republican victories during the 2010 midterm elections can be attributed to a number of factors. First, unemployment was over 9% during the elections and had not declined significantly since Obama had entered the White House. Secondly, public trust in Congress had diminished with a series of scandals in which Democratic Representatives Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters, along with Republican Senator John Ensign, were accused of unethical and/or illegal conduct prior to the midterm elections. Furthermore, passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act led to low approval ratings of Congress. Indeed, many Republicans ran on a promise to repeal the act and beat incumbent Democrats who had voted for it. A fourth factor that contributed to the Republican victories was the mobilizing ability of the Tea Party movement in favor of Republican candidates . Meanwhile, the controversial Arizona Senate Bill 1070 ignited a national debate over immigration that led many in support of stronger immigration regulations to vote for the Republican Party.

Tea Party Gathering

The Tea Party movement’s ability to mobilize voters in favor of the Republican Party was one of the factors that contributed to many Republican victories during the 2010 elections.

8.6.3: The 2012 Presidential Election

Barack Hussein Obama was re-elected President of the United States on November 6th, 2012, serving a second term as the nation’s first black president.

Learning Objective

Describe the key issues and the electoral landscape that led to Obama’s reelection

Key Points

• The 2012 U.S. presidential election was between Democratic candidate President Barack Obama and Republican candidate Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts. Requiring 270 electoral votes to win the election, Obama received 303 electoral votes, while Romney earned 206.
• The major policy issues at stake in the 2012 election included: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care reform; the ongoing economic crisis; tax reform; women’s rights; and American foreign policy.
• Changes to the Electoral College apportionment of votes affected the the 2012 presidential election, likely in favor of the Republican party.
• In his second term, President Obama faced a divided political climate, negotiating between a Democratic Senate and a Republican House, often resulting in stalemate in the Congress.

Key Terms

Mitt Romney

Willard Mitt Romney (born March 12, 1947) is an American businessman and was the Republican Party’s nominee for President of the United States in the 2012 election. From 2003 to 2007, he served as the 70th Governor of Massachusetts.

electoral college

A body of electors empowered to elect someone to a particular office

incumbent

Being the current holder of an office or a title.

Barack Obama

Barack Hussein Obama II (born August 4, 1961) is the 44th and current President of the United States. On November 6th, 2012, he was re-elected for a second term.

Barack Hussein Obama was re-elected President of the United States on Tuesday, November 6th, 2012. He served a second term as the nation’s first black president. 

The 2012 presidential election was the 57^th quadrennial election in the United States. The Democratic Party Candidate, President Barack Obama, sought re-election for his second and final term as president. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney ran as the Republican candidate.

Requiring 270 electoral votes to win the election, Obama received 303 electoral votes, while Romney earned 206. His victory was much narrower than his electoral victory in the 2008 Presidential Election against Senator John McCain. Obama carried Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Virginia, and Wisconsin, many of the often decisive battleground states in presidential elections. Obama also carried a small advantage in Florida.

In his second term, President Obama will continue to face a divided political climate, with a Democratic Senate and a Republican House, often leading to stalemate in the Congress. Obama tackled many of the large issues he campaigned about before the 2008 Presidential Election, including immigration reform. The economic crisis, the growing deficit, and America’s longest undeclared war were the biggest obstacles to Obama’s re-election. Days prior to the 2012 Presidential Election, Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast, devastating many states in the Mid-Atlantic and New England regions.

Mitt Romney was highly criticized during his campaign due to his personal wealth. While he lost the popular vote by a slight margin, a much greater margin in the electoral college necessitated his loss.

The two other presidential candidates included Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Libertarian Party nominee, New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. While unlikely, both possessed the ballot access to mathematically win the majority of the Electoral College and, accordingly, the election.

The major policy issues at stake in the 2012 election were: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care reform; the ongoing economic crisis; tax reform; women’s rights; and American foreign policy.

Nominations

The Democratic nomination was uncontested with the incumbent, President Barack Obama, running for reelection . The Republican primaries were more complex, with many different candidates winning different contests. Romney won New Hampshire, Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania won in Iowa, and former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, won South Carolina by a surprising margin. Santorum suspended his campaign in April, leaving Romney as the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Romney was officially declared as the Republican Party’s nominee at the Republican National Convention on August 30, 2012 .

Mitt Romney

Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts was the Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential election.

Barack Obama

Incumbent President Barack Obama was the Democratic candidate for the 2012 presidential election. On November 6th, 2012, Obama was re-elected President for a second term.

Electoral College Changes and Controversies

Population changes indicated by the 2010 U.S. Census changed the apportionment of votes in the Electoral College, potentially changing the allocation of votes among swing states. Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Washington gained votes. Conversely, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania lost votes. The change in electoral allotment shifts the allocation of votes across the Democratic-Republican divide, as pundits predicted that the Democratic Party would lose electoral votes in states previously won in the past three presidential elections, and the Republican Party would gain votes in states won by Republican candidates in the last three elections.

Some states enacted new electoral laws in 2011. For example, Florida and Iowa banned felons from voting, and various states shortened their voting periods, eliminating the option of early voting. These measures were criticized as strategies to impede voter blocs, including college students, African Americans, and Latino Americas.

8.7: The Role of Money in Campaigns and Elections

8.7.1: Regulating Campaign Finance

Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels.

Learning Objective

Assess the origins, scope, and impact of money spent on election campaigns

Key Points

• At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency.
• Races for non-federal offices are governed by state and local law. Over half the states allow some level of corporate and union contributions.
• At the federal level, public funding is limited to subsidies for presidential campaigns. To receive subsidies in the primary, candidates must qualify by privately raising $5000 each in at least 20 states.
• In addition to primary matching funds, the public funding program also assists with financing the major parties’ presidential nominating conventions and funding the major party nominees’ general election campaigns.
• In 1971, Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), instituting various campaign finance disclosure requirements for federal candidates.

Key Terms

public funding

At the federal level, public funding is limited to subsidies for presidential campaigns. This includes (1) a “matching” program for the first $250 of each individual contribution during the primary campaign, (2) financing the major parties’ national nominating conventions, and (3) funding the major party nominees’ general election campaigns.

federal election commission

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that was founded in 1975 by the United States Congress to regulate the campaign finance legislation in the United States.

Example

• In 2008—the last presidential election year—candidates for office, political parties, and independent groups spent a total of $5.3 billion on federal elections. The amount spent on the presidential race alone was $2.4 billion, and over $1 billion of that was spent by the campaigns of the two major candidates: Barack Obama spent $730 million in his election campaign, and John McCain spent $333 million.

Introduction

Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency. Although most campaign spending is privately financed, public financing is available for qualifying candidates for President of the United States during both the primaries and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be fulfilled to qualify for a government subsidy, and those that do accept government funding are usually subject to spending limits.

Federal Elections Commission

Seal of the United States Federal Election Commission.

Races for non-federal offices are governed by state and local law. Over half the states allow some level of corporate and union contributions. Some states have limits on contributions from individuals that are lower than the national limits, while four states (Missouri, Oregon, Utah and Virginia) have no limits at all.

Campaign Finance Numbers

In 2008—the last presidential election year—candidates for office, political parties, and independent groups spent a total of $5.3 billion on federal elections. The amount spent on the presidential race alone was $2.4 billion, and over $1 billion of that was spent by the campaigns of the two major candidates: Barack Obama spent $730 million in his election campaign, and John McCain spent $333 million. In the 2010 midterm election cycle, candidates for office, political parties, and independent groups spent a total of $3.6 billion on federal elections. The average winner of a seat in the House of Representatives spent $1.4 million on his or her campaign. The average winner of a Senate seat spent $9.8 million.

Public financing of campaigns

At the federal level, public funding is limited to subsidies for presidential campaigns. This includes (1) a “matching” program for the first $250 of each individual contribution during the primary campaign, (2) financing the major parties’ national nominating conventions, and (3) funding the major party nominees’ general election campaigns.

To receive subsidies in the primary, candidates must qualify by privately raising $5000 each in at least 20 states. During the primaries, in exchange for agreeing to limit his or her spending according to a statutory formula, eligible candidates receive matching payments for the first $250 of each individual contribution (up to half of the spending limit). By refusing matching funds, candidates are free to spend as much money as they can raise privately.

From the inception of this program in 1976 through 1992, almost all candidates who could qualify accepted matching funds in the primary. In 1996 Republican Steve Forbes opted out of the program. In 2000, Forbes and George W. Bush opted out. In 2004 Bush and Democrats John Kerry and Howard Dean chose not to take matching funds in the primary. In 2008, Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and Republicans John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul decided not to take primary matching funds. Republican Tom Tancredo and Democrats Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and John Edwards elected to take public financing.

In addition to primary matching funds, the public funding program also assists with financing the major parties’ (and eligible minor parties’) presidential nominating conventions and funding the major party (and eligible minor party) nominees’ general election campaigns. The grants for the major parties’ conventions and general election nominees are adjusted each Presidential election year to account for increases in the cost of living. In 2012, each major party is entitled to $18.2 million in public funds for their conventions, and the parties’ general election nominees are eligible to receive $91.2 million in public funds. If candidates accept public funds, they agree not to raise or spend private funds or to spend more than $50,000 of their personal resources.

8.7.2: Sources of Campaign Funding

Different sources of campaign funding help party candidates to raise funds through multiple avenues.

Learning Objective

Identify the varied sources and roles of money in campaigns and politics

Key Points

• Corporations and unions are barred from donating money directly to candidates or national party committees.
• Lobbying in the United States describes paid activity in which special interests hire well-connected professional advocates, often lawyers, to argue for specific legislation in decision-making bodies such as the United States Congress.
• Federal law allows for multiple types of Political Action Committees, including connected PACs, nonconnected PACs, leadership PACs, Super PACs.
• A 527 organization is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after “Section 527” of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code.
• Political party committees may contribute funds directly to candidates, subject to the specified contribution limits.
• Different sources of campaign funding help party candidates to raise funds through multiple avenues. Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels.

Key Terms

527 organization

A 527 organization is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after “Section 527” of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional political action committees, “Super PACs”, and political parties are “527s. “

lobbying

Lobbying (also lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

bundlers

Bundlers are people who can gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and present the sum to the campaign. Campaigns often recognize these bundlers with honorary titles and, in some cases, exclusive events featuring the candidate.

Sources of Campaign Funding

Different sources of campaign funding enable party candidates raise funds through multiple avenues. Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency. Although most campaign spending is privately financed, public financing is also available for qualifying candidates for President of the United States during both the primaries and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be met to qualify for a government subsidy, and those that accept government funding are usually subject to spending limits. Federal law restricts how much individuals and organizations may contribute to political campaigns, political parties, and other FEC-regulated organizations.

Corporations and unions are barred from donating money directly to candidates or national party committees. One consequence of the limitation upon personal contributions from any one individual is that campaigns seek out “bundlers”—people who can gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and present the sum to the campaign. Campaigns often recognize these bundlers with honorary titles and, in some cases, exclusive events featuring the candidate. Although bundling had existed in various forms since the enactment of the FECA, it became more structured and organized in the 2000s, spearheaded by the “Bush Pioneers” for George W. Bush’s 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns. During the 2008 campaign, the six leading primary candidates (three Democratic, three Republican) had listed a total of nearly two thousand bundlers.

Lobbying and Special Interests

Lobbying in the United States describes paid activity in which special interests hire well-connected professional advocates, often lawyers, to argue for specific legislation in decision-making bodies such as the United States Congress . It is a highly controversial phenomenon, often seen in a negative light by journalists and the American public, and frequently misunderstood. While lobbying is subject to extensive and often complex rules which, if not followed, can lead to penalties including jail, the activity of lobbying has been interpreted by court rulings as free speech and protected by the Constitution.

Tony Podesta, Senator Kay and Chip Hagan

Lobbying depends on cultivating personal relationships over many years. Photo: Lobbyist Tony Podesta (left) with Senator Kay Hagan (center) and her husband.

Spending by Outside Organizations

Federal law allows for multiple types of Political Action Committees, including connected PACs, nonconnected PACs, leadership PACs and Super PACs. 501(c)(4) organizations are defined by the IRS as “social welfare” organizations. Unlike 501(c)(3) charitable organizations, they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as the organization’s “primary purpose” is the promotion of social welfare and not political advocacy. A 527 organization is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after “Section 527” of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional political action committees, “Super PACs”, and political parties are “527s. ” However, in common practice the term is usually applied only to such organizations that are not regulated under state or federal campaign finance laws because they do not “expressly advocate” for the election or defeat of a candidate or party.

Political party committees may contribute funds directly to candidates, subject to the specified contribution limits. National and state party committees may make additional “coordinated expenditures,” subject to limits, to help their nominees in general elections. National party committees may also make unlimited “independent expenditures” to support or oppose federal candidates. However, since 2002, national parties have been prohibited from accepting any funds outside the limits established for elections in the FECA.

8.7.3: PACs and Campaigns

A political action committee is any organization that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives or legislation.

Learning Objective

Analyze the role of PACs in federal elections

Key Points

• At the federal level, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act.
• Individuals are limited to contributing $5,000 per year to Federal PACs; corporations and unions may not contribute directly to federal PACs, but can pay for the administrative costs.
• Federal law allows for two types of PACs, connected and non-connected. Most of the 4,600 active, registered PACs are “connected PACs” established by businesses, labor unions, trade groups, or health organizations. By contrast, “non-connected PACs” have an ideological mission.
• Super PACs may not make contributions to candidate campaigns or parties, but may engage in unlimited political spending independently of the campaigns. Unlike traditional PACs, they can raise funds from corporations, unions and other groups, and from individuals, without legal limits.
• In 2010, the United States Supreme Court held in “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” that it is legal for corporations and unions to spend from their general treasuries to finance independent expenditures.

Key Terms

citizens united

In 2010, the United States Supreme Court held in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that laws prohibiting corporate and union political expenditures were unconstitutional. Citizens United made it legal for corporations and unions to finance independent expenditures with money from their general treasuries. It did not alter the prohibition on direct corporate or union contributions to federal campaigns—those are still prohibited.

super pacs

Super PACs, officially known as “independent-expenditure only committees,” may not make contributions to candidate campaigns or parties, but may engage in unlimited political spending independently of the campaigns. Also unlike traditional PACs, they can raise funds from corporations, unions and other groups, and individuals—without legal limits.

political action committee

A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.

Example

• According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, the top 100 individual super PAC donors in 2011–2012 made up just 3.7% of contributors, but accounted for more than 80% of the total money raised, while less than 0.5% of the money given to “the most active Super PACs” was donated by publicly traded corporations.

Introduction

A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives or legislation. At the federal level, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act. At the state level, an organization becomes a PAC according to the state’s election laws.

In 2010, the United States Supreme Court held in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that laws prohibiting corporate and union political expenditures were unconstitutional. Citizens United made it legal for corporations and unions to spend from their general treasuries to finance independent expenditures, but did not alter the prohibition on direct corporate or union contributions to federal campaigns; those are still prohibited.

History of PACs in the United States

In 1947, as part of the Taft-Hartley Act, the U.S. Congress prohibited labor unions or corporations from spending money to influence federal elections, and prohibited labor unions from contributing to candidate campaigns. Labor unions moved to work around these limitations by establishing political action committees, to which members could contribute. In 1971, Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). In 1974, Amendments to FECA defined how a PAC could operate and established the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to enforce the nation’s campaign finance laws. The FECA and the FEC’s rules provide for the following: Individuals are limited to contributing $5,000 per year to Federal PACs; corporations and unions may not contribute directly to federal PACs, but can pay for the administrative costs of a PAC affiliated with the specific corporation or union; Corporate-affiliated PACs may only solicit contributions from executives, shareholders, and their families.

Categorization of PACs

Federal law allows for two types of PACs, connected and non-connected. Most of the 4,600 active, registered PACs are “connected PACs” established by businesses, labor unions, trade groups, or health organizations. These PACs receive and raise money from a “restricted class,” generally consisting of managers and shareholders in the case of a corporation and members in the case of a union or other interest group. Groups with an ideological mission, single-issue groups, and members of Congress and other political leaders may form “non-connected PACs. ” These organizations may accept funds from any individual, connected PAC, or organization.

Super PACs, officially known as “independent-expenditure only committees,” may not make contributions to candidate campaigns or parties, but may engage in unlimited political spending independently of the campaigns. Also unlike traditional PACs, they can raise funds from corporations, unions and other groups, and from individuals, without legal limits. Super PACs may support particular candidacies. In the 2012 presidential election, super PACs have played a major role, spending more than the candidates’ election campaigns in the Republican primaries. As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a Super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign—has spent $40 million . In the 2012 election campaign, most of the money given to super PACs has come not from corporations but from wealthy individuals. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, the top 100 individual super PAC donors in 2011–2012 made up just 3.7% of contributors, but accounted for more than 80% of the total money raised, while less than 0.5% of the money given to “the most active Super PACs” was donated by publicly traded corporations.

Mitt Romney

Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts was the Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential election.

PAC Backlash

It was generally agreed in the 2012 campaign that the formation of a super PAC and the acceptance of large contributions was legal. However, a lingering question was whether super PACs are legal when examined on the basis of how they act. Two agreed-upon illegal actions were that a super PAC could not accept foreign funds and could not coordinate directly with a candidate. Super PACs were seen in the press as a possible means of allowing illegal donations from foreign entities – either individuals or companies – to be disguised. The concept of actions being illegal, when coordinated with a candidate, came out, in part, after a super PAC named American Crossroads requested permission to communicate to their favored candidate on an above-board basis.

International Comparison and Response

The leading democracies have different systems of campaign finance, and several have no institutions analogous to American PACs, in that there are no private contributions of large sums of money to individual candidates. This is true, for example in Germany, in France, and in Britain. In these countries, concerns about the influence of campaign contributions on political decisions are less prominent in public discussion.

8.7.4: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

The Citizens United case held that it was unconstitutional to ban campaign financial contributions by corporations, associations and unions.

Learning Objective

Analyze the significance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission for campaign finance reform

Key Points

• Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in 2010 in which the court held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions.
• The nonprofit group Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton and to advertise the film during television broadcasts in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. In a 5 to 4 decision, the court held that portions of BCRA violated the First Amendment.
• The Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations, and unions. This ruling was frequently interpreted as permitting corporate corporations and unions to donate to political campaigns.
• Citizens United has often been credited for the creation of “super PACs,” political action committees which make no contributions to candidates or parties and so can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions.

Key Terms

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in 2010 in which the court held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions.

super pacs

Political action committees, which make no contributions to candidates or parties, and so can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions.

Example

• In the 2012 presidential election, super PACs have played a major role, spending more than the candidates’ election campaigns in the Republican primaries. As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a Super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign—has spent $40 million.

Introduction

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in 2010 in which the court held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. The nonprofit group Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton and to advertise the film during television broadcasts in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. In a 5 to 4 decision, the court held that portions of BCRA violated the First Amendment.

Background

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 prohibited corporations and unions from using their general treasury to fund “electioneering communications” within 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election. During the 2004 presidential campaign, a conservative nonprofit organization named Citizens United filed a complaint before the Federal Election Commission (FEC) charging that advertisements for Michael Moore’s film, Fahrenheit 9/11, a documentary critical of the Bush administration’s response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, constituted political advertising and thus could not be aired within the 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election. The FEC dismissed the complaint after finding no evidence that broadcast advertisements for the movie and featuring a candidate within the proscribed time limits had actually been made.

In the wake of these decisions, Citizens United sought to establish itself as a bona fide commercial filmmaker, producing several documentary films between 2005 and 2007. By early 2008, it sought to run television commercials to promote its latest political documentary, Hillary: The Movie, and to air the movie on DirecTV. The movie was highly critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton, with the District Court describing the movie as an elongated version of a negative 30-second television spot. In January 2008, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the television advertisements for Hillary: The Movie violated the BCRA restrictions of “electioneering communications” within 30 days of a primary. Though the political action committee claimed that the film was fact-based and nonpartisan, the lower court found that the film had no purpose other than to discredit Clinton’s candidacy for president. The Supreme Court docketed the case on August 18, 2008 and heard oral argument on March 24, 2009.

Opinions of the Court

The Supreme Court held in Citizens United that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations and unions. This ruling was frequently interpreted as permitting corporate corporations and unions to donate to political campaigns, or else removing limits on how much a donor can contribute to a campaign. Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion found that the BCRA prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.

Justice Anthony Kennedy

Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion found that the BCRA prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.

A dissenting opinion by Justice Stevens was joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor. Stevens concurred in the court’s decision to sustain BCRA’s disclosure provisions, but dissented from the principal holding of the majority opinion. The dissent argued that the court’s ruling “threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation. The path it has taken to reach its outcome will, I fear, do damage to this institution. ” He wrote: “A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold. “

Justice John Paul Stevens

John Paul Stevens wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the Court’s ruling “threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation. “

Impact

On January 27, 2010, President Barack Obama condemned the decision during the 2010 State of the Union Address, stating that, “Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. ” Moreover, The New York Times stated in an editorial, “The Supreme Court has handed lobbyists a new weapon. A lobbyist can now tell any elected official: if you vote wrong, my company, labor union or interest group will spend unlimited sums explicitly advertising against your re-election. ” The New York Times reported that 24 states with laws prohibiting or limiting independent expenditures by unions and corporations would have to change their campaign finance laws because of the ruling.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission has often been credited for the creation of “super PACs”, political action committees which make no contributions to candidates or parties and so can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions. In the 2012 presidential election, super PACs have played a major role, spending more than the candidates’ election campaigns in the Republican primaries. As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a Super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign—has spent $40 million.

8.7.5: Campaign Finance Reform

In the U.S., campaign finance reform is the common term for the political effort to change the involvement of money in political campaigns.

Learning Objective

Identify major legislative and judicial milestones in campaign finance reform in the United States

Key Points

• The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 required candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditures. It was amended in 1974 with the introduction of statutory limits on contributions, and creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
• The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits on expenditures set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions to national political parties.
• The voting with dollars plan would establish a system of modified public financing coupled with an anonymous campaign contribution process. It has two parts: patriot dollars and the secret donation booth.
• Another method allows the candidates to raise funds from private donors, but provides matching funds for the first chunk of donations. This would effectively make small donations more valuable to a campaign, potentially leading them to put more effort into pursuing such donations.
• Another method, which supporters call clean money, clean elections, gives each candidate who chooses to participate a certain, set amount of money. In order to qualify for this money, the candidates must collect a specified number of signatures and small (usually $5) contributions.

Key Term

federal election campaign act

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is a United States federal law which increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns. It was amended in 1974 to place legal limits on the campaign contributions.

Introduction

Campaign finance reform is the common term for the political effort in the United States to change the involvement of money in politics, primarily in political campaigns. Although attempts to regulate campaign finance by legislation date back to 1867, the first successful attempts nationally to regulate and enforce campaign finance originated in the 1970s. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 required candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditures. It was amended in 1974 with the introduction of statutory limits on contributions, and creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It attempted to restrict the influence of wealthy individuals by limiting individual donations to $1,000 and donations by political action committees (PACs) to $5,000. These specific election donations are known as ‘hard money. ‘ The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits on expenditures set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions to national political parties.

Federal Election Campaign Act

In 1971, Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act, requiring broad disclosure of campaign finance. In 1974, fueled by public reaction to the Watergate Scandal, Congress passed amendments to the Act establishing a comprehensive system of regulation and enforcement, including public financing of presidential campaigns and creation of a central enforcement agency, the Federal Election Commission. Other provisions included limits on contributions to campaigns and expenditures by campaigns, individuals, corporations and other political groups. However, in 1976 Buckley v. Valeo challenged restrictions in FECA as unconstitutional violations of free speech. The court struck down, as infringement on free speech, limits on candidate expenditures and certain other limits on spending.

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002

The Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), also called the McCain-Feingold bill after its chief sponsors, John McCain and Russ Feingold . The BCRA was a mixed bag for those who wanted to remove big money from politics. It eliminated all soft money donations to the national party committees, but it also doubled the contribution limit of hard money, from $1,000 to $2,000 per election cycle, with a built-in increase for inflation. In addition, the bill aimed to curtail ads by non-party organizations by banning the use of corporate or union money to pay for “electioneering communications,” a term defined as broadcast advertising that identifies a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or nominating convention, or 60 days of a general election.

Russ Feingold

Senator Russ Feingold from Wisconsin.

Current proposals for reform

The voting with dollars plan would establish a system of modified public financing coupled with an anonymous campaign contribution process. It has two parts: patriot dollars and the secret donation booth. It was originally described in detail by Yale Law School professors Bruce Ackerman and Ian Ayres in their 2004 book Voting with Dollars: A new paradigm for campaign finance. All voters would be given a $50 publicly funded voucher (Patriot dollars) to donate to federal political campaigns. All donations including both the $50 voucher and additional private contributions must be made anonymously through the FEC. Ackerman and Ayres include model legislation in their book in addition to detailed discussion as to how such a system could be achieved and its legal basis.

Another method allows the candidates to raise funds from private donors, but provides matching funds for the first chunk of donations. For instance, the government might “match” the first $250 of every donation. This would effectively make small donations more valuable to a campaign, potentially leading them to put more effort into pursuing such donations, which are believed to have less of a corrupting effect than larger gifts and enhance the power of less-wealthy individuals. Such a system is currently in place in the U.S. presidential primaries.

Another method, which supporters call clean money, clean elections, gives each candidate who chooses to participate a certain, set amount of money. In order to qualify for this money, the candidates must collect a specified number of signatures and small (usually $5) contributions. The candidates are not allowed to accept outside donations or to use their own personal money if they receive this public funding. Candidates receive matching funds, up to a limit, when they are outspent by privately-funded candidates, attacked by independent expenditures, or their opponent benefits from independent expenditures. This is the primary difference between clean money public financing systems and the presidential campaign system, which many have called “broken” because it provides no extra funds when candidates are attacked by 527s or other independent expenditure groups.

8.7.6: The Federal Election Campaign Act

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is a United States federal law which increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns.

Learning Objective

Describe the history of campaign finance regulation in the twentieth century

Key Points

• The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that was founded in 1975 by the United States Congress to regulate the campaign finance legislation.
• Early legislation by Congress sought to limit the influence of wealthy individuals and special interest groups on the outcome of federal elections, regulate spending in campaigns for federal office, and deter abuses by mandating public disclosure of campaign finances.
• A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.
• In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court upheld a federal law which set limits on campaign contributions, but it also ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, striking down portions of FECA.
• With the Buckley v. Valeo decision, the Supreme Court also ruled that candidates can give unlimited amounts of money to their own campaigns.
• Following Buckley v. Valeo, the Federal Elections Campaign Act was amended in 1976 and 1979 with the goal to allow parties to spend unlimited amounts of soft money on activities like increasing voter turnout and registration. This led to passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in 2002.

Key Terms

political action committee

A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.

federal election commission

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that was founded in 1975 by the United States Congress to regulate the campaign finance legislation in the United States.

federal election campaign act

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is a United States federal law which increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns. It was amended in 1974 to place legal limits on the campaign contributions.

Example

• According to FECA, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election.

Introduction

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is a United States federal law which increased disclosure of contributions for federal campaigns. It was amended in 1974 to place legal limits on the campaign contributions. The amendment also created the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent agency responsible for regulating campaign finance legislation . The FEC describes its duties as “to disclose campaign finance information, to enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and prohibitions on contributions, and to oversee the public funding of Presidential elections.”

Federal Elections Commission

Seal of the United States Federal Election Commission.

History

As early as 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt asserted the need for campaign finance reform and called for legislation to ban corporate contributions for political purposes. In response, the United States Congress enacted the Tillman Act of 1907, named for its sponsor Senator Benjamin Tillman. This act banned corporate contributions. Further regulation followed with the Federal Corrupt Practices Act enacted in 1910 with subsequent amendments in 1910 and 1925, the Hatch Act, the Smith-Connally Act of 1943, and the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. These acts sought to:

President Theodore Roosevelt

President of the United States Theodore Roosevelt, who asserted the need for campaign finance reform and called for legislation to ban corporate contributions for political purposes.

• Limit the influence of wealthy individuals and special interest groups on the outcome of federal elections.
• Regulate spending in campaigns for federal office.
• Deter abuses by mandating public disclosure of campaign finances..

In 1971, Congress consolidated earlier reform efforts in the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), instituting more stringent disclosure requirements for federal candidates, political parties and political action committees. A political action committee(PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation. According to the FECA, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $1,000 for the purpose of influencing a federal election. Without a central administrative authority, campaign finance laws were difficult to enforce.

Public subsidies for federal elections, originally proposed by President Roosevelt in 1907, began to take shape as part of FECA. Congress established the income tax checkoff to provide financing for Presidential general election campaigns and national party conventions. Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code in 1974 established the matching fund program for Presidential primary campaigns. Following reports of serious financial abuses in the 1972 Presidential campaign, Congress amended the FECA in 1974 to set limits on contributions by individuals, political parties, and PACs. The 1974 amendments also established the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to enforce the law, facilitate disclosure, and administer the public funding program. The FEC opened its doors in 1975 and administered the first publicly funded Presidential election in 1976.

Buckley v. Valeo

In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court struck down or narrowed several provisions of the 1974 amendments to FECA, including limits on spending and limits on the amount of money a candidate could donate to his or her own campaign. The court upheld a federal law which set limits on campaign contributions, but it also ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, striking down portions of the law. The court also ruled candidates can give unlimited amounts of money to their own campaigns.

Further Legislation

Following Buckley v. Valeo, FECA was amended again in 1976 and 1979. The aim of these amendments was to allow parties to spend unlimited amounts of hard money on activities like increasing voter turnout and registration. In 1979, the Commission ruled that political parties could spend unregulated or “soft” money for non-federal administrative and party building activities. Later, this money was used for candidate related issue ads, leading to a substantial increase in soft money contributions and expenditures in elections. The increase of soft money created political pressures that led to passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA). The BCRA banned soft money expenditure by parties. Some of the legal limits on giving of “hard money” were also changed in by BCRA.

8.7.7: The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 is a United States federal law that regulates the financing of political campaigns.

Learning Objective

Analyze the history of legal challenges to campaign finance reform legislation

Key Points

• The Act was designed to address two issues: the increased role of soft money in campaign financing, and the proliferation of issue advocacy ads.
• Soft money refers to “non-federal money” that corporations, unions and individuals contribute to political parties to influence state or local elections.
• Provisions of the legislation were challenged as unconstitutional by a group of plaintiffs led by then–Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, a long-time opponent of the bill.
• “McConnell v. Federal Election Commission” is a case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of most of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA).
• The impact of BCRA was felt nationally during the 2004 elections. One impact was that all campaign advertisements included a verbal statement to the effect of “I’m (candidate’s name) and I approve this message.

Key Terms

mcconnell v. federal election commission

In McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of most of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA).

soft money

Soft money refers to “non-federal money” that corporations, unions and individuals contribute to political parties to influence state or local elections.

bipartisan campaign reform act

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 is a United States federal law amending the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 regulating the financing of political campaigns.

Example

• The impact of BCRA was felt nationally during the 2004 elections. One impact was that all campaign advertisements included a verbal statement to the effect of “I’m (candidate’s name) and I approve this message.

Introduction

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 is a United States federal law amending the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 regulating the financing of political campaigns. Its chief sponsors were Senators Russ Feingold (, D-WI) and John McCain (, R-AZ). The law became effective on November 6, 2002, with the new legal limits going into effect on January 1, 2003. Although the legislation is known as “McCain–Feingold,” the Senate version is not the bill that became law. Instead, the companion legislation introduced by Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT),H.R. 2356, is the version that became law. Shays–Meehan was originally introduced as H.R. 380.

2008 Republican Party Presidential Candidate John McCain

Senator John McCain from Arizona.

Russ Feingold

Senator Russ Feingold from Wisconsin.

The Act addresses the increased role of soft money in campaign financing by prohibiting national political party committees from raising or spending funds not subject to federal limits. Soft money refers to “non-federal money” that corporations, unions and individuals contribute to political parties to influence state or local elections. The Act also addresses proliferation of issue advocacy ads, defining as “electioneering communications” broadcast ads that name a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or caucus or 60 days of a general election. Any such ad paid for by a corporation or a non-profit organizations is also prohibited .

In June 2003, the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling on the constitutionality of the law, but the ruling never took effect as the case was immediately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Legal Disputes

Provisions of the legislation were challenged as unconstitutional by a group of plaintiffs led by then–Senate Majority WhipMitch McConnell . President Bush signed the law despite “reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising. ” Bush appeared to expect that the Supreme Court would overturn some of its key provisions. However, in December 2003, the Supreme Court upheld most of the legislation in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission.

Mitch McConnell

Official portrait of United States Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

In McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of most of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA). The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a special session on September 8, 2003. On December 10, 2003, it issued a complicated decision that upheld the key provisions of McCain-Feingold. These included “electioneering communication” provisions placing restrictions on using corporate and union treasury funds to disseminate broadcast ads identifying a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election) The court also upheld the “soft money” ban prohibiting the raising or use of these funds in federal elections.

Impact and Overturn

The impact of BCRA was felt nationally during the 2004 elections. One immediately recognizable impact was the so-called “Stand By Your Ad” provision. The provision requires all U.S. political candidates and parties to identify themselves and state that they have approved a particular communication, i.e. “I’m (a candidate) and I approve this message. “

In Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that the organizations engaged in genuine discussion of issues were entitled to a broad, “as applied” exemption from the electioneering communications provisions of BCRA applying to naming a candidate before an election or primary. Observers argue that the Court’s exemption effectively nullifies those provisions of the Act, but the full impact of Wisconsin Right to Life remains to be seen.

8.7.8: Campaign Financing

Campaign finance in the United States refers to the process of financing electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels.

Learning Objective

Describe the nature of and uses for campaign finance in the United States

Key Points

• At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency.
• Political finance refers to all funds that are raised and spent for political purposes. This includes all political contests for voting by citizens, especially the election campaigns for various public offices.
• Political expenses can be caused by election campaigns or contests for nomination or re-selection of parliamentary candidates.

Key Terms

political finance

Political finance covers all funds that are raised and spent for political purposes. Such purposes include all political contests for voting by citizens, especially the election campaigns for various public offices that are run by parties and candidates.

grassroots fundraising

Grassroots fundraising is a method of fundraising used by or for political candidates, which has grown in popularity with the emergence of the Internet and its use by US presidential candidates like Howard Dean and Ron Paul.

Introduction

Campaign finance in the United States refers to the process of financing electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. At the federal level, campaign finance law is enacted by Congress and enforced by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), an independent federal agency. Although most campaign spending is privately financed, public financing is available for qualifying US presidential candidates during both the primaries and the general election. Eligibility requirements must be fulfilled to qualify for a government funding, and candidates who accept this funding are usually subject to spending limits.

Political Finance

Political finance refers to all funds that are raised and spent for political purposes. This includes all political contests for voting by citizens, especially the election campaigns for various public offices. Modern democracies operate a variety of permanent party organizations. For example, in the United States this includes the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee. Political expenses can include:

• Election campaigns run by candidates, candidate committees, interest groups or political parties
• Contests for nomination or re-selection of parliamentary candidates
• Training activities for party activists, officeholders or candidates
• Efforts to educate citizens with regard to popular initiatives, ballot issues or referendums.

Grassroots fundraising is a method of fundraising used by or for political candidates. This method has grown in popularity with the emergence of the Internet and its use by US presidential candidates like Howard Dean and Ron Paul . Grassroots fundraising is a way of financing campaigns for candidates who don’t have significant media exposure or candidates who are in opposition to the powerful lobby groups. It often involves mobilizing grassroots support to meet a specific fundraising goal, or it sets a specific day for grassroots supporters to donate to the campaign.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul is a congressman from Texas who employs the method of grassroots fundraising.

7.1: Interest Groups

7.1.1: The Constitutional Right to Petition the Government

Learning Objective

Describe the constitutional warrant for lobbying the government

Key Points

• The ability of individuals, groups, and corporations to lobby the government is protected by the right to petition in the First Amendment.
• The legality of lobbying took “strong and early root” in the new republic.
• Lobbying, properly defined, is subject to control by Congress.

Key Terms

First Amendment

The first of ten amendments to the constitution of the United States, which protects freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and the press.

direct lobbying

Direct lobbying refers to methods used by lobbyists to influence legislative bodies through direct communication with members of the legislative body, or with a government official who formulates legislation.

Supreme Court

The highest court in the United States.

The ability of individuals, groups, and corporations to lobby the government is protected by the right to petition in the First Amendment. It is protected by the Constitution as free speech; one accounting was that there were three Constitutional provisions which protect the freedom of interest groups to “present their causes to government”, and various decisions by the Supreme Court have upheld these freedoms over the course of two centuries . Corporations have been considered in some court decisions to have many of the same rights as citizens, including their right to lobby officials for what they want. As a result, the legality of lobbying took “strong and early root” in the new republic.

Value or Price

In 1953, after a lawsuit involving a congressional resolution authorizing a committee to investigate “all lobbying activities intended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation,” the Supreme Court narrowly construed “lobbying activities” to mean only “direct” lobbying–which the Court described as “representations made directly to the Congress, its members, or its committees”. It contrasted it with indirect lobbying: efforts to influence Congress indirectly by trying to change public opinion. The Court rejected a broader interpretation of “lobbying” out of First Amendment concerns, and thereby affirmed the earlier decision of the appeals court. The Supreme Court ruling was:

In support of the power of Congress it is argued that lobbying is within the regulatory power of Congress, that influence upon public opinion is indirect lobbying, since public opinion affects legislation; and that therefore attempts to influence public opinion are subject to regulation by the Congress. Lobbying, properly defined, is subject to control by Congress, . . . But the term cannot be expanded by mere definition so as to include forbidden subjects. Neither semantics nor syllogisms can break down the barrier which protects the freedom of people to attempt to influence other people by books and other public writings. . . . It is said that lobbying itself is an evil and a danger. We agree that lobbying by personal contact may be an evil and a potential danger to the best in legislative processes. It is said that indirect lobbying by the pressure of public opinion on the Congress is an evil and a danger. That is not an evil; it is a good, the healthy essence of the democratic process. . . .—Supreme Court decision in Rumely v. United States

Using the Courts

Drawing on the First Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court has protected lobbying as free speech in numerous rulings since the early republic.

7.1.2: Interest Groups

Learning Objective

Discuss the main actors who work for interest groups and seek to influence policy

Key Points

• Interest groups include corporations, charitable organizations, civil rights groups, neighborhood associations, professional, and trade associations.
• Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.
• Groups use varied methods to try to achieve their aims including lobbying, media campaigns, publicity stunts, polls, research, and policy briefings. Some groups are supported by powerful business or political interests and exert considerable influence on the political process.
• Some powerful Lobby groups have been accused of manipulating the democratic system for narrow commercial gain. and in some instances have been found guilty of corruption, fraud, bribery, and other serious crimes; lobbying has become increasingly regulated as a result.

Key Terms

interest groups

The term interest group refers to virtually any voluntary association that seeks to publicly promote and create advantages for its cause. It applies to a vast array of diverse organizations. This includes corporations, charitable organizations, civil rights groups, neighborhood associations, and professional and trade associations.

advocacy groups

Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.

Example

• There are many significant advocacy groups through history, some of which operate with different dynamics and could better be described as social movements. For example, Greenpeace is a non-governmental environmental organization with offices in over forty countries and with an international coordinating body in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Greenpeace states its goal is to “ensure the ability of the Earth to nurture life in all its diversity” and focuses its campaigning on worldwide issues such as global warming, deforestation, overfishing, commercial whaling, and anti-nuclear issues.

Interest Groups

Introduction

The term interest group refers to virtually any voluntary association that seeks to publicly promote and create advantages for its cause. It applies to a vast array of diverse organizations. This includes corporations, charitable organizations, civil rights groups, neighborhood associations, professional, and trade associations. Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.

Groups vary considerably in size, influence, and motive; some have wide ranging long term social purposes, others are focused and are a response to an immediate issue or concern. Motives for action may be based on a shared political, faith, moral, or commercial position. Groups use varied methods to try to achieve their aims including lobbying, media campaigns, publicity stunts, polls, research, and policy briefings. Some groups are supported by powerful business or political interests and exert considerable influence on the political process, while others have few such resources.

Some interest groups have developed into important social, political institutions or social movements. Some powerful Lobby groups have been accused of manipulating the democratic system for narrow commercial gain. In some instances, they have been found guilty of corruption, fraud, bribery, and other serious crimes; lobbying has become increasingly regulated as a result. Some groups, generally ones with less financial resources, may use direct action and civil disobedience, and in some cases are accused of being domestic extremists or a threat to the social order. Research is beginning to explore how advocacy groups use social media to facilitate civic engagement and collective action.

There are many significant advocacy groups throughout history, some of which operate with different dynamics and could better be described as social movements. There are some notable groups operating in different parts of the world. For example, Greenpeace is a non-governmental environmental organization with offices in over forty countries and with an international coordinating body in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Greenpeace states its goal is to “ensure the ability of the Earth to nurture life in all its diversity” and focuses its campaigning on worldwide issues such as global warming, deforestation, overfishing, commercial whaling, and anti-nuclear issues.

Greenpeace

Greenpeace is a non-governmental environmental organization with offices in over forty countries and with an international coordinating body in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Greenpeace states its goal is to “ensure the ability of the Earth to nurture life in all its diversity” and focuses its campaigning on world wide issues such as global warming, deforestation, overfishing, commercial whaling, and anti-nuclear issues. Greenpeace uses direct action, lobbying, and research to achieve its goals.

In some instances, advocacy groups have been convicted of illegal activity. Major examples include: 1) Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal Corrupt and fraudulent lobbying in relation to Native American gambling enterprises; 2) Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement between the Attorneys General of 46 states and the four largest US tobacco companies who agreed to pay $206 billion over the first twenty-five years of the agreement

7.1.3: Organization of Interest Groups

Learning Objective

Discuss the theories behind interest groups and their effects on government

Key Points

• An employers’ organization is an association of employers. The role and position of an employers’ organization differs from country to country, depending on the economic system of a country.
• Occupational organizations promote the professional and economic interests of workers in a particular occupation, industry, or trade, through interaction with the government, and by preparing advertising and other promotional campaigns to the public.
• Interest groups can be technical or non technical. Some are dedicated to unions while others to specific interests.
• Their organization and operations can be based on any of three theories: pluralism, neo-pluralism, and corporatism.

Key Terms

occupational organizations

Occupational organizations promote the professional and economic interests of workers in a particular occupation, industry, or trade, through interaction with the government, and by preparing advertising and other promotional campaigns to the public.

employers’ organization

An employers’ organization is an association of employers.

Introduction

A Special Interest Group (SIG) is a community with particular interest in advancing a specific area of knowledge, learning or technology.Members cooperate to affect or to produce solutions within their particular field, and may communicate, meet, and organize conferences. They may, in some cases, also advocate or lobby on a particular issue or on a range of issues but they are generally distinct from advocacy and pressure groups which are normally set up for the specific political aim; this distinction is not firm however and some organizations can adapt and change their focus over time. Public policy, in general, is a dynamic interplay of decisions between the President, Congress and interest groups.

Organizations may also have Special Interest Groups which are normally focused on a mutual interest or shared characteristic of a subset of members of the organization. An important example for this are trade unions, educational unions, and labor unions .

National Educators Association

The NEA is a prominent and powerful interest group

Much work has been undertaken by academics in trying to categorize how pressure groups operate, particularly in relation to governmental policy creation.

The field is dominated by several differing schools of thought:

1. Pluralism: This is based upon the understanding that pressure groups operate in competition with one another and play a key role in the political system. They do this by acting as a counterweight to undue concentrations of power. However, this pluralist theory (formed primarily by American academics) reflects a more open and fragmented political system similar to that in countries like the United States. Under neo-pluralism, a concept of political communities developed that is more similar to the British form of government
2. Neo-Pluralism: This is based on the concept of political communities in that pressure groups and other similar bodies are organised around a government department and its network of client groups. The members of this network co-operate during the policy making process.
3. Corporatism: Some pressure groups are backed by private businesses that have heavy influence on the legislature.

7.1.4: The Characteristics of Members

Learning Objective

Explain the benefits and incentives of joining interest groups

Key Points

• An interest group is a group of individuals who share common objectives, and whose aim is to influence policymakers.
• Membership includes a group of people that join an interest group and unite under one cause. They may or may not have an opinion on some of the issues the staff pursues.
• Similarly, staff are the leaders of this group that heads up the membership. With the membership united under one cause, the staff has the ability to pursue other issues that the membership may disagree on, but will remain members united by the primary cause.
• Mancur Lloyd Olson sought to understand the logical basis of interest group membership and participation. In his first book, he theorized that “only a separate and ‘selective’ incentive will stimulate a rational individual in a latent group to act in a group-oriented way.

Key Terms

interest group

Collections of members with shared knowledge, status, or goals. In many cases, these groups advocate for particular political or social issues.

mancur lloyd olson

Mancur Lloyd Olson, a leading American economist, sought to understand the logical basis of interest group membership and participation. In his first book, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (1965), he theorized that “only a separate and ‘selective’ incentive will stimulate a rational individual in a latent group to act in a group-oriented way”; that is, members of a large group will not act in the group’s common interest unless motivated by personal gains.

Example

• Membership interests are organizations that represent individuals for social, business, labor, or charitable purposes, in order to achieve civil or political goals. This includes the NAACP (represents African-American interests), the Sierra Club (represents environmental interests), the NRA (represents Second Amendment interests), and Common Cause (represents interests in an increase in voter turnout and knowledge).

Introduction

An interest group is a group of individuals who share common objectives, and whose aim is to influence policymakers. Institutional interests are organizations that represent other organizations, whose rules and policies are custom-fit to the needs and wants of the organizations they serve. This includes the American Cotton Manufacturers (which represents the generally congruous southern textile mills) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (which represents the multitude of wants of American businesses).

Membership interests are organizations that represent individuals for social, business, labor, or charitable purposes, in order to achieve civil or political goals. This includes the NAACP(represents African-American interests), the Sierra Club (represents environmental interests), the NRA (represents Second Amendment interests, ), and Common Cause (represents interests in an increase in voter turnout and knowledge). Membership includes a group of people that join an interest group and unite under one cause. They may or may not have an opinion on some of the issues the staff pursues. Similarly, staff are the leaders of this group that heads up the membership. With the membership united under one cause, the staff has the ability to pursue other issues that the membership may disagree on, but will remain members united by the primary cause.

NRA Headquarters

The headquarters of the NRA, an interest group, located in Fairfax Virginia, USA. The NRA represents an interest group advocating for the rights to own weapons under the Second Amendment of the United States.

Benefits and Incentives

The general theory is that individuals must be enticed with some type of benefit to join an interest group. Known as the free rider problem, it refers to the difficulty of obtaining members of a particular interest group when the benefits are already reaped without membership. For instance, an interest group dedicated to improving farming standards will fight for the general goal of improving farming for every farmer, even those who are not members of that particular interest group. Thus, there is no real incentive to join an interest group and pay dues if the farmer will receive that benefit anyway. Interest groups must receive dues and contributions from its members in order to accomplish its agenda. While every individual in the world would benefit from a cleaner environment, an Environmental protection interest group does not, in turn, receive monetary help from every individual in the world.

Selective material benefits are benefits that are usually given in monetary benefits. For instance, if an interest group gives a material benefit to their member, they could give them travel discounts, free meals at certain restaurants, or free subscriptions to magazines, newspapers, or journals. Many trade and professional interest groups tend to give these types of benefits to their members. A selective solidary benefit is another type of benefit offered to members or prospective members of an interest group. These incentives involve benefits like “socializing congeniality, the sense of group membership and identification, the status resulting from membership, fun and conviviality, the maintenance of social distinctions, and so on. A solidary incentive is one in which the rewards for participation are socially derived and created out of the act of association.

An expressive incentive is another basic type of incentive or benefit offered to being a member of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits likely joined to express an ideological or moral value that they believe in. Some include free speech, civil rights, economic justice, or political equality. To obtain these types of benefits, members would simply pay dues, donating their time or money to get a feeling of satisfaction from expressing a political value. Also, it would not matter if the interest group achieved their goal; these members would merely be able to say they helped out in the process of trying to obtain these goals, which is the expressive incentive that they got in the first place. The types of interest groups that rely on expressive benefits or incentives would be environmental groups and groups who claim to be lobbying for the public interest.

Collective Action

Mancur Lloyd Olson, a leading American economist, sought to understand the logical basis of interest group membership and participation. The reigning political theories of his day granted groups an almost primordial status. Some appealed to a natural human instinct for herding, others ascribed the formation of groups that are rooted in kinship to the process of modernization. Olson offered a radically different account of the logical basis of organized collective action. In his first book, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (1965), he theorized that “only a separate and ‘selective’ incentive will stimulate a rational individual in a latent group to act in a group-oriented way”; that is, members of a large group will not act in the group’s common interest unless motivated by personal gains.

7.1.5: Motivations Behind the Formation of Interest Groups

Learning Objective

Identify the benefits and incentives for individuals to join interest groups

Key Points

• The free rider problem refers to the difficulty of obtaining members of a particular interest group when the benefits are already reaped without membership.
• A collective good refers to something of value that cannot be withheld from a nonmember of a group.
• Selective material benefits are benefits that are usually given in monetary benefits. For instance, if an interest group gives a material benefit to their members, they could give them rewards for their efforts.
• A selective solidary benefit refers to the benefits of belonging to a community of shared principles and interests. Members join for the benefits of group distinction and the status resulting from membership.
• An expressive incentive is another basic type of incentive or benefit offered to being a member of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits likely joined to express an ideological or moral value that they believe in.
• A purposive incentive refers to a benefit that comes from serving a cause or principle; people who join because of these are usually passionate about the cause or principle.

Key Terms

expressive incentive

An expressive incentive is another basic type of incentive or benefit offered to being a member of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits likely joined to express an ideological or moral value that they believe in. Some include free speech, civil rights, economic justice, or political equality.

solidary benefit

A selective solidary benefit is another type of benefit offered to members or prospective members of an interest group. These incentives involve benefits like “socializing congeniality, the sense of group membership and identification, the status resulting from membership, fun and conviviality, the maintenance of social distinctions, and so on.

selective material benefits

Selective material benefits are benefits that are usually given in monetary benefits. For instance, if an interest group gives a material benefit to their member, they could give them travel discounts, free meals at certain restaurants, or free subscriptions to magazines, newspapers, or journals.

free rider

In economics, collective bargaining, psychology and political science, “free riders” are those who consume more than their fair share of a resource, or shoulder less than a fair share of the costs of its production. Free riding is usually considered to be an economic “problem” only when it leads to the non-production or under-production of a public good (and thus to Pareto inefficiency), or when it leads to the excessive use of a common property resource. The free rider problem is the question of how to prevent free riding from taking place (or at least limit its negative effects) in these situations.

purposive incentive

A purposive incentive refers to a benefit that comes from serving a cause or principle; people who join because of these are usually passionate about the cause or principle.

collective goods

items and resourcses that benefit everyone, and from which people cannot be excluded

Example

• To illustrate the free rider problem and collective goods, take for instance a tax write-off for a better environment. While every individual in the world would benefit from a cleaner environment, an environmental protection interest group does not, in turn, receive monetary help from every individual in the world.

Why Interest Groups Form

Introduction

The general theory is that individuals must be enticed with some type of benefit to join an interest group. Known as the free rider problem, it refers to the difficulty of obtaining members of a particular interest group when the benefits are already reaped without membership. For instance, an interest group dedicated to improving farming standards will fight for the general goal of improving farming for every farmer, even those who are not members of that particular interest group. Thus, there is no real incentive to join an interest group and pay dues if the farmer will receive that benefit anyway. Interest groups must receive dues and contributions from its members in order to accomplish its agenda. A collective good refers to something of value that cannot be withheld from a nonmember of a group. To illustrate the free rider problem and collective goods, take environmental groups who advocate for a cleaner environment. While every individual in the world would benefit from a cleaner environment, an environmental protection interest group does not, in turn, receive monetary help from every individual in the world.

Types of Benefits and Incentives

Selective material benefits are benefits that are usually given in monetary benefits. For instance, if an interest group gives a material benefit to their member, they could give them travel discounts, free meals at certain restaurants, or free subscriptions to magazines, newspapers, or journals. Many trade and professional interest groups tend to give these types of benefits to their members. A selective solidary benefit is another type of benefit offered to members or prospective members of an interest group. These incentives involve benefits like socializing congeniality, the sense of group membership and identification, the status resulting from membership, fun and conviviality, the maintenance of social distinctions, and so on. A solidary incentive is one in which the rewards for participation are socially derived and created out of the act of association.

An expressive incentive is another basic type of incentive or benefit offered to being a member of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits likely joined to express an ideological or moral value that they believe in. Some include free speech, civil rights, economic justice, or political equality . To obtain these types of benefits, members would simply pay dues, donating their time or money to get a feeling of satisfaction from expressing a political value. Also, it would not matter if the interest group achieved their goal. These members would merely be able to say they helped out in the process of trying to obtain these goals, which is the expressive incentive that they got in the first place. The types of interest groups that rely on expressive benefits or incentives would be environmental groups and groups who claim to be lobbying for the public interest. A purposive incentive refers to a benefit that comes from serving a cause or principle; people who join because of these are usually passionate about the cause or principle .

Protests at the 2008 Republican National Convention

A purposive incentive refers to a benefit that comes from serving a cause or principle; people who join because of these are usually passionate about the cause or principle.

Demonstration against Ahmadinejad in Rio

An expressive incentive is another basic type of incentive or benefit offered to being a member of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits likely joined to express an ideological or moral value that they believe in.

7.1.6: The Function of Interest Groups

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the function of interest groups

Key Points

• A single-issue group may form in response to a particular issue area sometimes in response to a single event or threat. In some cases initiatives initially championed by advocacy groups later become institutionalized as important elements of civic life.
• Anti-defamation organizations issue responses or criticisms to real or supposed slights of any sort by an individual or group against a specific segment of the population that the organization exists to represent.
• Watchdog groups exist to provide oversight and rating of actions or media by various outlets, both government and corporate. They may also index personalities, organizations, products and activities in databases to provide coverage and rating of the value of such entities.
• Lobby groups work for a change to the law or the maintenance of a particular law and big businesses fund very considerable lobbying influence on legislators, for example in the U.S. and in the U.K. where lobbying first developed.
• Legal defense funds provide funding for the legal defense for, or legal action against, individuals or groups related to their specific interests or target demographic by filing Amicus Curiae in court.

Key Terms

legal defense funds

Legal defense funds provide funding for the legal defense for, or legal action against, individuals or groups related to their specific interests or target demographic.

lobby groups

The act of attempting to persuade a group of people that influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

anti-defamation organizations

Anti-defamation organizations issue responses or criticisms to real or supposed slights of any sort by an individual or group against a specific segment of the population that the organization exists to represent.

advocacy group

An advocacy group is a group or an organization that tries to influence the government but does not hold power in the government.

watchdog groups

Watchdog groups exist to provide oversight and rating of actions or media by various outlets, both government and corporate.

Example

• Groups representing broad interests of a group may be formed with the purpose of benefiting the group over an expended period of time and in many ways; examples include Consumer organizations, Professional associations, Trade associations and Trade unions.

Introduction

An advocacy group is a group or an organization that tries to influence the government but does not hold power in the government . A single-issue group may form in response to a particular issue area sometimes in response to a single event or threat. In some cases initiatives initially championed by advocacy groups later become institutionalized as important elements of civic life (for example universal education or regulation of doctors). Groups representing broad interests of a group may be formed with the purpose of benefiting the group over an extended period of time and in many ways; examples include Consumer organizations, Professional associations, Trade associations and Trade unions.

Health News Watchdog

Media watchdogs ensure that media coverage is factually accurate and as objective as possible.

Activities

Advocacy groups exist in a wide variety of genres based upon their most pronounced activities . Anti-defamation organizations issue responses or criticisms to real or supposed slights of any sort by an individual or group against a specific segment of the population that the organization exists to represent. Watchdog groups exist to provide oversight and rating of actions or media by various outlets, both government and corporate. They may also index personalities, organizations, products and activities in databases to provide coverage and rating of the value or viability of such entities to target demographics.

Support Public Libraries Advocacy

Advocacy groups seek to influence government policy. In cases such as public libraries, advocacy groups have been critical in lobbying for continued funding across the nation.

Lobby groups work for a change to the law or the maintenance of a particular law and big businesses fund very considerable lobbying influence on legislators, for example in the U.S. and in the U.K. where lobbying first developed. Legal defense funds provide funding for the legal defense for, or legal action against, individuals or groups related to their specific interests or target demographic. This is often accompanied by one of the above types of advocacy groups filing Amicus curiae if the cause at stake serves the interests of both the legal defense fund and the other advocacy groups.

7.1.7: Interest Groups vs. Political Parties

Learning Objective

Explain how competing business interests lobby to influence legislation in Congress

Key Points

• A party or its leading members may be offered money or gifts-in-kind. These donations are the traditional source of funding for all right-of-center cadre parties.
• Advocacy groups exert influence on political parties, mostly through campaign finance.
• Left-wing parties are often funded by organized labor. When the Labor Party was first formed, it was largely funded by trade unions.

Key Term

advocacy groups

Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.

Example

• George W. Bush’s re-election campaign in 2004 was the most expensive in American history. It was financed mainly by large corporations and industrial interests.

Political Parties

Political parties are lobbied vigorously by organizations, businesses, and special interest groups such as trades unions. A party or its leading members may be offered money or gifts-in-kind. These donations are the traditional source of funding for all right-of-center cadre parties. Starting in the late 19^th century, these parties were opposed by the new founded left-of-center workers’ parties. They started a new party type, the mass membership party, and a new source of political fundraising, membership dues.

Social Movements

Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals or organizations which focus on specific political or social issues. In other words, they carry out, resist or undo a social change. Political science and sociology have developed a variety of theories and empirical research on social movements. For example, some research in political science highlights the relation between popular movements and the formation of new political parties as well as discussing the function of social movements in relation to agenda setting and influence on politics.

Advocacy Groups

In most liberal democracies, advocacy groups tend to use the bureaucracy as the main channel of influence. In liberal democracies, bureaucracy is where the decision-making power lies. Advocacy groups can also exert influence on political parties, and have often done so. The main way groups exert their influence is through campaign finance. In the UK, the conservative party’s campaigns are often funded by large corporations, as many of the conservative party’s campaigns reflect the interests of businesses. In the US, George W. Bush’s re-election campaign in 2004 was the most expensive campaign in American history. It was financed mainly by large corporations and industrial interests . In contrast to the conservative right, left-wing parties are often funded by organized labor. When the Labor Party was first formed, it was largely funded by trade unions. Similarly, political parties are often formed as a result of group pressure. For example, the Labour Party in the UK was formed out of the new trade-union movement, which lobbied for the rights of workers.

George W. Bush

George W. Bush’s re-election campaign in 2004 was largely funded by special interest groups such as financial banks and large industrial corporations.

More often than not, lobbying coalitions enter into conflict with each other. For example, in the issue of free trade, some corporate lobbyists seek to eliminate or dismantle tariffs, promoting free trade and the free movement of goods and services. By contrast, lobbyists representing farmers and rural interests seek to maintain or reinforce existing tariffs. It is in their best interest to preserve the status quo. If tariffs are reduced or eliminated, then American farmers are forced to compete with farmers from other trading countries. As these coalitions enter into conflict, congressmen must choose how to vote in the face of different pressures from different constituencies.

7.2: Interest Group Strategies

7.2.1: Direct Lobbying

Direct lobbying is used to influence legislative bodies directly via communication with members of the legislative body.

Learning Objective

Describe direct lobbying

Key Points

• During the direct lobbying process, the lobbyist introduces to the legislator information that may supply favors, may otherwise be missed or makes political threats.
• Direct lobbying is different from grassroots lobbying, a process that uses direct communication with the general public.
• Direct lobbying is often used alongside grassroots lobbying.

Key Terms

grassroots lobbying

A process that uses direct communication with the general public, which, in turn, contacts and influences the government.

legislative bodies

Legislative bodies are a kind of deliberative assembly with the power to pass, amend and repeal laws.

direct lobbying

Direct lobbying refers to methods used by lobbyists to influence legislative bodies through direct communication with members of the legislative body, or with a government official who formulates legislation.

Direct lobbying refers to methods used by lobbyists to influence legislative bodies through direct communication with members of the legislative body, or with a government official who participates in formulating legislation .

Direct Lobbying

Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are subject to direct lobbying tactics by lobbyists.

During the direct lobbying process, the lobbyist introduces to the legislator information that may supply favors, may otherwise be missed or makes political threats. A common use of direct lobbying is to persuade the general public about a ballot proposal. In this case, the public is considered to be the legislator. This aspect of direct lobbying attempts to alter the legislature before it is placed on the ballot. Communications regarding a ballot measure are also considered direct lobbying. Direct lobbying is different from grassroots lobbying, a process that uses direct communication with the general public, which, in turn, contacts and influences the government.

Washington, D.C. is the home to many firms that employ these strategies. Lobbyists often attempt to facilitate market entry through the adoption of new rules, or the revision of old ones. They also remove regulatory obstacles for a company looking to grow, while also stopping others from attaining regulatory changes that would harm a company’s cause.

Meta-analysis reveals that direct lobbying is often used alongside grassroots lobbying. There is evidence that groups are much more likely to directly lobby previous allies rather than opponents. Allies are also directly lobbied if a counter lobby is brought to light. When groups have strong ties to a legislator’s district, they will use a combination of grassroots and direct lobbying, even if the legislator’s original position does not support theirs. When strong district ties are not present, groups will rely on direct lobbying with committee allies.

7.2.2: Direct Techniques

Lobbyists employ direct lobbying in the United States to influence United States legislative bodies through direct interaction with legislators.

Learning Objective

Identify the direct techniques used by interest groups to influence policy and what groups would use them

Key Points

• Revolving door is a term used to describe the cycling of former federal employees into jobs as lobbyists while former lobbyists are pulled into government positions.
• There have been several efforts to regulate the lobbying sector including the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 and the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act.
• Direct lobbying is different from grassroots lobbying, a process that uses direct communication with the general public, who in turn, contacts and influences the government.

Key Terms

Lobbying Disclosure Act

The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 signed into law by President Bill Clinton was revised in 2006 to require the registration of all lobbying entities to occur shortly after the individual lobbyist makes a first plan to lobby any highly ranked federal official.

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, signed September 15, 2007 by President Bush, requires a quarterly report on lobby spending, places restrictions on gifts to Congress members, provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills, and places restrictions on the revolving door in direct lobbying.

direct lobbying

Direct lobbying in the United States consists of methods used by lobbyists to influence U.S. legislative bodies through direct interaction with those who have influence on the legislature.

Direct lobbying in the United States consists of methods used by lobbyists to influence the United States legislative bodies . Interest groups from many sectors spend billions of dollars on lobbying. There are three lobbying laws in the U.S. that require a lobbying entity to be registered, allow nonprofit organizations to lobby without losing their nonprofit status, require lobbying organizations to present quarterly reports, places restrictions on gifts to U.S. Congress members, and makes it mandatory for earmarks to be disclosed in expenditure bills. Revolving door, when a former federal employee becomes a lobbyist and vice-versa, occurs in the direct lobbying sector.

Washington D.C., Lobbyist Central

As Washington D.C. is the seat of the United States Federal Government, it attracts a high concentration of lobbyists.

Theory

Lobbying is a common practice at all levels of legislature. Direct lobbying is done either through direct communication with members or employees of the legislative body, or with a government official who participates in formulating legislation. During the direct lobbying process, the lobbyist introduces statistics that will inform the legislator of any recent information that might otherwise be missed, and may make political threats or promises, and/or grant favors. Communications regarding a ballot measure are also considered direct lobbying. Direct lobbying is different from grassroots lobbying, a process that uses direct communication with the general public, who in turn contact and influence the government.

The most common goals of lobbyists are:

• to facilitate market entry through the adoption of new rules, or the repeal or revision of old ones.
• to remove regulatory obstacles that prevent the growth of a company.
• to stop others from attaining regulatory changes that would harm the business of one’s company’s or one’s cause.

Direct lobbying is often used alongside grassroots lobbying. When groups have strong ties to a legislator’s district, those groups will use a combination of grassroots and direct lobbying, even if the legislator’s original position does not support theirs, which may help groups expand their coalitions. When strong district ties are not present, groups tend to rely on direct lobbying with committee allies.

Spending

In 2010, the total amount spent on lobbying in the U.S. was $3.5 billion . The top sectors for lobbying as of 2010 are financial, insurance, and real estate, with $4,405,909,610 spent on lobbying. Health is the second largest sector by spending, with $4,369,979,173 recorded in 2010.

Spending on Lobbying

This graph compares the number of lobbyists with the amount of lobby spending.

The oil and gas sector companies are among the biggest spenders on lobbying. During the 2008 elections, oil companies spent a total of $132.2 million into lobbying for law reform. The three biggest spenders from the oil and gas sector are Koch Industries (1,931,562), Exxon ( ), and the Mobil Corporation (1,192,361).

Lobbying Laws

Lobbying Disclosure Act

The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 was signed into law by President Bill Clinton . Under a January 1, 2006 revision, the act requires the registration of all lobbying entities with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The registration must occur within 45 days after the individual lobbyist makes a first plan to lobby. Penalizations include fines of over $50,000 and being reported to the United States Attorney.

Public Charity Lobbying Law

The Public Charity Lobbying Law gives nonprofit organizations the opportunity to spend about 5% of their revenue on lobbying without losing their nonprofit status with the Internal Revenue Service. Organizations must elect to use the Public Charity Law, and so increase the allowable spending on lobbying to increase to 20% for the first $500,000 of their annual expenditures. Another aspect to the law is the spending restrictions between direct lobbying and grassroots lobbying—no more than 20% can be spent on grassroots lobbying at any given time, while 100% of the lobbying expenditures can be on direct lobbying.

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act was signed on September 15, 2007 by President Bush, amending the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. The bill includes provisions that require a quarterly report on lobby spending by organizations, places restrictions on gifts to Congress members, provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills, and places restrictions on the revolving door in direct lobbying.

Revolving Door

Revolving door is a term used to describe the cycling of former federal employees into jobs as lobbyists, while former lobbyists are pulled into government positions. Government officials with term limits form valuable connections that could help influence future law-making even when they are out of office. The other form of the revolving door is pushing lobbyists into government positions, developing connections, and returning into the lobbying world to use said connections. A total of 326 lobbyists are part of the Barack Obama Administration . In the past, 527 lobbyists were part of the Bush Administration, compared to 358 during the Clinton Administration.

7.2.3: Indirect Techniques

Grassroots lobbying asks the public to contact legislators concerning the issue at hand, as opposed to going to the legislators directly.

Learning Objective

Identify the indirect techniques used by interest groups to influence legislation

Key Points

• A grassroots lobby puts pressure on the legislature to address the concerns of a particular group by mobilizing that group, usually through raising public awareness and running advocacy campaigns.
• A group or individual classified as a lobbyist must submit regular disclosure reports; however, reporting requirements vary from state to state.
• The unique characteristic of grassroots lobbying, in contrast to other forms of lobbying, is that it involves stimulating the politics of specific communities.

Key Term

indirect lobbying

Grassroots lobbying, or indirect lobbying, is a form of lobbying that focuses on raising awareness in the general population of a particular cause at the local level, with the intention of influencing the legislative process.

Grassroots lobbying

Grassroots lobbying, or indirect lobbying, is a form of lobbying that focuses on raising awareness for a particular cause at the local level, with the intention of influencing the legislative process. Grassroots lobbying is an approach that separates itself from direct lobbying through the act of asking the general public to contact legislators and government officials concerning the issue at hand, as opposed to conveying the message to the legislators directly.

The unique characteristic of grassroots lobbying, in contrast to other forms of lobbying, is that it involves stimulating the politics of specific communities. Interest groups, however, do not recruit candidates to run for office. Rather, they choose to influence candidates and public officials using indirect tactics of advocacy.

Tactics

The main two tactics used in indirect advocacy are contacting the press (by either a press conference or press release), and mobilizing the mass membership to create a movement.

Media Lobbying

Grassroots lobbying oftentimes implement the use of media, ranging from television to print, in order to expand their outreach. Other forms of free media that make a large impact are things like boycotting, protesting, and demonstrations.

Social Media

The trend of the past decade has been the use of social media outlets to reach people across the globe. Using social media is, by nature, a grassroots strategy.

Mass movements

Mobilizing a specific group identified by the lobby puts pressure on the legislature to address the concerns of this group. These tactics are used after the lobbying group gains the public’s trust and support through public speaking, passing out flyers, and even campaigning through mass media.

Trends

Trends from the past decade in grassroots lobbying include an increase in the aggressive recruitment of volunteers, as well as starting campaigns early on, before the legislature has made a decision. Also, lobbying groups have been able to create interactive websites and utilize social media (including Facebook and Twitter) to email, recruit volunteers, assign them tasks, and keep the goal of the lobbying group on track.

Regulations

Lobbying is protected by the First Amendment rights of speech, association, and petition . Federal law does not mandate grassroots lobbying disclosure, yet 36 states regulate grassroots lobbying. There are 22 states that define lobbying as direct or indirect communication to public officials, and 14 additional states that define it as any attempt to influence public officials. A group or individual classified as a lobbyist must submit regular disclosure reports; however, reporting requirements vary from state to state. Some states’ disclosure requirements are minimal and require only registration, while other states’ requirements are extensive, including the filing of monthly to quarterly expense reports, which include all legislative activity relevant to the individual or groups activities, amounts of contributions and donations, and the names and addresses of contributors and specified expenses. Penalties range from civil fines to criminal penalties if regulations are not complied with.

Bill of Rights

The First Amendment rights of free speech, freedom of association, and freedom of petition protect lobbying, including grassroots lobbying.

7.2.4: Cultivating Access

Access is important and often means a one-on-one meeting with a legislator.

Learning Objective

Describe how lobbying and campaign finance intersect

Key Points

• Getting access can sometimes be difficult, but there are various avenues: email, personal letters, phone calls, face-to-face meetings, meals, get-togethers, and even chasing after congresspersons in the Capitol building.
• When getting access is difficult, there are ways to wear down the walls surrounding a legislator.
• One of the ways in which lobbyists gain access is through assisting congresspersons with campaign finance by arranging fundraisers, assembling PACs, and seeking donations from other clients.

Key Terms

PACs

A political action committee (PAC) is any organization in the United States that campaigns for or against political candidates, ballot initiatives or legislation.

access

A way or means of approaching or entering; an entrance; a passage.

Access is important and often means a one-on-one meeting with a legislator . Getting access can sometimes be difficult, but there are various means one can try: email, personal letters, phone calls, face-to-face meetings, meals, get-togethers, and even chasing after congresspersons in the Capitol building. One lobbyist described his style of getting access as “not to have big formal meetings, but to catch members on the fly as they’re walking between the House and the office buildings. “

Cultivating Access

Connections count: Congressperson Tom Perriello with lobbyist Heather Podesta at an inauguration party for Barack Obama.

When getting access is difficult, there are ways to wear down the walls surrounding a legislator. Lobbyist Jack Abramoff explains:

Access is vital in lobbying. If you can’t get in your door, you can’t make your case. Here we had a hostile senator, whose staff was hostile, and we had to get in. So that’s the lobbyist safe-cracker method: throw fundraisers, raise money, and become a big donor. —Abramoff in 2011

One of the ways in which lobbyists gain access is through assisting congresspersons with campaign finance by arranging fundraisers, assembling PACs, and seeking donations from other clients. Many lobbyists become campaign treasurers and fundraisers for congresspersons. This helps incumbent members cope with the substantial amounts of time required to raise money for reelection bids; one estimate was that Congresspersons had to spend a third of their working hours on fundraising activity. PACs are fairly easy to set up; all they require is a lawyer and about $300.

An even steeper possible reward which can be used in exchange for favors is the lure of a high-paying job as a lobbyist. According to Abramoff, one of the best ways to “get what he wanted” was to offer a high-ranking congressional aide a high-paying job after they decided to leave public office. When such a promise of future employment was accepted, according to Abramoff, “we owned them”. This helped the lobbying firm exert influence on that particular congressperson by going through the staff member or aide. At the same time, it is hard for outside observers to argue that a particular decision, such as hiring a former staffer into a lobbying position, was purely as a reward for some past political decision, since staffers often have valuable connections and policy experience needed by lobbying firms. Research economist Mirko Draca suggested that hiring a staffer was an ideal way for a lobbying firm to try to sway their old bosses—a congressperson—in the future.

7.2.5: Mobilizing Public Opinion

Increasingly, lobbyists seek to influence politics by putting together large coalitions and using outside lobbying to sway public opinion.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between direct and indirect lobbying efforts

Key Points

• Efforts to influence Congress indirectly, by trying to change public opinion, are often referred to as indirect lobbying.
• Larger, more diverse, and more wealthy coalitions tend to be the most effective at outside lobbying (the “strength in numbers” principle applies).
• Increasingly, in order to influence elections, lobbyists have put together large coalitions and mobilized outside lobbying efforts aimed at swaying and controlling public opinion.

Key Terms

indirect lobbying

Efforts to influence Congress indirectly by trying to change public opinion. These efforts depend on the fact that politicians must frequently appeal to the public during regular election cycles.

direct lobbying

Direct lobbying refers to methods used by lobbyists to influence legislative bodies through direct communication with members of the legislative body, or with a government official who formulates legislation.

public opinion

The opinion of the public, the popular view.

In 1953, following a lawsuit that included a congressional resolution that authorized a governmental committee to investigate “all lobbying activities intended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation,” the Supreme Court narrowly construed “lobbying activities” to mean only “direct” lobbying. The Court defined this “direct” method of lobbying as “representations made directly to the Congress, its members, or its committees”. It contrasted this with indirect lobbying, which it defined as efforts to influence Congress indirectly by trying to change public opinion.

Mobilizing Public Opinion

Large health notices on tobacco products is one way in which the anti-smoking lobby and the government have tried to mobilize public opinion against smoking.

Increasingly, lobbyists seek to influence politics by putting together coalitions and by utilizing outside lobbying to mobilize public opinion on issues. Larger, more diverse, and more wealthy coalitions tend to be more effective at outside lobbying (the “strength in numbers” principle often applies). These groups have been defined as “sustainable coalitions of similarly situated individual organizations in pursuit of like-minded goals. ” According to one study, it is often difficult for a lobbyist to influence a staff member in Congress directly, because staffers tend to be well-informed, and because they frequently hear views from competing interests. As an indirect tactic, lobbyists often try to manipulate public opinion which, in turn, can sometimes exert pressure on congresspersons, who must frequently appeal to that public during electoral campaigns. One method for exerting this indirect pressure is the use of mass media. Interest groups often cultivate contacts with reporters and editors and encourage these individuals to write editorials and cover stories that will influence public opinion regarding a particular issue. Because of the important connection between public opinion and voting, this may have the secondary effect of influencing Congress. According to analyst Ken Kollman, it is easier to sway public opinion than a congressional staff member, because it is possible to bombard the public with “half-truths, distortion, scare tactics, and misinformation. ” Kollman suggests there should be two goals in these types of efforts. First, communicate to policy makers that there is public support behind a particular issue, and secondly, increase public support for that issue among constituents. Kollman asserted that this type of outside lobbying is a “powerful tool” for interest group leaders. In a sense, using these criteria, one could consider James Madison as having engaged in outside lobbying. After the Constitution was proposed, Madison wrote many of the 85 newspaper editorials that argued for people to support the Constitution. These writings later came to be known as the Federalist Papers. As a result of Madison’s “lobbying” effort, the Constitution was ratified, although there were narrow margins of victory in four of the states.

Lobbying today generally requires mounting a coordinated campaign, which can include targeted blitzes of telephone calls, letters, and emails to congressional lawmakers. It can also involve more public demonstrations, such as marches down the Washington Mall, or topical bus caravans. These are often put together by lobbyists who coordinate a variety of interest group leaders to unite behind a hopefully simple, easy-to-grasp, and persuasive message.

7.2.6: Using Electoral Politics

A number of interest groups have sought out electoral politics as a means of gaining access and influence on broader American policies.

Learning Objective

Give an example of an interest group making determined use of electoral politics

Key Points

• One example of an interest group using electoral politics is the National Caucus of Labor Committees.
• in 1972, the NCLC launched the U.S. Labor Party (USLP), a registered political party, as its electoral arm. They later nominated LaRouche for President of the United States.
• The National Caucus of Labor Committees (NCLC) is a political cadre organization in the United States founded and controlled by political activist Lyndon LaRouche, who has sometimes described it as a “philosophical association”.

Key Terms

electoral politics

An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.

interest group

Collections of members with shared knowledge, status, or goals. In many cases, these groups advocate for particular political or social issues.

All electoral politics are interest politics in some sense. Over the course of American history, a number of interest groups have sought out electoral politics as a means of gaining access and influence on broader American policies. One example of an interest group using electoral politics is the National Caucus of Labor Committees (NCLC).

The NCLC is a political cadre organization in the United States, founded and controlled by political activist Lyndon LaRouche, who has sometimes described it as a “philosophical association. “

Lyndon LaRouche

LaRouche was the leader of the National Caucus of Labor Committees, an interest group that later developed a distinct political party that nominated LaRouche for president of the U.S.

LaRouche is the NCLC’s founder and the inspiration for its political views. (For more information on these views see the article “Political Views of Lyndon LaRouche,” as well as the main article titled “Lyndon LaRouche. ” An overview of LaRouche’s organizations is in “LaRouche movement. “) The highest group within the NCLC is the “National Executive Committee” (NEC), described as the “inner leadership circle” or “an elite circle of insiders” that “oversees policy. ” The next most senior group is the “National Committee” (NC), which is reportedly “one step beneath the NEC. “

In 1972, the NCLC launched the U.S. Labor Party (USLP), a registered political party, as its electoral arm. In 1976, they nominated LaRouche for President of the United States on the Labor Party ticket, along with numerous candidates for lower office. In 1979, LaRouche changed his political strategy to allow him to run in the Democratic primaries, rather than as a third party candidate. This resulted in the USLP being replaced by the National Democratic Policy Committee (NDPC) a political action committee unassociated with the Democratic National Committee.

7.3: Types of Interest Groups

7.3.1: Business and Economic Interest Groups

Economic interest groups advocate for the economic benefit of their members, and business interests groups are a prominent type of economic interest group.

Learning Objective

Identify the organization and purpose of business and economic interest groups

Key Points

• Economic interest groups are one of the five broad categories of interest groups in the US.
• These groups advocate for the economic interest and benefits of their members.
• Economic interest groups are varied and for and given issue there will be large number of competing interest groups. These category includes groups representing representing business, labor, professional and agricultural interests.
• Business interest groups generally promote corporate or employer interests.

Key Terms

business group

a collection of parent and subsidiary companies that function as a single economic entity through a common source of control

partisan

An adherent to a party or faction.

Business and Economic Interest Groups

Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, through advocacy, public campaigns and even by lobbying governments to make changes in public policy. There are a wide variety of interest groups representing a variety of constituencies.

Economic Interest Groups

Economic interest groups are one of the five broad categories of interest groups in the US. These groups advocate for the economic interest and benefits of their members. Economic interest groups are varied, and for any given issue there will be a large number of competing interest groups. Categories of economic interest groups include those representing business, labor, professional and agricultural interests.

Business Interest Groups

Business interest groups generally promote corporate or employer interests. Larger corporations often maintain their own lobbyists to work on behalf of their specific interests. Companies and organizations will also come together in larger groups to work together on general business interests.

Umbrella organizations such as the US Chambers of Commerce (USCC) work around general business interests. While the name might suggest that this is a government agency, the USCC represents various business and trade organizations, and was formed as a counterbalance to the growing power of the labor movement in 1912. The USCC uses a wide variety of strategies and tactics in its work including lobbying or representation, and monitoring various laws and programs. USCC’s work is at times more partisan; for example, it might endorse a specific candidates.

US Chamber of Commerce

This banner celebrating both jobs and free enterprise hung outside of the US Chamber of Commerce to commemorate the groups hundredth year.

Another example of an umbrella business interest group is the US Women’s Chamber of Congress (USWCC). The USWCC’s work could be described as agenda setting, as their work representing women in business attempts to bring attention to an issue that had been neglected. Like other business interest groups, USWCC will work though legal and lobbying to gain benefits for its constituency.

Because of how numerous and well funded business interest groups tend to be, there is always a concern that they are interfering with, rather than enhancing, the democratic process.

7.3.2: Labor Interest Groups

Labor interest groups advocate for the economic interests of workers and trade organizations.

Learning Objective

Explain the decline of labor interest groups and new kinds of organization

Key Points

• Labor interest groups are a type of economic interest group. Economic interest groups advocate for the economic benefit of their members and constituents.
• Labor interest groups advocate for the economic interests of workers and trade organizations.
• In addition to representing their members unions also often organized opportunities for direct citizen participation, along with public education and lobbying.
• Membership in private unions has steadily declines. In 2011 on 7% of workers were union members. Public workers are still unionized at much higher rates.
• New kinds of labor interest groups are developing to represent workers outside of the mainstream workforce, such as low-wage or freelance workers.

Key Terms

Industrial Unionism

Industrial unionism is a labor union organizing method through which all workers in the same industry are organized into the same union—regardless of skill or trade—thus giving workers in one industry, or in all industries, more leverage in bargaining and in strike situations.

craft unionism

Craft unionism refers to organizing a union in a manner that seeks to unify workers in a particular industry along the lines of the particular craft or trade that they work in by class or skill level.

Labor Interest Groups

Labor interest groups are a type of economic interest group. Economic interest groups advocate for the economic benefit of their members and constituents. There are a wide variety of types of economic interest groups, including labor groups which advocate on behalf of individual workers and trade organizations. In addition to representing their members, unions also often organize opportunities for direct citizen participation , along with public education and lobbying.

May Day Marches

May 1st is traditionally a day for protests and celebration for labor interest groups. In the US there is now also a focus on immigration and labor rights.

History of Labor Interest Groups

Some of the earliest unions in the US were formed by women in the textile industry in cities such as Lowell, Massachusetts. The National Labor Union (NLU) was the first American federation of unions formed in 1866. In these early days, unions lobbied against dangerous work conditions and for regulations around the work conditions of women and children. They also pushed for an eight hour work day and the right to strike.

The strength of labor interest groups continued in the 19^th century. One example was the American Federation of Labor, a large umbrella group made up primarily of locals involved in craft unionism. While labor was more disorganized during the 1920s, the period during and right after WWII saw a continued growth of unions including the formation of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). The CIO was built around an industrial unionism model. These two major unions merged in 1955 to form the AFL-CIO.

Unions have had an uneven history with women and people of color. Some early unions, for example, specifically banned members who were Chinese or of Chinese decent. The Pullman’s union and the United Farm Workers unions are examples of unions that came together to advocate for the economic interests of African-American and latino workers.

Decline of Private Labor Interest Groups

With the reduction of manufacturing jobs in the US, the number of people represented by unions has fallen. Also, legislation such as the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act made it harder to organize by allowing individual states to ban “closed-shops. ” These are workplaces in which all new employees are required to join a union. Twenty-three states have such laws in place; these are the so-called “right-to-work” states.

While private union membership has declined, public unions are still quite strong. While only 7% of workers in the private sectors belong to unions, 31% of federal workers, 35% of state workers, and 46% of local government employees belong to unions.

New Kinds of Organizing

Even as traditional labor interest groups are seeing their numbers fall, there are new groups developing around new constituencies of workers who are outside of the mainstream workforce. Some examples include the National Domestic Workers Alliance, Domestic Workers United and the Restaurant Opportunities Center (ROC), which represent low-wage workers. These groups focus on member education as well as advocacy and public education, ensuring their members are aware of the rights that they are already entitled to as well as organizing around new economic benefits.

Another example is the Freelancers Union which provides health care for members who are independent workers. Many of these workers are high-skilled or creative workers who are not eligible for workplace related benefits. This union also works as an agenda building organization, bringing attention to the challenges of freelance workers including the high tax burden for independent workers.

7.3.3: Professional Interest Groups

Professional interest groups represent the economic interests for members of various professions including doctors, engineers, and lawyers.

Learning Objective

Classify professional interest groups that influence policy

Key Points

• Professional interest groups are another type of economic interest group. Economic interest groups advocate for the economic benefit of their members and constituents.
• While labor groups focused on trades and industrial labor, professional interest groups represent members of various professions including doctors and engineers.
• These groups also often set rule for their members, including rules about certification and conduct including professional codes of ethics.
• Professional organizations also provide direct economic benefits to their members. These benefits include personal or professional insurance as well as professional development opportunities.

Key Term

professions

A job, especially one requiring a high level of skill or training.

Professional Interest Groups

Professional interest groups are another type of economic interest group. Economic interest groups advocate for the economic benefit of their members and constituents. There are many types of economic interest groups, including professional interest groups which organize and represent professional workers. While trade unions represent skilled and industrial labor, professional organizations represent skilled workers such as doctors, engineers, and lawyers.

These groups advocate for the economic interests of their members. They groups often set the rules for membership in their organizations. This includes rules about certification and conduct including professional codes of ethics. Professional organizations also provide direct economic benefits to their members. These benefits include access to personal or professional insurance as well as professional development opportunities.

One critique of professional organizations is that they serve to increase the income of their membership without any added value or service.

An example of a professional interest group is the American Medical Association (AMA), which represents doctors and medical students throughout the United States. The AMA conducts significant amounts of member and public education work, including publishing the Journal of the America Medical Association . It also carries out a substantial amount of charity work. Its broad mission is to promote the art and science of medicine for the betterment of the public health. However, it is also committed to advancing the interest of physicals, including economic interests. The AMA often lobbies on behalf of its members. For example, the AMA lobbied in campaigns against Medicare during the 1950’s and 1960’s. While the AMA now supports Medicare it did opposed attempts to create a national health care system. Another campaign that is directly related to economic interests is one to limit the damages awarded in medical malpractice suits.

Journal of the America Medical Association

The first edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Today it is the most widely read medical journal in the world.

7.3.4: Agricultural Interest Groups

Agricultural interest groups are a type of economic interest group that represent farmers.

Learning Objective

Analyze the organization and purpose of agricultural interest groups

Key Points

• Agricultural interest groups are a type of economic interest group.
• Agricultural interest groups represent the economic interests of farmers, including issues such as crop prices, land use zoning, government subsidies, and international trade agreements.
• There is a long history of agricultural interest groups in the United States. An example is the American Farm Bureau Federation which started in 1911.
• Today, agricultural interest groups are often divided among themselves. There are various types of farms and farmers in the U.S. with conflicting interests.

Key Term

yeoman farmer

Yeoman refers chiefly to a free man owning his own farm. Work requiring a great deal of effort or labor, such as would be done by a yeoman farmer, came to be described as yeoman’s work. Thus, yeoman became associated with hard toil.

Agricultural Interest Groups

Economic interest groups are varied. For any given issue, there will be large number of competing interest groups. Categories of economic interest groups include those representing business, labor, professional, and agricultural interests.

Agricultural interest groups represent the economic interests of farmers. These interests include business and agricultural extension concerns, as well as matters of local, national, and even international policy. These include crop prices, land use zoning, government subsidies, and international trade agreements.

There is a long history of agricultural interest groups in the United States. An example is the American Farm Bureau Federation which was founded in 1911. As a result of the majority of the country’s rural history, agricultural concerns have long been of great importance. Specifically, the vision of the yeoman farmer was one of the important American archetypes moving into the progressive era.

Today, agricultural interest groups are often divided among themselves. There are various types of farms and farmers in the U.S. that often have conflicting interests. For example, a policy that is beneficial to large scale agribusiness might be highly damaging for small, family farms.

Agricultural interest groups range from large agribusiness, to groups such as the Farm Bureau representing mid-sized and commodity crop farmers, to the Farmers Market Coalition which advocates for policies that would benefit local farm production.

Organizations such as the Farmers Market Coalition represents a fairly new type of agricultural interest group. These are the groups advocating for policies that would support the renewal of small and local agriculture. One example are advocacy around the Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program/Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program . These programs provide fresh, locally produced fruits and vegetables for participants in other government nutritional subsidy programs. By sourcing local foods these programs also provide direct economic benefits for local farmers.

Farmers Market

Small farmers are just one part of the larger group of farmers involved in agricultural interest groups.

7.3.5: Environmental Interest Groups

Environmental interest groups are public-interest groups that advocate around conservation and ecological issues.

Learning Objective

Identify the historical origins and purpose of environmental interest groups

Key Points

• Environmental interest groups are generally public-interest groups, as their work benefits a wider community beyond their own active membership. They advocate for conservation and ecological issues.
• There is a long history of conservation and early forms of environmentalism in the US. Some early conservationists were members of the transcendental movement which developed in the 1830s.
• Today environmental interests groups are extremely varied, and while they all share some concern for conversation or the environment, many hold conflicting views.
• Different types of environmental interest groups include conservation, environmental justice, ecology, and bright green environmentalism.

Key Terms

greenwash

A false or misleading picture of environmental friendliness used to conceal or obscure damaging activities.

direct action

A form of political activism, in which participants act directly, ignoring established political procedures. This is often (but not always) accomplished by means of strikes, workplace occupations, sabotage, sit-ins, squatting, revolutionary/guerrilla warfare, demonstrations, vandalism, or graffiti.

environmental racism

Environmental racism is inequality — in the form of racism linked with environmental factors and practices — that causes disproportionate distress on minority communities.

Environmental Interest Groups

Environmental interest groups are generally public-interest groups, as their work benefits a wider community beyond their own active membership. These groups advocate around conservation and ecological issues. Interest groups in general are groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, or to make general changes for the public good.

There is a long history of conservation and early forms of environmentalism in the US. Some early conservationists were members of the transcendental movement which developed in the 1830s, and represented a general rejection of the rise in urbanization in the US. They advocated for meaningful and consistent interactions with nature, often employing poetic language to describe their ideals for a human environmental relationship. Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau were both part of this movement.

Today environmental interests groups are extremely varied, and while they all share some concern for conversation or the environment, many hold conflicting views about levels of conservation versus for example stewardship, and about appropriate strategies for pursuing their interests.

Some of the different types of environmentalism include the conservation movement, mostly focused on preserving land for sustainable use; the environmental justice movement that developed as a reaction to environmental racism in the US and particular in urban areas; the ecology movement, focused on human relationships and responsibilities to the environment; and bright green environmentalism, which looks at technological and design solutions to environmental question.

Love Canal

This 1978 protest at Love Canal was one of the early events in the environmental justice movement.

Each of these groups will use different strategies including scientific research, and public education as well as lobbying and litigation. Environmental groups are also known for their use of *direct action* techniques. These actions range from the work of Greenpeace in disrupting nuclear tests, or whaling to removing genetically modified crops to groups such as the Earth Liberation Front who take a more radical approach and regularly conduct destructive actions as a part of their work.

There are criticisms of environmental interest group including the concern that not all of their claims are scientifically sound, and the complaint that environmental actions or regulations will disrupt business.

On the other hand some business groups have also taken up environmental causes, with business practices and promotion geared towards members and supporters of environmental interests. However other businesses have started to greenwash their products, leading environmental and consumer interest groups to pressure governments to regulate environmental product claims.

7.3.6: Consumer Interest Groups

Consumer Interest Groups advocate for consumer rights and information.

Learning Objective

Classify consumer interest groups and their influence in policy-making

Key Points

• Consumer Interest Groups can be considered public-interest groups because they focus on the issues and interests of consumers rather than providing exclusive economic benefits to a closed set of members.
• The Better Business Bureau (BBB) and the Consumer Union, who publishes the Consumer Reports, are two examples of consumer groups concerned with a broad range of consumer goods.
• These groups focus on a number of different issues including product safety, price issues and consumer notification.
• Consumer Interest Groups employ a variety of strategies– from lobbying to public campaigns.
• They also provide important checks and balances to business interests, make market exchanges more transparent, and help consumers make more informed choices.

Key Term

arbitration

A process through which two or more parties use an arbitrator or arbiter (an impartial third party) in order to resolve a dispute.

Consumer Interest Groups

Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, or to make general changes for the public good. Consumer Interest Groups focus on the issues and interests of consumers .

Consumers

Consumer Interest Groups represent, protect, and inform consumers.

Consumer Interest Groups can be considered public-interest groups since their work benefits consumers rather than providing exclusive economic benefits to a closed set of members.

These groups focus on a number of different issues that include product safety, price issues, and consumer notification. They employ a variety of strategies– from lobbying to public campaigns. In these ways Consumer Interest Groups protect and represent consumers. They also provide important checks and balances to business interests, make market exchanges more transparent, and help consumers make more informed choices.

Two examples of consumer groups concerned with a broad range of consumer goods are the Better Business Bureau (BBB) and the Consumer Union, who publishes the Consumer Reports. The BBB works to advance marketplace trust by publishing business reviews and providing a dispute resolution process. This process allows consumers with conflicts or complaints regarding a particular business receive arbitration through the BBB. Consumer Reports is known for its rigorous product testing including side-by-side comparison of similar products. Consumer Reports also continues to do lobbying work around issues such as telecommunications and mass media, health care, and product safety.

Consumer Interest Groups can also be single-issue interests groups. In a very different vein from the example above, the British Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) is one of the oldest and largest single-issue consumer interest groups in the UK. They work to promote quality, choice, and value. They support small pubs with a community focus, promote traditional beers and ciders, and seek to improve licensing permits.

7.3.7: Ideological Interest Groups

Ideological interest groups unite on issues, with their work driven by deeply held beliefs.

Learning Objective

Describe ideological interest groups and their role in the policy-making process

Key Points

• Interest groups represent people or organizations who have common concerns and interests.
• Ideological interest groups might work on various different issues, but their work is driven by deeply held beliefs.
• The ideology of any given group can range from regressive or conservative, to liberal or libertarian, or to progressive or radical.
• These types of interest groups use a variety of strategies including education, representation, participation, and advocacy that includes lobbying and litigation.

Key Term

ideology

Doctrine, philosophy, body of beliefs or principles belonging to an individual or group.

Ideological Interest Groups

Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, or to make general changes they perceive to be for the public good. Interest groups work through advocacy, public campaigns, and even directly lobbying governments to change public policy. There are a wide range of ideological interest groups that represent many different constituencies.

Types of Ideological Interest Groups

Ideological interest groups often work on a variety of specific issues, with their work driven by deeply held beliefs. The ideology, or collective beliefs, of any given group might range from regressive or conservative, to liberal or libertarian, or to progressive or radical.

Some examples of ideological interest groups include the National Organization for Women (NOW), the National Taxpayers Union, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Christian Coalition. Each organization has an ideological point of view that determines which specific issues or campaigns they get involved in and which side of an issue they take. Additionally, these organizations use a variety of strategies including public education, representation, member participation, and advocacy with governments that includes lobbying and litigation.

NOW is an example of an ideological interest group. It is a liberal feminist organization, and its main mission is advocating for equality and full societal participation for women. However, NOW also works on a number of other issues. The current priorities for NOW include constitutional equality, violence against women, diversity/racism, abortion rights/reproductive issues, lesbian rights, and economic justice.

Leaders of NOW

National Organization for Women (NOW) founder and president Betty Friedan; NOW co-chair and Washington, D.C., lobbyist Barbara Ireton; and feminist attorney Marguerite Rawalt.

On the other hand, the Christian Coalition favors a conservative Christian ideology. The stated goal of the organization is to represent Christians who support a traditional family point of view.The group works on a variety of more specific issues such as disputing abortion, improving traditional education, and lowering taxes.

Some groups fall between being single issue groups or ideological interest groups. Examples include the National Rifle Association (NRA), a gun rights advocacy group, or AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP), an LGBTQ group advocating around AIDS research and health. While both focus on one main unifying issue, their advocacy work is also driven by larger ideological concerns.

7.3.8: Public Interest Groups

Public interest groups advocate for what they consider to be the public good.

Learning Objective

Illustrate how interest groups work for the public interest

Key Points

• Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests.
• Public interest groups work on issues that impact the general public, rather than a small group of members.
• One of the challenges that public interest groups face is the difficulty in defining a single idea of the public good in a pluralist society.
• One of the challenges, or criticisms of public interest groups is the difficulty in defining a single idea of the public good in a pluralist society.

Key Terms

free rider

One who obtains benefit from a public good without paying for it directly.

pluralism

A social system based on mutual respect for each other’s cultures among various groups that make up a society, wherein subordinate groups do not have to forsake their lifestyle and traditions and can express their culture and participate in the larger society free of prejudice.

public interest group

a group concerned with the common well-being or general welfare of the population

Public Interest Groups

Interest groups represent people or organizations with common concerns and interests. These groups work to gain or retain benefits for their members, or to make general changes for the public good. Interest groups work through advocacy, public campaigns, and even lobbying governments to make changes in public policy. There are a wide variety of interest groups representing a variety of constituencies. For example, public interest groups work on issues that impact the general public, rather than a select group of members. These groups advocate for their ideals of general good, or common well-being. Some of the issues a public interest group might address include health, the environment, and the political system.

One of the challenges, or criticisms, of public interest groups is the difficulty in defining a single idea of the public good in a society that values pluralism, such as the United States. Because of this difficulty, even when there is consensus around the good of a broad topic, the work of a single public interest group might still be controversial.

An example is in education where most agree that education is a public good, but there are strong disagreements over how to achieve that, or over what sort of education would be best. Groups like the National Education Association, a teachers union and general public interest group, might still be seen by some as primarily promoting teachers’ rights. While a program such as the charter school program might be seen as weakening public schools.

Public interest groups

Public interest groups advocate for issues that impact the general public, such as education.

Another challenge for public-interest groups is the so-called free rider effect. Because the benefits brought about by public interest groups benefit a large group of individuals, there is less direct incentive for people to become involved in an organization’s work since they will still gain from the work even if they remain inactive.

7.3.9: Single-Issue Interest Groups

Single-issue interest groups focus on advocacy around a single defining issue.

Learning Objective

Give examples of single-issue interest groups

Key Points

• Interest groups use various forms of advocacy in order to influence public opinion and/or policy.
• Single-issue interest groups focus on advocacy around a single defining issue.
• These groups focus on a diverse array of issues including abortion, taxation, and animal rights.
• Because of their singular focus, these groups are known for the intensity of their lobbying.
• The National Riffle Associate (NRA) is arguably the best known, and most influential single-issue interest group in the United States.

Key Terms

lobbying

Lobbying (also lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

constituencies

interest groups or fan bases

issue network

an alliance of various interest groups and individuals who unite in order to promote a single concern in government policy

Single-Issue Interest Groups

Interest groups use various forms of advocacy in order to influence public opinion and/or policy. Interest groups work through advocacy, public campaigns, and even lobbying governments to make changes in public policy. There are a wide variety of interest groups representing a variety of constituencies.

As the name suggests, these are groups that focus all of their energy on a single defining issue. Their membership is often quite devoted to the issue, and motivated by personal experiences or to participation in ongoing social movements. There are a growing number of single-issue interest groups in the US. These groups focus on a diverse array of issues including abortion, taxation, and animal rights. Because of their singular focus these groups are known for the intensity of their lobbying.

An example of a single-issue interest group is Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), which was formed by a mother whose teenaged daughter was killed by a drunk driver. The organization now lobbies heavily to stop drunk driving as well as supporting the victims of drunk driving and preventing underage drinking.

Another example is the National Riffle Associate (NRA, ), which is also, arguably, the best known and most influential single-issue interest group on the United States. The NRA lobbies in favor of the right of individuals to own and use fire arms. It also lobbies against any laws that its members and leadership see as abridging this right or invading the privacy of gun owners. The NRA spent $10 million dollars campaigning during the 2008 presidential election. Some see this as proof that the NRA has too much influence in government, while others would simple describe it as evidence of the broad support for the organization. However you interpret the actions of the NRA, they have been successful in their efforts, since the United States has the least restrictive gun laws of any country in the Global North.

National Rifle Association (NRA) Headquarters

The NRA is one of the best known, and arguably the most influential single-issue interest group in the US.

7.3.10: Governmental Interest Groups

Government interest groups are a unique type of interest group that represents the interests of government to other governments.

Learning Objective

Give examples of government interest groups and their influence on policy

Key Points

• Government interest groups are a unique form of interest groups that represent the interests of government to other governments.
• City and state governments, for example might lobby in Washington to pursue their goals and gain benefits.
• As with other interest groups many government interest groups also conduct work in public education and media campaigns in addition to their direct advocacy work.
• Foreign governments may also send representatives to make their case with Congress and the executive branch.

Key Terms

New Federalism

New Federalism is a political philosophy of devolution, or the transfer of certain powers from the United States federal government back to the states.

lobby

To attempt to influence (a public official or decision-maker) in favor of a specific opinion or cause.

New Deal

The New Deal was a series of economic programs enacted in the United States between 1933 and 1936. They involved presidential executive orders or laws passed by Congress during the first term of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The programs were in response to the Great Depression, and focused on what historians call the “3 Rs”: Relief, Recovery, and Reform.

Government Interest Groups

Government interest groups are a unique form of interest groups that represent the interests of government to other governments. City and state governments, for example, might lobby in Washington to pursue their goals and gain benefits. In many cases local governments are seeking more funding to carry out their work and responsibilities. This support often comes in the form of federal grants. At other times local governments may advocate for increased direct decision making powers, and control over new policy areas.

As with other interest groups many government interest groups also conduct work in public education and media campaigns in addition to their direct advocacy work.

US Government Interest Groups

The practice of local governments lobbying the federal government started with the New Deal during which an attempt was made to organize the distribution of funds and programs during that period. Since then local governments have continued their efforts. Major gains were made in the 1960s and 1970s, especially around social program funding.

New Deal Programs

These women are learning new skills in a Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) program in Pennsylvania during the Great Depression. FERA was part of the New Deal federal funding to state and local governments.

However, and particularly with President Reagan’s move towards what was known as New Federalism, there has been a move to shrink the size of the federal government and also federal grants. States and cities are now stuck between wanting continued support for their work, and wanting to be free of federal regulations.

Some government interest groups in the US include the National League of Cities, the National Conference of Mayors, and the National Governors Association.

The International Lobby

Additionally, foreign governments may send representatives to make their case with Congress and the executive branch. Again, the support they seek might be direct finding through aid, but might also involve economic arrangements such as trade deals including free trade arrangements or reduction of US tariffs.

7.4: Regulating Interest Groups

7.4.1: Regulating Congressional Lobbyists

Generally, the United States requires systematic disclosure of lobbying in all branches of government, including in Congress.

Learning Objective

Describe the key difficulties that make the regulation of lobbying activity challenging

Key Points

• The rules often specify how much a lobbyist can spend on specific activities, and how to report expenses; many of the laws and guidelines are specified in the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.
• Sometimes defining clearly who is a “lobbyist” and what precisely are lobbying activities can be difficult.
• The legal ramifications of lobbying are further inter-tangled with aspects of campaign finance reform, since lobbyists often spend time seeking donations for the reelection efforts of congresspersons; sorting out these issues can pose ethical challenges.
• Supporters for regulating lobbying hold the view that existing regulations designed to rein in the excesses of lobbying have not been effective, and that reforms and regulations have not cleaned up the system “at all”.
• Laws requiring disclosure have been more prevalent in the twentieth century.

Key Terms

lobbyist

A person remunerated to persuade (to lobby) politicians to vote in a certain way or otherwise use their office to effect a desired result.

disclosure

The act of revealing something

The United States generally requires a systematic disclosure of lobbying, and it may be one of the few countries to have such extensive requirements. Disclosure in one sense allows lobbyists and public officials to justify their actions under the banner of openness and with full compliance of the law. The rules often specify how much a lobbyist can spend on specific activities, and how to report expenses. Many of the laws and guidelines are specified in the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.

Clearly defining who is a “lobbyist” and what precisely are lobbying activities can sometimes be difficult. According to the Lobbying Disclosure Act, several authorized definitions include: Lobbying activities means “lobbying contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation and planning activities, research and other background work that is intended, at the time it is performed, for use in contacts, and coordination with the lobbying activities of others. ” Lobbying contact means “any oral or written communication (including an electronic communication) to a covered executive branch official or a covered legislative branch official.”

Distinguishing lobbyists from a strategic adviser can still be difficult, since the duties of each can often overlap and are hard to define precisely. There have been issues raised about what constitutes the difference between a lobbyist and a bundler. One report described bundlers as “supporters who contribute their own money to a campaign and solicit it from others. ” There was a question whether such persons were really lobbyists involved with raising campaign monies for the election of Barack Obama, and whether Obama had broken his own pledge not to receive money from lobbyists.

The legal ramifications of lobbying are further inter-tangled with aspects of campaign finance reform, since lobbyists often spend time seeking donations for the reelection efforts of congresspersons. Sorting out these issues can pose ethical challenges. There are numerous regulations governing the practice of lobbying, often ones requiring transparency and disclosure. People paid to lobby must register with the secretary of the Senate and the clerk of the House of Representatives within 45 days of contacting a legislator for the first time, or 45 days after being employed. An exception is that lobbyists who earn less than $3,000 per client for each fiscal quarter, or whose total lobbying expenses are less than $11,500 each quarter, do not need to register. Part-time lobbyists are exempt from registering unless they spend more than 20% of their working hours doing lobbying activities in any quarter. If lobbyists have two or more contacts with a legislator as a lobbyist, then they must register. Requirements for registering also apply to companies that specialize in lobbying, or ones that have an in-house lobbyist, particularly if they spend more than $11,500 on lobbying.

Laws requiring disclosure have been more prevalent in the twentieth century. In 1946, there was a so-called “sunshine law” requiring lobbyists to disclose what they were doing, on whose behalf, and how much they received in payment. The resulting Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act (1946) governed lobbying rules up until 1995 when the Lobbying Disclosure Act replaced it. In 2002, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 later amended the law to the McCain Feingold Act, which contained rules governing campaign contributions. Lobbying law is a constantly evolving field; the American Bar Association published a book of guidelines in 2009 with over 800 pages .

American Bar Association

The American Bar Association published a book about lobbying regulations.

Lobbyists sometimes support rules requiring greater transparency and disclosure: “Our profession is at a critical point where we can either embrace the constructive changes and reforms by Congress or we can seek out loopholes and continue the slippery slide into history along side the ranks of snake oil salesmen.” —Lobbyist Gerald S. J. Cassidy, 2007.

Supporters for regulating lobbying hold the view that existing regulations designed to rein in the excesses of lobbying have not been effective, and that reforms and regulations have not cleaned up the system at all. Jack Abramoff said lobbyists could “find a way around just about any reform Congress enacted. ” He gave the following example: You can’t take a congressman to lunch for $25 and buy him a hamburger or a steak or something like that … But you can take him to a fund-raising lunch and not only buy him that steak, but give him $25,000 extra and call it a fund-raiser — and have all the same access and all the same interactions with that congressman. A similar view suggested that lobbying reform efforts have been “fought tooth and nail to prevent its passage” since the people with the power to reform would curtail their own powers and income flows.

7.4.2: Regulating Executive Branch Lobbyists

Lobbying the Executive Branch is similar to any other branch of the U.S. government and is regulated by laws pertaining to disclosure.

Learning Objective

Summarize the key reasons behind the movement of lobbying activity from the state to the federal level

Key Points

• Executive branch agencies added a new layer of rule-making to congressional legislation.
• It was not until the 20th century that lobbying the Executive Branch really emerged as a widespread issue with several new political trends in the government.
• Many executive branch agencies have the power to write specific rules and are a target for lobbying.

Key Terms

lobbying

Lobbying (also lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

executive branch

The branch of government that oversees the carrying out of the laws, led by the president.

Most lobbying during the nineteenth century happened within state legislatures. While the federal government had a larger jurisdiction, it did not handle many matters pertaining to the economy. The state governments did much more legislating than the federal government. When lobbying did happen, it was often “practiced discreetly” with little or no public disclosure. By one account, more intense lobbying in the federal government happened from 1869 to 1877 during the administration of President Grant near the start of the so-called Gilded Age. The most influential lobbyists wanted railroad subsidies and a tariff on wool. At the same time in the Reconstruction South, lobbying was intense near the state legislatures, especially regarding railroad subsidies, but it also happened in other areas, such as gambling. For example, Charles T. Howard of the Louisiana State Lottery Company actively lobbied state legislators and the governor of Louisiana for the purpose of getting a license to sell lottery tickets.

President Grant

President Ulysses S. Grant was in office during a period of more intense lobbying in the federal government between 1869 and 1877.

But, it was not until the 20^th century that lobbying the Executive Branch really emerged as a widespread issue with several new political trends in the government, including:

• Expensive campaigns. Winning reelection meant spending huge sums on expensive media, particularly television advertising. Congresspersons seeking reelection found themselves having to spend much of their time raising money instead of governing. In 1976, the average cost of running for a House seat was 86,000. By 2006, it was 1.3 million. Running for Senate was even pricier, with an average cost in 2006 of $8.8 million.
• Increased Complexity. This was partly the result of a continuing shift of legislative authority from state governments to Washington and partly the result of new technologies and systems. It became difficult for voters or watchdog groups to monitor this activity since it became harder to follow or even comprehend. Complexity encouraged more specialized lobbying, often with more than one agency affected by any one piece of legislation. It also encouraged lobbyists to become familiar with the intricate details and history of many issues. Executive branch agencies added a new layer of rule-making to congressional legislation. The economy expanded.

In many ways, lobbying the Executive Branch is similar to any other branch of the U.S. government and is thereby regulated by laws pertaining to disclosure discussed in Regulation Congressional Lobbyists. However, it is true that many executive branch agencies have the power to write specific rules and are a target of lobbying. Federal agencies, like the State Department, make rules to give aid money to countries like Egypt. In fact, an Egyptian-American businessman named Kais Menoufy organized a lobby to try and halt U.S. aid to Egypt.

Further complicating the relationship between lobbying and the Executive Branch is the fact that it is possible for one level of government to lobby another level. The District of Columbia, seeking better voting rights for its citizens, has been lobbying Congress and the president for greater power—including possible statehood or voting representation in Congress. An assessment in 2011 suggested that the district needed to rethink its lobbying strategy, since its past efforts have only had “mixed results.”

7.4.3: Results of the 1946 Act

The Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act of 1946 was a statute enacted by the United States Congress to reduce the influence of lobbyists.

Learning Objective

Summarize the contents of the 1946 Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act and reactions to it

Key Points

• Section 308 of the bill forced lobbyists to register with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate and to provide information including the names and addresses of their employers, and to identify in whose interest the particular lobbyist worked.
• The 1946 Act expanded the definition of who could be considered a lobbyist. It included in this category any person who directly or indirectly solicits, collects, or receives money or any other thing of value to be used principally to aid in relation to the passage or defeat of any legislation.
• Lobbyists challenged the Regulation of Lobbying Act on the grounds that it was vague and unclear.

Key Terms

regulation

A law or administrative rule, issued by an organization, used to guide or prescribe the conduct of members of that organization; can specifically refer to acts in which a government or state body limits the behavior of businesses.

scope

The breadth, depth or reach of a subject; a domain.

provision

A clause in a legal instrument, a law, etc., providing for a particular matter and/or stipulation.

The Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act of 1946 was a statute enacted by the United States Congress that was intended to reduce the influence of lobbyists on the government.

There is general agreement that money is a key variable in lobbying . This has been viewed as problematic, because it allows those with the most financial resources to influence government more than those who possess less money. The Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act of 1946 was specifically crafted to deal with this issue. The act defined lobbying as an activity, and thus created the legal conditions for the behavior to be regulated by the government.

Lobbying for Pay

There is general agreement that money is a key variable in lobbying.

The provisions of the act define lobbying in the following manner:

Section 308 states that, “any person who shall engage himself for pay, or for any consideration, for the purpose of attempting to influence the passage or defeat of any legislation by the Congress of the United States shall, before doing anything in furtherance of such object, register with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate and shall give to those officers in writing and under oath, his name and business address, the name and address of the person by whom he is employed, and in whose interest he appears or works, the duration of such employment, how much he is paid and is to receive, by whom he is paid or is to be paid, how much he is to be paid for expenses, and what expenses are to be included. “

Section 307 further describes what is regulated. “The Provisions of this act apply to any person (except a political committee as defined in the Federal Corrupt Practices Act, and duly organized State or local committees of a political party), who by himself, or through any agent or employee or other persons in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, solicits, collects, or receives money or any other thing of value to be used principally to aid, or which the principal purpose of which person is to aid, in the accomplishment of influencing, directly or indirectly, the passage or defeat of any legislation by the Congress of the United States. “

Lobbyists claimed that the Regulation of Lobbying Act was unconstitutional on the grounds that it was vague and unclear. In a 1954 case (United States v. Harriss), the Supreme Court made its voice heard on the issue. The Court upheld the act’s constitutionality, but it also narrowed the scope and application of the act. The Supreme Court ruled that the act applied only to paid lobbyists who directly communicated with members of Congress, and only when that communication regarded pending or proposed federal legislation. This meant that lobbyists who visited with congressional staff members, rather than members of Congress themselves, were not considered lobbyists. In addition, the act only monitored attempts to specifically influence the passage or defeat of legislation in Congress, and thus excluded other congressional activities or communication between officials and lobbyists. Finally, the Court also ruled that the act only applied to individuals who spent at least half of their time lobbying. This set basic occupational limits as to who would be affected by the law.

7.4.4: The Reforms of 1995

The Lobbying and Disclosure Act of 1995 was legislation aimed at bringing a level of accountability to federal lobbying practices in the United States.

Learning Objective

Summarize the content and effectiveness of the lobbying reforms of 1995

Key Points

• The law was amended substantially by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.
• The Lobbying and Disclosure Act of 1995 defines a number of provisions attempting to maintain a degree of transparency in the activities of lobbyists.
• The legislation does not include those lobbyists whose “activities constitute less than 20 percent of the time engaged in services”, thus failing to regulate grassroots (small donors) lobbying.
• The ultimate failure of the Lobbying and Disclosure Act of 1995 was in its failure to provide adequate funding to implement the regulations.

Key Terms

loophole

A method of escape, especially an ambiguity or exception in a rule that can be exploited in order to avoid its effect.

transparency

(figuratively) openness, degree of accessibility to view

lobbyist

A person remunerated to persuade (to lobby) politicians to vote in a certain way or otherwise use their office to effect a desired result.

The Lobbying and Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. § 1601) was legislation aimed at bringing a level of accountability to federal lobbying practices in the United States. This law was then amended substantially by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007. Under provisions which took effect on January 1, 2006, lobbyists are required to register with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate. Failing to do so is punishable by a civil fine of up to $50,000. The Clerk and Secretary must refer any acts of non-compliance to the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Bill Provisions

Definitions: The LDA defines a number of provisions attempting to maintain a degree of transparency in the activities of lobbyists. The legislation defines a client as: “…any person or entity that employs or retains another person for financial or other compensation to conduct lobbying activities on behalf of that person or entity. A person or entity whose employees act as lobbyists on its own behalf is both a client and an employer of such employees….”. The legislation also includes lobbyists that are affected: “The term “lobbyist” means any individual who is employed or retained by a client for financial or other compensation for services that include more than one lobbying contact, other than an individual whose lobbying activities constitute less than 20 percent of the time engaged in the services provided by such individual to that client over a six month period. ” Also included in the legislation are the definitions of what actions must be disclosed, which includes lobbying to certain members of the Executive Branch who are included on specific payrolls. Also included are members of Congress.

Loopholes: The legislation does not include those lobbyists whose “activities constitute less than 20 percent of the time engaged in services”, thus failing to regulate grassroots (small donors) lobbying. The LDA includes a number of other “thresholds” that define what must be recorded. Any organization that contributes more than $10,000 towards lobbying activities must also be registered. Amounts even slightly below this threshold are exempt from reporting. The outline for registration includes “name, address, business telephone number, and principal place of business of the registrant, and a general description of its business or activities;” as well as for the client. The register must also include a statement of what issues the registrant expects to lobby or what may have already been lobbied.

After recording, the records are maintained by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate. Due to severe understaffing, these two offices are unable to check for illegal activities or corrupt practices. This is the significant failure of this bill. During a hearing before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, Senator Christopher Dodd stated that “[s]ince 2003, the Office of Public Records has referred over 2,000 cases to the Department of Justice, and nothing’s been heard from them again.”

Senator Christopher Dodd

Senator Christopher Dodd, while pointing out gaps in the 1995 lobbying reform, was himself implicated in controversy surrounding his role as Chairman of the Senate Banking committee and his relationship with Countrywide Financial

7.4.5: Lobbying Scandals and the Reforms of 2007

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 sought to amend and strengthen parts of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.

Learning Objective

Describe the rules that the Honest Leadership and Open Government act put in place to regulate lobbying

Key Points

• The bill strengthens public disclosure requirements concerning lobbying activity and funding, places more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress and their staff, and provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills.
• The bill sought to address the “revolving door” issue, by declaring limitations on the ability of members of the government to serve as lobbyists following the end of their terms.
• The bill requires lobbyist disclosure filings to be filed twice as often, by decreasing the time between filing from semi-annual to quarterly.

Key Terms

revolving door

The movement between roles as legislators and regulators become lobbyists

disclosure

The act of revealing something

house ethics rules

The Committee on Ethics, often known simply as the Ethics Committee, is one of the committees of the United States House of Representatives. Prior to the 112th Congress it was known as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

Lobbying Scandals and the Reforms of 2007

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 is a law of the United States federal government that amended parts of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. It strengthens public disclosure requirements concerning lobbying activity and funding, places more restrictions on gifts for members of Congress and their staff, and provides for mandatory disclosure of earmarks in expenditure bills. The bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on September 15, 2007.

Details of the bill include closing the revolving door , prohibiting senators from gaining undue lobbying access by increasing the “cooling off” period before they can lobby Congress from one to two years, prohibiting cabinet secretaries and other senior executive personnel from lobbying the department or agency in which they worked for two years after they leave their position, and prohibiting senior Senate staff and officers from lobbying contacts with the entire Senate for one year, instead of just their former employing office. The bill also includes numerous other prohibitions and requirements including:

Closing the Revolving Door

As the former Under Secretary of Agriculture for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services and lobbyist for the Podesta Group in 2009, Ellen Haas represents the revolving door phenomenon that the 2007 lobbying reforms sought to address.

• Prohibits senior House staff from lobbying their former office or committee for one year after they leave House employment.
• Requires that executive and legislative branch employees who leave government positions and seek to lobby on behalf of Native American tribes face the same revolving door provisions as others.
• Exempts those who serve as elected or appointed officials of Native American tribes.
• Prohibits members of Congress and their staff from influencing hiring decisions of private organizations on the sole basis of partisan political gain.
• Subjects those who violate this provision to a fine and imprisonment for up to 15 years.
• Prohibits gifts by lobbyists.
• Prohibits lobbyists from providing gifts or travel to members of Congress with knowledge that the gift or travel is in violation of House or Senate rules.
• Full public disclosure of lobbying activity.
• Requires lobbyist disclosure filings to be filed twice as often, by decreasing the time between filing from semi-annual to quarterly.
• Requires lobbyist disclosures in both the Senate and House to be filed electronically and requires creation of a public searchable Internet database of such information.Increases civil penalty for knowing and willful violations of the Lobby Disclosure Act from 200,000 and imposes a criminal penalty of up to five years for knowing and corrupt failure to comply with the Act.
• Requires the Government Accountability Office to audit annually lobbyist compliance with disclosure rules.
• Requires lobbyists to certify they have not given gifts or travel that would violate Senate or House rules.
• Requires the disclosure of businesses or organizations that contribute more than 15,000 semiannually in campaign contributions for any federal elected official, candidate (including Senate, House and Presidential), or leadership PAC.
• Requires lobbyists to disclose to the Secretary of the Senate and the House Clerk their campaign contributions and payments to Presidential libraries, Inaugural Committees or entities controlled by, named for or honoring members of Congress.
• Includes congressional pension accountability.

Unlike previous lobbying regulations, the 2007 reforms also made an attempt to amend House ethics rules in the following ways:

• Requires disclosure of employment negotiations by members and staff.
• Prohibits members from engaging in any agreements or negotiations about future employment until a successor has been selected unless the member files a statement with the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; and requires that members recuse themselves from any matter in which there is a conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict.
• Requires senior staff to notify the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct within three days if they engage in negotiations or agreements for future employment or compensation.
• Requires that members prohibit their staff from having any lobbying contact with the Member’s spouse if such individual is a registered lobbyist or is employed or retained by a registered lobbyist to influence legislation.
• Requires that travel by members financed by outside groups be posted on a searchable, sortable and downloadable website by August 1, 2008. Requires that members’ financial disclosure forms be posted on a searchable, sortable and downloadable website by August 1, 2008.
• Prohibits members from attending parties held in their honor at national party conventions if they have been sponsored by lobbyists, unless the member is the party’s presidential or vice presidential nominee.

7.4.6: Obama vs. the Lobbyists?

Early in his presidency, Obama said “[lobbyists] won’t find a job in my White House,” but softened his stance later in the campaign.

Learning Objective

Summarize the Obama White House’s position on hiring former lobbyist

Key Points

• On January 21, 2009, Obama issued an executive order which stated no appointee who was a registered lobbyist within the two years before his appointment could participate on matters in which he lobbied for a period of two years after the date of appointment.
• As of March 21, 2009, at least thirty officials appointed by Obama had been lobbyists in the past five years.
• Critics of Obama’s administration claim Obama is retreating from his own ethics rules barring lobbyists from working on the issues about which they lobbied during the previous two years by issuing waivers.

Key Terms

recusal

An act of recusing. To remove oneself from a decision/judgment because of a conflict of interest.

appointee

a person who is appointed

waiver

Something that releases a person from a requirement.

Early in his presidential campaign, Obama stated that “they [lobbyists] won’t find a job in my White House”, but softened his stance later in the campaign. On January 21, 2009, Obama issued an executive order for all future appointees to his administration, which stated, no appointee who was a registered lobbyist within the two years before his appointment could participate on matters in which he lobbied for a period of two years after the date of appointment. Three formal waivers were initially issued in early 2009, out of 800 executive appointments: to William J. Lynn III, a lobbyist for Raytheon, to hold the position of Deputy Secretary of Defense; to Jocelyn Frye, former general counsel at the National Partnership for Women and Families, to serve as Director of Policy and Projects in the Office of the First Lady; and to Cecilia Muñoz, former senior vice president for the National Council of La Raza, to serve as Director of Intergovernmental Affairs in the Executive Office of the President. As of March 21, 2009, at least thirty officials appointed by Obama had been lobbyists in the past five years. Ten additional waivers were announced in September 2009.

President Barack Obama

Starting his presidential years as an outspoken advocate of lobbying regulation, President Obama’s actions in relation to lobbying have led some to believe that he has not lived up to the high ethical standards that he set out for himself.

Not all recent former lobbyists require waivers; those without waivers write letters of recusal stating issues from which they must refrain because of their previous jobs. USA Today reported that 21 members of the Obama administration have at some time been registered as federal lobbyists, although most have not within the previous two years. Lobbyists in the administration include William Corr, an anti-tobacco lobbyist, as Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services and Tom Vilsack, who lobbied in 2007, for a national teachers union, as Secretary of Agriculture. Also, the Secretary of Labor nominee, Hilda Solis, formerly served as a board member of American Rights at Work, which lobbied Congress on two bills Solis co-sponsored, and Mark Patterson, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s chief of staff, is a former lobbyist for Goldman Sachs.

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington have criticized the administration, claiming that Obama is retreating from his own ethics rules barring lobbyists from working on the issues about which they lobbied during the previous two years by issuing waivers. According to Melanie Sloan, the group’s executive director, “It makes it appear that they are saying one thing and doing another. “

7.5: Elements of Successful Interest Groups

7.5.1: Size and Resources

Interest groups, comprised of members with shared knowledge, status, or goals, frequently advocate on behalf of particular political issues.

Learning Objective

Explain the purpose, composition, and functioning of interest groups.

Key Points

• Interest groups may attempt to influence policy through lobbying, political contributions, or media campaigns.
• Access to financial resources is generally necessary in order for lobbying efforts to be successful.
• The greater the size of an interest group, the more likely it is to have the ability to influence policy.

Key Terms

interest group

Collections of members with shared knowledge, status, or goals. In many cases, these groups advocate for particular political or social issues.

lobbying

Lobbying (also lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies.

media campaign

An attempt to influence public opinion using television, radio, internet, and print advertisements.

Example

• Greenpeace and the National Rifle Association (NRA) are both examples of interest groups. They lobby politicians, contribute to campaigns, and organize media campaigns in attempts to influence policy.

Introduction

Interest groups are comprised of individuals with shared knowledge, status, or goals, and in many cases these groups advocate for particular political or social issues. In the United States, interest groups are often associated with lobbying groups, who seek to influence government officials to act favorably towards them. Interest groups, however, are not always involved in lobbying. They may not be politically active, or else they may use indirect tactics such as media campaigns, research, and public opinion polls in order to advance their cause.

The Iron Triangle

In United States politics, the iron triangle comprises the policy-making relationship among the congressional committees, the bureaucracy, and interest groups.

Interest groups that are politically active with regards to one or more issues are called advocacy groups. In liberal democracies, advocacy groups tend to treat bureaucracy as their main channel of influence, because that is where the decision-making power lies. The aim of advocacy groups is to influence a member of the legislature to support their cause by voting a certain way. The practice of attempting to influence lawmakers is called lobbying, and the effectiveness of a group’s lobbying efforts is usually tied to its access to resources (almost always financial).

Interest Groups and Resources

Interest groups may gain influence because of their access to money. Indeed, financial resources are often critical in influencing governmental policy. In some cases, money is used directly to influence politicians — for example, a lobbyist may treat a legislator to an expensive dinner. These instances are almost always considered corrupt, and are often outlawed as bribery. Money can also be used in more subtle ways to pressure lawmakers into voting in a particular way. For example, because they play a large role in the national economy, large corporations have an advantage in influencing lawmakers. If these large corporations were to suddenly become less successful, it might create economic trouble, which could turn public opinion against elected officials. Thus, the wealthier a corporation is, the more political clout it tends to have. Likewise, large corporations have greater access to politicians than other groups, because corporate leaders often have insider status in powerful groups. Moreover, an interest group might also make use of financial resources in order to donate to a political campaign. In this instance, the donation is not explicitly tied to a policy vote, and is therefore a legal contribution. That being said, the expectation is that interest groups will use their wealth to elect candidates that support their issues. In all of these ways, interest groups use money to gain success and influence on many levels.

Issue Campaigns

Apart from using money to directly influence bureaucrats, interest groups may also use their wealth to launch issue campaigns. In this case, organizations try to gain popular support among American voters for a particular issue. Ultimately, the goal of this tactic is to pressure legislators into acting a certain way in response to a perceived public mandate. Since legislators are elected, there is a strong incentive for them to vote for issues that are popular with the current public opinion. Media campaigns can be very effective at marshaling public opinion, but they are very expensive, because campaigns need to buy television and radio air time, as well as print advertisements. Money is also required to hire and fund the professionals who will run these campaigns. Thus, interest groups with greater funds are far more likely to successfully influence policy than those groups with fewer financial resources.

Size of Interest Groups

As organizations attempting to influence politics through public opinion, interest groups with larger memberships have an advantage over smaller ones. Since legislators are accountable to voters, the more public support there is for an issue, the more likely it is to receive support and governmental attention. Larger interest groups necessarily have influence because of how many voters participate in them. They are also effective because the core group membership is able to more effectively campaign on behalf of an issue than a group with a smaller membership. Additionally, larger interest groups are able to stage large demonstrations that make visible the widespread support for an issue .

7.5.2: Leadership

Interest groups often rely on leaders to organize their fundraising and make their advocacy efforts successful.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between the different kinds of leadership structures in interest groups and social movements.

Key Points

• Corporate interest groups usually choose professional lobbyists to lead their advocacy.
• Interest groups that use public campaigns to influence opinion tend to rely on campaign strategists.
• Interest groups that form social movements may not have a clear leader, though a figurehead may become an informal spokesperson for the group.

Key Terms

political strategist

A consultant who advises and assists political campaigns.

lobbyist

A person remunerated to persuade (to lobby) politicians to vote in a certain way or otherwise use their office to effect a desired result.

social movement

A large, informal grouping of individuals or organizations which advocates for specific political or social issues.

Example

• Martin Luther King, Jr. is an example of an unofficial leader of a social movement–the Civil Rights Movement was a diffuse political movement, not a discrete organization, but King became the figurehead of the movement through his charismatic and influential leadership.

The role of leadership varies based on the political orientation or goals of an interest group. Some interest groups, especially corporations, hire lobbyiststo lead their advocacy efforts. Interest groups with organized media campaigns may be led by political strategists. In contrast, more amorphous social movements that act as interest groups may coalesce around charismatic, but often unofficial, group leaders.

When interest groups attempt to influence policymakers through lobbying, they usually rely on professional lobbyists. Lobbyists are often well-connected professionals, such as lawyers, whose role is to argue for specific legislation. Successful lobbyists achieve insider status in legislative bodies, meaning they can talk directly to lawmakers. Once they gain access to legislators, the lobbyist’s job is to persuade them to act on behalf of their client. Recent estimates put the number of registered lobbyists in Washington, D.C. at about 13,700, though there are likely thousands more unregistered lobbyists working to influence policymakers.

Interest groups that attempt to influence policy by changing public opinion may be led by political strategists, who are often consultants familiar with public relations, advertising, and the political process. Political strategists are responsible for determining a campaign plan. The campaign plan usually involves deciding on a central message the interest group hopes to use for persuading voters to support their position. Additionally, the strategist determines where advertisements will be placed, where grassroots organizing efforts will be focused, and how fundraising will be structured. In issue-based campaigns, successful political strategists create public awareness and support for an issue, which can then pressure legislators to act in favor of the interest group.

Interest groups may be broader than one formal organization, in which case advocacy may form a social movement. A social movement is group action aimed at social change. Social movements may have some formal hierarchy, but they are often disorganized, with funding and support coming from a range of decentralized sources. Because of these factors, social movements do not always have a clear leader the way corporate lobbying efforts and media campaigns do. Instead, social movements may either rely on a network of local leaders, or may be led informally by a charismatic or influential participant. For example, the Civil Rights Movement was a diffuse and widespread effort toward social change, involving many formal organizations and informal groups. Still, many consider Martin Luther King, Jr. to be the leader of the Civil Rights Movement because of the highly influential and public role he played in influencing policies and opinions. Interest groups with a de facto leader may be more successful at sustained political advocacy than those with no clear hierarchy, because a clearly defined leader allows for more efficient organization of fundraising efforts, demonstrations, and campaigns. That being said, social scientists often disagree when defining social movements and the most effective forms of advocacy, finding that leadership plays an ambiguous role in terms of the overall success of many interest groups.

7.5.3: Cohesiveness

Advocacy groups that form along ideological, ethnic, or foreign policy objectives tend to have higher levels of internal cohesion.

Learning Objective

Describe the key characteristics and aims of advocacy groups

Key Points

• In the social sciences, a social group has been defined as two or more humans who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. A social group exhibits degrees of social cohesion and is more than a simple collection or aggregate of individuals.
• Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.
• An ethnic interest group, according to the political scientist Thomas Ambrosio, is an advocacy group established along cultural, ethnic, religious, or racial lines by an ethnic group for the purposes of directly or indirectly influencing the foreign policy.
• While many formal organizations established by ethnic identity groups are apolitical, others are created explicitly for political purposes.
• Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints.
• Deindividuation is a concept in social psychology that is generally thought of as the loosening of self-awareness in groups, although this is a matter of contention.

Key Terms

ethnic interest group

An ethnic interest group, according to the political scientist Thomas Ambrosio, is an advocacy group established along cultural, ethnic, religious or racial lines by an ethnic group for the purposes of directly or indirectly influencing the foreign policy of their resident country in support of the homeland and/or ethnic kin abroad with which they identify.

social cohesion

The bonds or “glue” that maintain stability in society.

groupthink

A process of reasoning or decision-making by a group, especially one characterized by uncritical acceptance or conformity to a perceived majority view.

Introduction

In the social sciences a social group has been defined as two or more humans who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. Other theorists, however, are a wary of definitions which stress the importance of interdependence or objective similarity. Instead, for researchers in the social identity tradition, “a group is defined in terms of those who identify themselves as members of the group. ” Regardless, social groups come in a myriad of sizes and varieties.

A social group exhibits some degree of social cohesion and is more than a simple collection or aggregate of individuals, such as people waiting at a bus stop or people waiting in a line. Characteristics shared by members of a group may include interests, values, representations, ethnic or social background, and kinship ties. Kinship ties being a social bond based on common ancestry, marriage, or adoption. In a similar vein, some researchers consider the defining characteristic of a group as social interaction.

Advocacy Groups

Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy to influence public opinion and/or policy; they have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems. Groups vary considerably in size, influence, and motive; some have wide-ranging, long-term social purposes, others are focused and are a response to an immediate issue or concern. Motives for action may be based on a shared political, faith, moral, or commercial position. Groups use varied methods to try to achieve their aims including lobbying, media campaigns, publicity stunts, polls, research, and policy briefings. Some groups are supported by powerful business or political interests and exert considerable influence on the political process, others have few such resources.

An ethnic interest group, according to the political scientist Thomas Ambrosio, is an advocacy group established along cultural, ethnic, religious, or racial lines by an ethnic group for the purposes of directly or indirectly influencing the foreign policy of their resident country in support of the homeland and/or ethnic kin abroad with which they identify. According to Ambrosio, “like other societal interest groups, ethnic identity groups establish formal organizations devoted to promoting group cohesiveness and addressing group concerns. ” While many formal organizations, established by ethnic identity groups, are apolitical, others are created explicitly for political purposes. In general, groups who seek to influence government policy on domestic or foreign issues are referred to as “advocacy groups. ” Those interest groups, established by ethnic identity groups, are referred to as ethnic interest groups. The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee is an example of an ethnic interest group in the United States – its mission is to influence American foreign policy and maintain a robust alliance with Israel .

AIPAC Protest DC 2005

The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee is an example of an ethnic interest group. This is a photograph of a group of protesters outside the AIPAC conference at the Washington, D.C. Convention Center.

Groupthink

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within groups of people, in which the desire for harmony in a decision-making group overrides a realistic appraisal of alternatives. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints. Antecedent factors, such as group cohesiveness, structural faults, and situational context, play into the likelihood of whether or not groupthink will impact the decision-making process.

Deindividuation is a concept in social psychology that is generally thought of as the loosening of self-awareness in groups, although this is a matter of contention. Sociologists also study the phenomenon of deindividuation, but the level of analysis is somewhat different. For the social psychologist, the level of analysis is the individual in the context of a social situation. As such, social psychologists emphasize the role of internal psychological processes. Other social sciences, such as sociology, are more concerned with broad social, economic, political, and historical factors that influence events in a given society.

7.5.4: Members

Members join interest groups because of common concerns and to unite under one cause.

Learning Objective

Describe the activities of interest groups and the challenges they face

Key Points

• An interest group is a group of individuals who share common objectives and whose aim is to influence policymakers.
• Membership interests represent individuals for social, business, labor, or charitable purposes in order to achieve civil or political goals. Institutional interests represent other organizations, with agendas that fit the needs of the organizations they serve.
• A general theory is that individuals must be enticed with some type of benefit to join an interest group.
• People who join an interest group may not have shared opinions on other issues. With the membership united under one cause, the staff has the ability to pursue other issues that the membership may disagree on because members will remain united by the primary cause.

Key Terms

solidary

Having shared community interests and responsibilities.

interest group

Collections of members with shared knowledge, status, or goals. In many cases, these groups advocate for particular political or social issues.

incentive

Something that motivates, rouses, or encourages.

Example

• Mancur Lloyd Olson, a leading American economist, sought to understand the logical basis of interest group membership and participation. In his first book, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (1965), he theorized that “only a separate and ‘selective’ incentive will stimulate a rational individual in a latent group to act in a group-oriented way”; that is, members of a large group will not act in the group’s common interest unless motivated by personal gains.

Introduction

An interest group is a group of individuals who share common objectives, and whose aim is to influence policymakers. Institutional interest groups represent other organizations, with agendas that fit the needs of the organizations they serve. Examples include the American Cotton Manufacturers (which represents the generally congruous southern textile mills) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (which represents the multitude of wants of American businesses).

Membership interest groups are organizations that represent individuals for social, business, labor, or charitable purposes in order to achieve civil or political goals. Examples include the NAACP (African-American interests), the Sierra Club (environmental interests), the NRA (Second Amendment interests), and Common Cause (interests in an increase in voter turnout and knowledge). Membership includes a group of people that join an interest group and unite under one cause. Members may or may not have an opinion on some of the issues the staff pursues. Similarly, staff are the leaders. With the membership united under one cause, the staff has the ability to pursue other issues that the membership may disagree on because members will remain in the group because they are united by the primary cause.

NRA Headquarters

The headquarters of the NRA, an interest group, located in Fairfax Virginia, USA.

Benefits and Incentives

A general theory is that individuals must be enticed with some type of benefit to join an interest group. Known as the free rider problem, it refers to the difficulty of obtaining members when the benefits are reaped without membership. For instance, an interest group dedicated to improving farming standards will fight for the general goal of improving farming for all farmers, even those who are not members of the particular interest group. Thus, there is no real incentive to join an interest group and pay dues if the farmer will still receive that benefit even if they do not become a member. Interest groups must receive dues and contributions from members in order to accomplish their agendas. While every individual in the world would benefit from a cleaner environment, an environmental protection interest group does not, in turn, receive financial help from every individual in the world.

Selective material benefits are sometimes given in order to address the free rider problem. Interest groups give material benefits like travel discounts, free meals at certain restaurants, or free subscriptions to magazines, newspapers, or journals. Many trade and professional interest groups give these benefits to members.

A selective solidary benefit is another type of benefit offered to members of an interest group. These incentives involve benefits like socializing, congeniality, the sense of group membership and identification, the status resulting from membership, fun and conviviality, the maintenance of social distinctions, and so on. A solidary incentive is one in which the rewards for participation are social and created out of the act of association.

An expressive incentive can be another basic benefit to members of an interest group. People who join an interest group because of expressive benefits join to express an ideological or moral value they believe in. Such values include free speech, civil rights, economic justice, or political equality. To obtain these types of benefits, members simply pay dues or donate time or money to get a feeling of satisfaction from expressing a political value. Even if the interest group does not achieve its goals, members merely want to be able to say they helped out in the process of trying to obtain the goals, which is the expressive incentive. Interest groups that rely on expressive benefits include environmental groups and groups who claim to lobby for the public interest.

Collective Action

Mancur Lloyd Olson, a leading American economist, sought to understand the logical basis of interest group membership and participation. The reigning political theories of his day granted groups an almost primordial status. Some appealed to a natural human instinct for herding, others ascribed the formation of groups to kinship rooted in the process of modernization. Olson offered a radically different account of the logical basis of organized collective action. In his first book, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (1965), he theorized that “only a separate and ‘selective’ incentive will stimulate a rational individual in a latent group to act in a group-oriented way.” Olsen’s work laid the foundation for understanding how members of a large group will not act in the group’s common interest unless motivated by personal gains.

7.6: Political Parties

7.6.1: Political Parties

A political party seeks to influence government policy by nominating their own candidates and trying to seat them in office.

Learning Objective

Identify the functions and different structures of political parties in an electoral democracy

Key Points

• There are three general, main types of party systems, single or dominant party systems, two-party systems, or multi-party systems.
• Single party systems tend to be indicative of authoritarian regimes since the dominance of a single party means the repression of all other political opposition.
• The type of electoral system is a major factor in determining the type of party political system. In countries with a simple plurality voting system, parties elected tend to be few, sometimes only two in a single jurisdiction.

Key Terms

Single Dominant Party

In single dominant, or single-party systems, one political party is legally allowed to hold effective power. Although minor parties may sometimes be allowed, they are legally required to accept the leadership of the dominant party.

political party

A political party is a political organization that typically seeks to influence government policy, usually by nominating their own candidates and trying to seat them in political office. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision, bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.

Nonpartisan

In a nonpartisan system, no official political parties exist, sometimes reflecting legal restrictions on political parties. In nonpartisan elections, each candidate is eligible for office on his or her own merits.

Political Parties

A political party is a political organization that typically seeks to influence government policy, usually by nominating their own candidates and trying to seat them in political office. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.

Parliamentary Party Structure

When the party is represented by members in the lower house of parliament, the party leader simultaneously serves as the leader of the parliamentary group of that full party representation. Depending on a minimum number of seats held, Westminster-based parties allow for leaders to form frontbench teams of senior fellow members of the parliamentary group who serve as critics of aspects of government policy. When a party becomes the largest party not to be represented in a Westminster-style parliament, the party’s parliamentary group forms the Official Opposition. The Official Opposition frontbench team members often form the Official Opposition Shadow cabinet. When a party achieves enough seats in an election to form a majority, the party’s frontbench becomes the Cabinet of government ministers.

Regulation of Party Formation

The freedom to form a political party is considered a measurement of a state’s adherence to liberal democracy as a political value. Regulation of political parties may manifest as a crackdown on or repression of all opposition parties or certain parties who promote ideals that run counter to the general ideology of the state’s incumbents or possess membership by-laws which are legally unenforceable.

Voting Systems

The type of electoral system is a major factor in determining the type of political party system. In countries with a simple plurality voting system, there tends to be few parties elected (often only two in any given jurisdiction). In countries that have a proportional representation voting system, as exists throughout Europe, or to a greater extent ranked voting systems, such as in Australia or Ireland, three or more parties are often elected to parliament in significant proportions, and thus may have more access to public office.

Partisan and Nonpartisan Style Political Parties

Partisan style political parties varies according to each jurisdiction, depending on how many parties there are, and how much influence each individual party has.

In a nonpartisan system, no official political parties exist, sometimes reflecting legal restrictions on political parties. In nonpartisan elections, each candidate is eligible for office on his or her own merits. Unless there are legal prohibitions against political parties, factions within nonpartisan systems often evolve into political parties.

A Single Dominant Party

In single-party systems, one political party is legally allowed to hold effective power. Although minor parties may sometimes be allowed, they are legally required to accept the leadership of the dominant party. This party may not always be identical to the government, although sometimes positions within the party may in fact be more important than positions within the government. North Korea and China are examples. Other examples can be found in Fascist states, such as Nazi Germany between 1934 and 1945. The single-party system is thus usually equated with dictatorships and tyranny.

In dominant-party systems, opposition parties are allowed, and there may be even a deeply established democratic tradition, but other parties are widely considered to have no real chance of gaining power. Political, social, and economic circumstances, and public opinion can be reasons for others parties’ failure. Typically in countries with less of an established democratic tradition, it is possible the dominant party will remain in power by using patronage and sometimes through voting fraud.

Two-Party Systems

Two-party systems are states in which there are two political parties dominant to such an extent that electoral success under the banner of any other party is almost impossible. One right wing coalition party and one left wing coalition party is the most common ideological breakdown in such a system, but in two-party states political parties are traditionally parties that are ideologically broad and inclusive.

The British Parliament and U.S. Congress are examples of two-party systems.

Multiple Political Parties

Multi-party systems are systems in which more than two parties are represented and elected to public office.

Australia, Canada, People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Ireland, United Kingdom, and Norway are examples of countries with two strong parties and additional smaller parties that have also obtained representation. The smaller or “third” parties may hold the balance of power in a parliamentary system, and thus may be invited to form a part of a coalition government together with one of the larger parties; or may instead act independently from the dominant parties.

More commonly, in cases where there are three or more parties, no one party is likely to gain power alone, and parties work with each other to form coalition governments. Political change is often easier with a coalition government than in one-party or two-party dominant systems.

Westminster-Based Government, British Parliament

The British Parliament is a Westminster-based system of government with multiple political parties.

Joint Session of a Two-Party Congress

The United States Congress is an example of a two-party system of governance. In this picture, Obama’s Health Care Speech is being given to both the House and the Senate.

7.6.2: Interest Groups

Interest groups are any voluntary associations that seek to publicly promote and create advantages for their cause.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the different types of interest groups

Key Points

• Interest groups, also known as advocacy groups or lobbying groups, work to gain support both governmental and popular, for their causes or communities. Lobbying groups tend to focus on influencing governmental legislation directly through appeals to members of government.
• The lobbying done by interest groups or advocacy groups may be on behalf of private interests, i.e. commercial business etc, or may be on behalf of public interests such as the civil rights or environmental regulation.
• Governments often define and regulate organized group lobbying.

Key Terms

lobbying

Lobbying (also to lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government. Lobbying is done by many different types of people and organized groups including individuals in the private sector, corporations, fellow legislators or government officials, and advocacy groups (interest groups).

interest group

An interest group is any voluntary association that seeks to publicly promote and create advantages for its cause.

Special Interest Group

A Special Interest Group (SIG) is a community with an interest in advancing a specific area of knowledge, learning, or technology where members cooperate to affect or to produce solutions within their particular field and may communicate, meet, and organize conferences. At times, they may also advocate or lobby on a particular issue or on a range of issues.

Interest Group

The term interest group refers to nearly any voluntary association that seeks to publicly promote and create advantages for its cause. These diverse organizations include corporations, charitable organizations, civil rights groups, neighborhood associations, professional associations, and trade associations.

Special Interest Group

A Special Interest Group (SIG) is a community with an interest in advancing a specific area of knowledge, learning, or technology where members cooperate to affect or to produce solutions within their particular field. SIG members may communicate, meet, and organize conferences. At times they may also advocate or lobby on a particular issue or on a range of issues. However, they are generally distinct from advocacy groups and pressure groups which are normally set up for the specific political aim. The distinction is not firm though and some organizations evolve and change their focus over time.

Lobbying

Lobbying (also lobby) is the act of attempting to influence decisions made by officials in the government . Lobbying is done by many different types of people and organized groups, including individuals in the private sector, corporations, fellow legislators or government officials, or advocacy groups (interest groups). Professional lobbyists are people whose business is trying to influence legislation on behalf of a group or individual who hires them. Individuals and nonprofit organizations can also lobby as an act of volunteering or as a small part of their normal job. Governments often define and regulate organized group lobbying that has become influential.

The Lobby of the House of Commons

The Lobby of the House of Commons, painted in 1886 by Liborio Prosperi.

The ethics and morality of lobbying are dual-edged. Lobbying is often spoken of with contempt when the implication is that people with inordinate socioeconomic power are corrupting the law in order to serve their own interest. However, another side of lobbying is making sure that others’ interests are duly defended against corruption. Lobbying can also make sure that minority interests are fairly defended against mere tyranny of the majority. Governments often define and regulate organized group lobbying.

Lobby groups may concentrate their efforts on the legislatures, where laws are created, but may also use the judicial branch to advance their causes. For example, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People filed suits in state and federal courts in the 1950’s to challenge segregation laws. Their efforts resulted in the Supreme Court declaring such laws to be unconstitutional.

Advocacy Group

Advocacy groups use various forms of advocacy in order to influence public opinion and/or policy. They have played and continue to play an important part in the development of political and social systems.

Some advocacy groups have developed into important social, political institutions or social movements. Some powerful lobby groups have been accused of manipulating the democratic system for narrow commercial gain. In some instances, they have been found guilty of corruption, fraud, bribery, and other serious crimes. As a result, lobbying has become increasingly regulated. Some groups, generally ones with less financial resources, may use direct action and civil disobedience. At times, they are accused of being a threat to the social order or ‘domestic extremists. ‘

An advocacy group is a group or an organization that tries to influence the government, but does not hold power in the government. Smaller groups representing broad interests of a group may be formed with the purpose of benefiting the group over an extended period of time and in many ways. Examples are consumer organizations, professional associations, trade associations, and trade unions.

Advocacy groups exist in a wide variety of genres based upon their most pronounced activities.

Anti-defamation organizations issue responses or criticisms to real or supposed slights of any sort by an individual or group against a specific segment of the population which the organization exists to represent.

Watchdog groups provide oversight and rating of actions or media by various outlets, both government and corporate.

Lobby groups work to enact a change to the law or the maintenance of a particular law. Some lobby groups have considerable financial resources at their disposal. Lobbying is regulated to stop the worst abuses which can develop into corruption.

Legal defense funds provide funding for the legal defense for, or legal action against, individuals or groups related to their specific interests or target demographic.

Types

Organizations can be categorized along the lines of the three elements of commerce: business owners, workers, and consumers.

Employers’ organizations represent the interests of a group of businesses in the same industry.

Occupational or labor organizations promote the professional and economic interests of workers in a particular occupation, industry, or trade, through interaction with the government and by preparing advertising and other promotional campaigns to the public. Such groups will also provide member services such as career support, training, and organized social activities.

Consumer organizations exist to protect people from corporate abuse, promote fair business practices, and enforce consumer rights.

7.6.3: Party Identification

Party identification is usually determined by which political party the individual most commonly supports, through voting or other means.

Learning Objective

Discuss how voters form their party identification

Key Points

• Citizens who identify with a party are the Party in the Electorate. A partisan registers as a member of their party to vote, strongly tend to vote for their party’s candidates, support their party’s policies, work for the party’s campaigns, & have a higher voter turnout in primary elections.
• Some believe that voter identification is developed during childhood due to personal, family, social and environmental factors. In this case, party identification would be stable and nearly unchangeable.
• However, party identification changes can occur in times of party coalition change, or realignment. During these times, party coalitions themselves are being transformed. As a result, people are more likely to desert the party of their parents.

Key Terms

Party identifiers

Party identifiers (partisans) could be described by their support in the following ways: they register as a member of the particular party, they show a strong tendency to vote for candidates in their preferred party, when surveyed, they identify themselves as members of that particular party, they are inclined to support policies endorsed by the particular party, they volunteer for campaigns to support party candidates more than the general population, and they have a higher voter turnout in primary elections than the general population.

party identification

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies. Party identification is usually determined by which political party the individual most commonly supports, through voting or other means.

Likert Scale

The Likert Scale is a 7 point scale to measure party identification that goes from Strong Democrat to Strong Republican.

Party Identification

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual identifies. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports, by voting or other means. shows the shift of party identification between the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections.

Voting Shifts by County Between the 2004 and 2008 Presidential Election

Voter identification is shown no where more clearly perhaps than during presidential elections. This map shows shifts in broad county party identification between the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections.

In the United States, political parties consist of three parts: the party as government (members of the party who hold public office), the party as organization (committees, leaders and activists who work to promote the party and the candidates), and the party as electorate (citizens who support the party through party identification).

Citizens in the general population who identify with a particular party make up the Party in the Electorate. Party identifiers (partisans) could be described by their support in the following ways:

• They register as a member of the particular party when registered to vote.
• They show a strong tendency to vote for candidates in their preferred party in most elections.
• When surveyed, they identify themselves as members of that particular party.
• They are inclined to support policies endorsed by the particular party.
• They volunteer for campaigns to support party candidates more than the general population.
• They have a higher voter turnout in primary elections than the general population.

Some researchers view party identification as a form of social identity, in the same way that a person identifies with a religious or ethnic group. This identity develops early in a person’s life mainly through family and social influences. This description would make party identification a stable perspective, which develops as a consequence of personal, family, social and environmental factors. Other researchers consider party identification to be more flexible and more of a conscious choice. They see it as a position and a choice based on the continued assessment of the political, economic and social environment. Party identification can increase or even shift by motivating events or conditions in the country.

Characterization

Childhood influence

Childhood Influence is one of main driving factors behind formation of party identification. During childhood, the main political influence comes from parents, other close family members and close surroundings such as the immediate community. Children remember events that happened during their childhood and associate them with the political party, whether or not they were connected with those events. For example, a child growing up in the 1970s would associate the Republican party with the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration, a child growing up in the 1990s would associate the Democratic party with the sex scandal of the Clinton administration, or a child growing up in early 2000 would associate the Republican party with the Iraq War and the War on Terror. Although these parties might or might not embrace the issues that happened during that administration, a child could forever associate the party with those memorable events.

Adulthood

During adulthood, people can begin to adjust their party loyalties according to their personal experiences. The longer an individual holds a party ID, the stronger that attachment to the party tends to become. Because of this, older adults are more likely to hold strong party attachments, and less likely to change them than young adults.

Change

Party ID changes can occur in times of party coalition change, or realignment. During these times, party coalitions themselves are being transformed, and as a result, people are more likely to desert the party of their parents. It is during these times of partisan turmoil when younger adults are more likely to change party ID.

Measuring Party Identification

It is important to measure party identification in order to determine its strengths and weaknesses. Political scientists have developed many ways to measure party identification in order to examine and evaluate it.

One method of measuring party identification uses the Likert Scale. The Likert Scale is a 7 point scale to measure party identification:

Strong Democrat-Weak Democrat-Lean Democrat-Independent-Lean Republican-Weak Republican-Strong Republican

This scale does have some problematic aspects. According to the scale, a weak party supporter should normally vote with the party, but many times this is not the case. A “leaning” party supporter shows more loyalty to the party than that of a weak party supporter. Weak party supporters are more likely to stray from their party than someone who does not really declare a party identification and only tends to lean to one or the other based on the issues at hand.

Voting

Those people who identify with a party tend to vote for their party’s candidate for various offices in high percentages. Those who consider themselves to be strong partisans, tend to be the most faithful in voting for their party’s nominee for office. In the case of voting for president, since the 1970s, party identification on voting behavior has been increasing significantly. By the late 1990s, party identification on voting behavior was at the highest level of any election since the 1950s. When voting in congressional elections, the trend is similar. Strong party identifiers voted overwhelmingly for their party’s nominee in the general election.

The same level of voting behavior can also be applied to state and local levels. While straight ticket voting has declined among the general voting population, it is still prevalent in those who are strong Republicans and strong Democrats.

7.7: The Two-Party System

7.7.1: The Two-Party System

Two-party systems are prominent in various countries, such as the U.S., and contain both advantages and disadvantages.

Learning Objective

Discuss the historical origins of the two-party system in the United States and its advantages and disadvantages

Key Points

• The advantages of a two party system are that they tend to be less extreme, support policies that appeal to a broader segment of the population, and generally more stable.
• The disadvantages of a two party system are that they tend to ignore alternative views, stifle debate, and may not promote inter-party compromise but simply partisan appeals to the population.
• Third parties can and do exist in two-party system, however, they do not wield very much influence.

Key Terms

Winner-Takes-All

The winner-takes-all voting system allows only a single winner for each possible legislative seat and is sometimes termed a plurality voting system or single-winner voting system.

two-party system

A two-party system is a system in which two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and, as a result, the majority of elected offices are members of one of the two major parties.

Two-party system

A two-party system is a system in which two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and the majority of elected offices are members of one of the two major parties. Under a two-party system, one party typically holds a majority in the legislature and is usually referred to as the majority party while the other is the minority party. The United States is an example of a two-party system in which the majority of elected officials are either Democrats or Republicans .

The United States Two-Party System

Breakdown of political party representation in the United States House of Representatives during the 112th Congress. Blue: Democrat Red: Republican.

The modern political party system in the U.S. is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress to some extent since at least 1856. However, the political party system did not develop until tax reform. The First Party System of the United States featured the Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party (Anti-Federalist). In 1829, the Second Party System saw a split of the Democratic-Republican Party into the Jacksonian Democrats, who grew into the modern Democratic Party, led by Andrew Jackson, and the Whig Party, led by Henry Clay. The Third Party System stretched from 1854 to the mid-1890s, and was characterized by the emergence of the anti-slavery Republican Party, which adopted many of the economic policies of the Whigs, such as national banks, railroads, high tariffs, homesteads and aid to land grant colleges. The Fourth Party System, 1896 to 1932, retained the same primary parties as the Third Party System, but saw major shifts in the central issues of debate. This period also corresponded to the Progressive Era, and was dominated by the Republican Party. The Fifth Party System emerged with the New Deal Coalition beginning in 1933. The Republicans began losing support after the Great Depression, giving rise to Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the activist New Deal. Experts debate whether this era ended in the mid-1960s when the New Deal coalition did, the early 1980s when the Moral Majority and the Reagan coalition were formed, the mid-1990s during the Republican Revolution, or continues to the present. Since the 1930s, the Democrats positioned themselves more towards Liberalism while the Conservatives increasingly dominated the GOP.

Causes

There are several reason two major parties often dominate the political landscape in some systems. In the U.S., forty-eight states have a standard winner-takes-all electoral system for amassing presidential votes in the Electoral College system. The winner–takes–all principle applies in presidential elections, thus if a presidential candidate gets the most votes in any particular state, all of the electoral votes from that state are awarded to the candidate. In all but Maine and Nebraska, the presidential candidate must win a plurality of votes to wins all of the electoral votes; this practice is called the unit rule.

There are two main reasons winner–takes–all systems lead to a two-party system. First, the weaker parties are pressured to form an alliance, sometimes called a fusion, attempting to become big enough to challenge a large dominant party and, in so doing, gain political clout in the legislature. Second, voters learn, over time, not to vote for candidates outside of one of the two large parties since their votes for third party candidates are usually ineffectual. Therefore, weaker parties are eliminated by the voters over time. The gravitation of voters towards one of the two main parties is called polarization.

Advantages and Disadvantages

One opinion in political science is that a two-party system promotes centrism, less extremism, and that a two-party system is generally more stable and easier to govern than multi-party systems which can become a hung parliament. However, two-party systems have been criticized for ignoring alternative views and putting a damper on debate within a nation. Multi-party governments tend to permit wider and more diverse viewpoints in government and encourage dominant parties to make deals with weaker parties to form winning coalitions. Compared to the United States’ two-party system, the most common form of democracy is the British multi-party model.

There have been arguments that the winner-take-all mechanism discourages independent or third-party candidates from running for office or promulgating their views. One analyst suggested that parliamentary systems, which typically are multi-party in nature, lead to a better “centralization of policy expertise” in government. Multi-party governments permit wider and more diverse viewpoints in government, and encourage dominant parties to make deals with weaker parties to form winning coalitions. While there is considerable debate about the relative merits of a constitutional arrangement such as that of the United States versus a parliamentary arrangement such as Britain, analysts have noted that most democracies around the world have chosen the British multi-party model.

7.7.2: The Republican Party

The Republican Party is a major political party in the U.S, along with the Democratic Party; its platform reflects American conservatism.

Learning Objective

Explain the ideology and political positions of the Republican Party

Key Points

• Currently the party’s platform reflects American conservatism in the U.S. political spectrum which is largely based on its support of classical principles against the modern liberalism of the Democratic Party that is considered American liberalism in contemporary American political discourse.
• The Republican Party includes fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, neoconservatives, moderates, and libertarians.
• In the 21st century, the Republican Party has been defined by social conservatism, a preemptive war foreign policy intended to defeat terrorism and promote global democracy, a more powerful executive branch, supply-side economics, support for gun ownership, and deregulation.

Key Term

Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States during the Civil War and first Republican President.

Republican Party

The Republican Party is one of the two major political parties in the United States, along with the Democratic Party. Founded by anti-slavery activists in 1854, it dominated politics nationally for most of the period 1860-1932. Eighteen presidents have been Republicans; most recently, George W. Bush.

Currently the party’s platform generally reflects American conservatism in the U.S. political spectrum. American conservatism of the Republican Party is not wholly based upon rejection of the political ideology of liberalism, as many principles of American conservatism are based upon classical liberalism. Rather the Republican Party’s conservatism is largely based upon its support of classical principles against the modern liberalism of the Democratic Party that is considered American liberalism in contemporary American political discourse.

History

Founded in the Northern states in 1854 by anti-slavery activists, modernizers, ex-Whigs and ex-Free Soldiers, the Republican Party quickly became the principal opposition to the dominant Southern Democratic Party. The main cause was opposition to the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which repealed the Missouri Compromise by which slavery was kept out of Kansas. The Northern Republicans saw the expansion of slavery as a great evil.

By 1858, the Republicans dominated nearly all Northern states. The Republican Party first came to power in 1860 with the election of Lincoln to the Presidency and Republicans in control of Congress and again, the Northern states . The Republicans were cemented as the party of business, though mitigated by the succession of Theodore Roosevelt who embraced trust busting. The party controlled the presidency throughout the 1920s, running on a platform of opposition to the League of Nations, high tariffs, and promotion of business interests.

Abraham Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president.

The second half of the 20^th century saw election or succession of Republican presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. The Republican Party, led by House Republican Minority Whip Newt Gingrich campaigning on the Contract with America, was elected to majorities to both houses of Congress in the Republican Revolution of 1994.

In the 21^st century, the Republican Party has been defined by social conservatism, a preemptive war foreign policy intended to defeat terrorism and promote global democracy, a more powerful executive branch, supply-side economics, support for gun ownership, and deregulation.

Name and symbols

The party’s founding members chose the name “Republican Party” in the mid-1850s as homage to the values of republicanism promoted by Thomas Jefferson’s Republican Party. The traditional mascot of the party is the elephant. A political cartoon by Thomas Nast, published in Harper’s Weekly on November 7, 1874, is considered the first important use of the symbol. After the 2000 election, the color red became associated with the GOP when on election night, for the first time, all of the major broadcast networks used the same color scheme for the electoral map: red for states won by Republican George W. Bush and blue for Democrat Al Gore.

Ideology and political positions

The Republican Party includes fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, neoconservatives, moderates, and libertarians. Prior to the formation of the conservative coalition, which helped realign the Democratic and Republican Party ideologies in the mid-1960s, the party historically advocated classical liberalism, paleo-conservatism, and progressivism.

Neoconservatism

Neoconservatism is an intellectual movement born in the 1960s inside the monthly review Commentary. Neoconservatism is critical of the so-called welfare state as conceived by the New Left but supportive of the New Deal and moderate welfare statism, offers lukewarm applause for free markets, and advocates “assertive” promotion of democracy and American national interest in international affairs including by military means. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush had neoconservative advisors regarding military and foreign policies. During the George W. Bush administration, neoconservative officials of the Departments of Defense and State helped to plan and promote the Iraq War.

The Bush campaign and the early Bush administration did not exhibit strong endorsement of neoconservative principles. Bush’s policies changed dramatically immediately after the September 11, 2001, attacks. During Bush’s State of the Union speech of January 2002, he named Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as states that “constitute an axis of evil” and “pose a grave and growing danger”. Bush suggested the possibility of preemptive war: “I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world’s most destructive weapons.

7.7.3: The Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is a major political party in the US which promotes a social liberal, social democratic and progressive platform.

Learning Objective

Identify the historical origins and development of the Democratic Party, as well as the demographics of the party

Key Points

• The early Democratic Party favored states’ rights and strict adherence to the Constitution while opposing a national bank and wealthy, moneyed interests.
• The Fugitive Slave Law and the Kansas–Nebraska Act were the catalysts that drove the anti-slavery Democrats from the Party. These former Democrats created the Republican Party.
• Since the 1930s, however, the Democratic Party has become much more socially and economically liberal favoring such issues like progressive taxation and a mixed economy in which the government helps alleviate poverty through economic intervention.

Key Terms

The Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is one of two major contemporary political parties in the United States along with the Republican Party. Since the 1930s, the party has promoted a social liberal, social democratic and progressive platform, and its Congressional caucus is composed of progressives, liberals, centrists, and left-libertarians.

Blue Dog Coalition

The Blue Dog Coalition, a caucus of fiscal and social conservatives and moderates forms part of the Democratic Party’s current faction of conservative Democrats. They have acted as a unified voting bloc in the past, giving its forty plus members some ability to change legislation and broker compromises with the Republican Party’s leadership

Liberals

Social liberals (modern liberals) and progressives constitute roughly half of the Democratic voter base. A large majority of liberals favor universal health care, with many supporting a single-payer system, diplomacy over military action, stem cell research, legalization of same-sex marriage, secular government, stricter gun control, and environmental protection laws as well as the preservation of abortion rights. Immigration and cultural diversity is deemed positive; liberals favor cultural pluralism, a system in which immigrants retain their native culture in addition to adopting their new culture.

Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is one of two major contemporary political parties in the United States along with the Republican Party. Since the 1930s, the party has promoted a social liberal, social democratic and progressive platform, and its Congressional caucus is composed of progressives, liberals, centrists, and left-libertarians. The party has the lengthiest record of continuous operation in the United States and is one of the oldest political parties in the world. President Barack Obama is the15^th Democrat to hold the presidency.

The Democratic Party evolved from Anti-Federalist factions that opposed the fiscal policies of Alexander Hamilton in the early 1790s. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison organized these factions into the Democratic-Republican Party. The party favored states’ rights and strict adherence to the Constitution; it opposed a national bank and wealthy, moneyed interests. The Democratic-Republican Party gained power in the election of 1800.

Democratic-Republicans split over the choice of a successor to President James Monroe, and the party faction that supported many of the old Jeffersonian principles, led by Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, became the Democratic Party . In the 1850s, under the stress of the Fugitive Slave Law and the Kansas–Nebraska Act, anti-slavery Democrats left the party. Joining with former members of existing or dwindling parties, the Republican Party emerged. In the lead up to the 1860 election, the Democratic Party split further, this time, over nominees which led to a Republican victory and Abraham Lincoln was elected the 16^th President of the United States.

Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson is typically considered the first Democratic President.

As the American Civil War broke out, Northern Democrats were divided into War Democrats and Peace Democrats. Most War Democrats rallied to Republican President Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans’ National Union Party in the election of 1864, which featured Andrew Johnson on the Republican ticket even though he was a Democrat from the South.

After the end of Reconstruction in the 1870s, the South, voting Democratic, became known as the “Solid South. ” Though Republicans won all but two presidential elections, the Democrats remained competitive.

The Great Depression in 1929 that occurred under Republican President Hoover set the stage for a more liberal government; the Democrats controlled the House of Representatives nearly uninterrupted from 1931 until 1995 and won most presidential elections until 1968. Franklin D. Roosevelt, elected to the presidency in 1932, came forth with government programs called the New Deal.

New Deal liberalism meant the promotion of social welfare, labor unions, civil rights, and regulation of business. The opponents, who stressed long-term growth, support for business, and low taxes, started calling themselves “conservatives. “

African Americans, who traditionally supported the Republican Party, began supporting Democrats following the ascent of the Franklin Roosevelt administration, the New Deal, and the Civil Rights movement. The Democratic Party’s main base of support shifted to the Northeast, marking a dramatic reversal of history. Bill Clinton was elected to the presidency in 1992, as a New Democrat. Re-elected in 1996, Clinton was the first two term Democratic President since Roosevelt.

Some of the party’s key issues in the early 21^st century in their last national platform have included the methods of how to combat terrorism, homeland security, expanding access to health care, labor rights, environmentalism, and the preservation of liberal government programs.

Since 1912, the Democratic Party has moved to the left of the Republicans on economic and social issues. Roosevelt’s economic philosophy strongly influenced American liberalism and has shaped much of the party’s economic agenda since 1932.

Since the 1890s, the Democratic Party has favored liberal positions (“liberal” in this case meaning social liberalism). Historically, the party has favored farmers, laborers, labor unions, and religious and ethnic minorities; it has opposed unregulated business and finance, and favored progressive income taxes. In foreign policy, internationalism (including interventionism) was a dominant theme from 1913 to the mid-1960s. The major influences for liberalism were labor unions (which peaked in the 1936–1952 era), and the African American wing, which has steadily grown since the 1960s.

The mixed economy policy adopted by the modern Democratic Party has been referred to as the “Third Way”. Democrats believe government should play a role in alleviating poverty and social injustice and use a system of progressive taxation.

Initially calling itself the “Republican Party,” Jeffersonians were labeled “Democratic” by the Federalists, hoping to stigmatize them as purveyors of mob rule.

The most common mascot symbol for the party is the donkey, although the party never officially adopted this symbol. Andrew Jackson’s opponents had labeled him a jackass during the intense mudslinging in 1828

The Blue Dog Coalition, a caucus of fiscal and social conservatives and moderates, forms part of the Democratic Party’s current faction of conservative Democrats.

Since election night in 2000, the color blue has become the identified color of the Democratic Party, all major broadcast television networks used blue for Democrat Al Gore.

7.8: The History of Political Parties

7.8.1: The First Political Parties: Federalists and Anti-Federalists

The winning supporters of ratification of the Constitution were called Federalists, the opponents were called Anti-Federalists.

Learning Objective

Distinguish the differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist parties

Key Points

• The immediate problem faced by the Federalists was not simply one of acceptance of the Constitution, but the more fundamental concern of legitimacy for the government of the new republic.
• The Anti-Federalists objected to the new powerful central government, the loss of prestige for the states, and saw the Constitution as a potential threat to personal liberties.
• The major stumbling block for the Anti-Federalists was that the supporters of the Constitution had been more deeply committed, had cared more, and had outmaneuvered the less energetic opposition.

Key Terms

Bill of Rights

The collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution.

Anti-Federalists

Opponents of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and a strong central government.

federalist

Supporters of ratification of the U.S. Constitution

The Federalist Era was a period in American history from roughly 1789-1801 when the Federalist Party was dominant in American politics. This period saw the adoption of the United States Constitution and the expansion of the federal government. In addition, the era saw the growth of a strong nationalistic government under the control of the Federalist Party. Among the most important events of this period were the foreign entanglements between France and Great Britain, the assertion of a strong centralized federal government, and the creation of political parties. The First Party System of the United States featured the Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party (also known as the Anti-Federalist Party).

The United States Constitution was written in 1787 and unanimously ratified by the states in 1788, taking effect in 1789. The winning supporters of ratification of the Constitution were called Federalists and the opponents were called Anti-Federalists. The immediate problem faced by the Federalists was not simply one of acceptance of the Constitution but the more fundamental concern of legitimacy for the government of the new republic. With this challenge in mind, the new national government needed to act with the idea that every act was being carried out for the first time and would therefore have great significance and be viewed along the lines of the symbolic as well as practical implications. The first elections to the new United States Congress returned heavy Federalist majorities. The first Anti-Federalist movement opposed the draft Constitution in 1788, primarily because they lacked a Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists, or Democrat-Republicans, objected to the new powerful central government and the loss of prestige for the states, and saw the Constitution as a potential threat to personal liberties. During the ratification process the Anti-Federalists presented a significant opposition in all but three states. A major stumbling block for the Anti-Federalists, however, was that the supporters of the Constitution were more deeply committed and outmaneuvered the less energetic opposition.

Federalists v. Anti-Federalists

The dynamic force in the Presidency of George Washington was the secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton . Hamilton had the vision of a strong national government and a strong national economy. He devised a complex multi-faceted program to achieve that goal and simultaneously solved the debt problem for most of the states. Hamilton created a financial system for national and international stability that included paying off the national debt and laying the infrastructure for further economic development. Hamilton’s programs included:

Alexander Hamilton

Alexander Hamilton, secretary of treasury under President George Washington, became a leading Federalist in the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalists debate.

• the assumption of the state’s Revolutionary War debts;
• the payoffs of the debts of the old Continental Congress;
• the payoffs of loans from foreign treasuries and investors;
• the creation of a system of taxes and tariffs to pay for the debt; and
• a First Bank of the United States to handle the finances.

Congress approved Hamilton’s programs, which would later be labeled Federalist, over the opposition of the old Anti-Federalists element, which increasingly coalesced under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. In order to build a national network in support of his programs, Hamilton created a coalition of supporters in every city and state, often consisting of prominent businessmen and financiers. Hamilton’s network of supporters grew into the “Federalist Party” that included most, but not all, of those Federalists who supported the Constitution in 1788. A major emphasis of Hamilton’s policies and indeed the general outlook for the Federalist Party was that the federal government was to preside over the national economy.

Rise of political parties

Federalists during the ratification period had been unified around the Constitution and support for its form of government. Following the acceptance of the Constitution, the initial Federalist movement faded briefly only to be taken up by a second movement centered upon the support for Alexander Hamilton’s policies of a strong nationalist government, loose construction of the Constitution, and mercantile economic policies. The support around these policies eventually established the first official political party in the United States as the Federalist Party. The Party reached its political apex with the election of the strongly Federalist President John Adams. However the defeat of Adams in the election of 1800 and the death of Hamilton led to the decline of the Federalist Party from which it did not recover. While there were still Federalists after 1800, the party never again enjoyed the power and influence it had held earlier. One of the Federalists Era’s greatest accomplishments was that republican government survived and took root in the United States.

Republicans, or the Democratic-Republican Party, was founded in 1792 by Jefferson and James Madison. The party was created in order to oppose the policies of Hamilton and the Federalist Party. In contrast to the Federalists, the Republican supported a strict construction interpretation of the Constitution, and denounced many of Hamilton’s proposals (especially the national bank) as unconstitutional. The party promoted states’ rights and the primacy of the yeoman farmer over bankers, industrialists, merchants, and other monied interests. The party supported states’ rights as a measure against the tyrannical nature of a large centralized government that they feared the Federal government could have easily become. It would be Jefferson and the Republican Party that would replace the Federalist Party domination of politics following the election of 1800.

7.8.2: Political Parties from 1800–1824

The First Party System refers to political party system existing in the United States between roughly 1792 and 1824.

Learning Objective

Distinguish the issues and policies supported by the first political parties and identify the central elements of the First Party System

Key Points

• Rising out of the Federalist v. Anti-Federalist debates, it featured two national parties competing for control of the presidency, Congress, and the states: the Federalist Party and the rival Democratic-Republican Party.
• The Federalists were dominant until 1800, and the Republicans were dominant after 1800.
• The Federalists appealed to the business community, the Republicans to the planters and farmers.

Key Terms

Whig Party

The Whig Party was a political party of the United States during the era of Jacksonian democracy. Considered integral to the Second Party System and operating from the early 1830s to the mid-1850s, the party was formed in opposition to the policies of President Andrew Jackson and his Democratic Party. In particular, the Whigs supported the supremacy of Congress over the presidency and favored a program of modernization and economic protectionism.

republican

Advocating or supporting a republic as a form of government.

The First Party System is a model of American politics used by political scientists and historians to periodize the political party system existing in the United States between roughly 1792 and 1824. Rising out of the Federalist v. Anti-Federalist debates, it featured two national parties competing for control of the presidency, Congress, and the states: the Federalist Party, created largely by Alexander Hamilton, and the rival Democratic-Republican Party formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The Federalists were dominant until 1800, and the Republicans were dominant after 1800.

The First Party System

Federalist poster about 1800. Washington (in heaven) tells partisans to keep the pillars of Federalism, Republicanism and Democracy

In an analysis of the contemporary party system, Jefferson wrote on Feb. 12, 1798: “Two political Sects have arisen within the US, the one believing that the executive is the branch of our government which the most needs support; the other, that like the analogous branch in the English Government, it is already too strong for the republican parts of the Constitution; and therefore in equivocal cases they incline to the legislative powers: the former of these are called federalists, sometimes aristocrats or monocrats, and sometimes tories, after the corresponding sect in the English Government of exactly the same definition: the latter are stiled republicans, whigs, jacobins, anarchists, disorganizers, etc. these terms are in familiar use with most persons. “

Both parties originated in national politics, but later expanded their efforts to gain supporters and voters in every state. The Federalists appealed to the business community, the Republicans to the planters and farmers. By 1796 politics in every state was nearly monopolized by the two parties, with party newspapers and caucuses becoming especially effective tools to mobilize voters.

The Federalists promoted the financial system of Treasury Secretary Hamilton, which emphasized federal assumption of state debts, a tariff to pay off those debts, a national bank to facilitate financing, and encouragement of banking and manufacturing. The Republicans, based in the plantation South, opposed a strong executive power, were hostile to a standing army and navy, demanded a limited reading of the Constitutional powers of the federal government, and strongly opposed the Hamilton financial program. Perhaps even more important was foreign policy, where the Federalists favored Britain because of its political stability and its close ties to American trade, while the Republicans admired the French and the French Revolution. Jefferson was especially fearful that British aristocratic influences would undermine Republicanism. Britain and France were at war from 1793 through 1815, with one brief interruption. American policy was neutrality, with the Federalists hostile to France, and the Republicans hostile to Britain. The Jay Treaty of 1794 marked the decisive mobilization of the two parties and their supporters in every state. President George Washington, while officially nonpartisan, generally supported the Federalists, and that party made Washington their iconic hero. The First Party System ended during the Era of Good Feelings (1816–1824), as the Federalists shrank to a few isolated strongholds and the Republicans lost unity. In 1824-28, as the Second Party System emerged, the Republican Party split into the Jacksonian faction, which became the modern Democratic Party in the 1830s, and the Henry Clay faction, which was absorbed by Clay’s Whig Party.

7.8.3: Jacksonian Democrats: 1824–1860

Jacksonian democracy is the political movement toward greater democracy for the common man typified by American politician Andrew Jackson.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast Jacksonian democracy with Jeffersonian democracy

Key Points

• Jackson’s policies followed the era of Jeffersonian democracy which dominated the previous political era.
• Jackson’s supporters began to form the modern Democratic Party; they fought the rival Adams and Anti-Jacksonian factions, which soon emerged as the Whigs.
• During the Jacksonian era, the suffrage was extended to (nearly) all white male adult citizens.

Key Terms

strict constructionism

a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation (the phrase is also commonly used more loosely as a generic term for conservatism among the judiciary)

laissez-faire

an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from tariffs, government subsidies, and enforced monopolies, with only enough government regulations sufficient to protect property rights against theft and aggression

Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson (March 15, 1767 – June 8, 1845) was the seventh President of the United States (1829–1837).

Jacksonian democracy is the political movement toward greater democracy for the common man typified by American politician Andrew Jackson and his supporters. Jackson’s policies followed the era of Jeffersonian democracy which dominated the previous political era. The Democratic-Republican Party of the Jeffersonians became factionalized in the 1820s. Jackson’s supporters began to form the modern Democratic Party; they fought the rival Adams and Anti-Jacksonian factions, which soon emerged as the Whigs.

More broadly, the term refers to the period of the Second Party System (mid-1824–1860) when the democratic attitude was the spirit of that era. It can be contrasted with the characteristics of Jeffersonian democracy. Jackson’s equal political policy became known as “Jacksonian Democracy,” subsequent to ending what he termed a “monopoly” of government by elites. Jeffersonians opposed inherited elites but favored educated men while the Jacksonians gave little weight to education. The Whigs were the inheritors of Jeffersonian Democracy in terms of promoting schools and colleges. During the Jacksonian era, the suffrage was extended to (nearly) all white male adult citizens.

In contrast to the Jeffersonian era, Jacksonian democracy promoted the strength of the presidency and executive branch at the expense of Congress, while also seeking to broaden the public’s participation in government. They demanded elected (not appointed) judges and rewrote many state constitutions to reflect the new values. In national terms the Jacksonians favored geographical expansion, justifying it in terms of Manifest Destiny. There was usually a consensus among both Jacksonians and Whigs that battles over slavery should be avoided. The Jacksonian Era lasted roughly from Jackson’s 1828 election until the slavery issue became dominant after 1850 and the American Civil War dramatically reshaped American politics as the Third Party System emerged.

Jacksonian democracy was built on the following general principles:

Expanded Suffrage

The Jacksonians believed that voting rights should be extended to all white men. By 1820, universal white male suffrage was the norm, and by 1850 nearly all requirements to own property or pay taxes had been dropped.

Manifest Destiny

This was the belief that white Americans had a destiny to settle the American West and to expand control from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific and that the West should be settled by yeoman farmers. However, the Free Soil Jacksonians, notably Martin Van Buren, argued for limitations on slavery in the new areas to enable the poor white man to flourish; they split with the main party briefly in 1848. The Whigs generally opposed Manifest Destiny and expansion, saying the nation should build up its cities.

Patronage

Also known as the spoils system, patronage was the policy of placing political supporters into appointed offices. Many Jacksonians held the view that rotating political appointees in and out of office was not only the right but also the duty of winners in political contests. Patronage was theorized to be good because it would encourage political participation by the common man and because it would make a politician more accountable for poor government service by his appointees. Jacksonians also held that long tenure in the civil service was corrupting, so civil servants should be rotated out of office at regular intervals. However, it often led to the hiring of incompetent and sometimes corrupt officials due to the emphasis on party loyalty above any other qualifications.

Strict Constructionism

Like the Jeffersonians who strongly believed in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, Jacksonians initially favored a federal government of limited powers. Jackson said that he would guard against “all encroachments upon the legitimate sphere of State sovereignty”. This is not to say that Jackson was a states’ rights extremist; indeed, the Nullification Crisis would find Jackson fighting against what he perceived as state encroachments on the proper sphere of federal influence. This position was one basis for the Jacksonians’ opposition to the Second Bank of the United States. As the Jacksonians consolidated power, they more often advocated expanding federal power and presidential power in particular.

Laissez-faire Economics

Complementing a strict construction of the Constitution, the Jacksonians generally favored a hands-off approach to the economy, as opposed to the Whig program sponsoring modernization, railroads, banking, and economic growth. The leader was William Leggett of the Locofocos in New York City.

Banking

In particular, the Jacksonians opposed government-granted monopolies to banks, especially the national bank, a central bank known as the Second Bank of the United States. Despite this, Jackson did not actively seek to destroy or fight the Bank, only vetoing the Bank’s recharter and subsequently pulling out federal reserves. The Whigs, who strongly supported the Bank, were led by Daniel Webster and Nicholas Biddle, the bank chairman. Jackson himself was opposed to all banks, because he believed they were devices to cheat common people; he and many followers believed that only gold and silver could be money (.

Jackson and Banking

Democratic cartoon shows Jackson slaying the monster Bank

7.8.4: The Golden Age: 1860–1932

Despite outward indicators of prosperity, the Gilded Age (late 1860s to 1896) was an era characterized by turmoil and political contention.

Learning Objective

Describe major economic and political developments during the “Gilded Age” of American history and identify what led to these developments

Key Points

• The term “The Gilded Age” was coined by writers Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner in The Gilded Age: A Tale of Today, which satirized what they believed to be an era of serious social problems obscured by a thin veneer of prosperity.
• The Gilded Age was a time of enormous growth that attracted millions from Europe.
• Gilded Age politics, called the Third Party System, was characterized by intense competition between the two parties, with minor parties coming and going, especially on issues of concern to prohibitionists, labor unions and farmers.
• The Fourth Party System lasted from about 1896 to 1932, and was dominated by the Republican Party; it is generally referred to as the Progressive Era.

Key Terms

Reconstruction

A period in U.S. history from 1865 to 1877, during which the nation tried to resolve the status of the ex-Confederate states, the ex-Confederate leaders, and the Freedmen (ex-slaves) after the American Civil War.

Third Party System

A period in American political history from about 1854 to the mid-1890s that featured profound developments in issues of nationalism, modernization, and race.

In United States history, the Gilded Age was the period following the Civil War, running from the late 1860s to about 1896 when the next era began, the Progressive Era. The term was coined by writers Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner in The Gilded Age: A Tale of Today, which satirized what they believed to be an era of serious social problems obscured by a thin veneer of prosperity.

The Gilded Age was a time of enormous growth that attracted millions of European immigrants. Railroads were the major industry, but the factory system, mining, and labor unions also gained in importance . Despite the growth, there was serious cause for concern, which manifested in two major nationwide depressions, known as the Panic of 1873 and the Panic of 1893. Furthermore, most of the growth and prosperity came in the North and West – states that had been part of the Union. States in the South, part of the defeated Confederate States of America, remained economically devastated; their economies became increasingly tied to cotton and tobacco production, which suffered low prices. African Americans in the south experienced the worst setbacks, as they were stripped of political power and voting rights.

Gilded Age

The Breakers, the summer home of Cornelius Vanderbilt II, located in Newport, Rhode Island, United States. It was built in 1893, added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1971, and designated a National Historic Landmark in 1994.

During the 1870s and 1880s, the U.S. economy rose at the fastest rate in its history, with real wages, wealth, gross domestic product (GDP), and capital formation all increasing rapidly. Between 1865 and 1898, the output of wheat increased by 256%, corn by 222%, coal by 800% and miles of railway track by 567%. Thick national networks for transportation and communication were created. The corporation became the dominant form of business organization, and a managerial revolution transformed business operations. By the beginning of the 20^th century, per capita income and industrial production in the United States led the world, with per capita incomes double that of Germany or France, and 50% higher than Britain.

Politics in the Gilded Age

Gilded Age politics, called the Third Party System, were characterized by rampant corruption and intense competition between the two parties (with minor parties coming and going), especially on issues of Prohibitionist, labor unions and farmers. The Democrats and Republicans fought over control of offices as well as major economic issues. The dominant political issues included rights for African Americans, tariff policies and monetary policies. Reformers worked for civil service reform, prohibition and women’s suffrage, while philanthropists built colleges and hospitals, and the many religious denominations exerted a major sway in both politics and everyday life.

Voter turnout was very high and often exceeded 80% or even 90% in some states as the parties were adamant about rallying their loyal supporters. Competition was intense and elections were very close. In the South, lingering resentment over the Civil War meant that most states would vote Democrat. After the end of Reconstruction in 1877, competition in the South took place mainly inside the Democratic Party. Nationwide, voter turnout fell sharply after 1900.

The Third Party System (1854-1890s)

The Third Party System lasted from about 1854 to the mid-1890s, and featured profound developments in issues of nationalism, modernization, and race. It was dominated by the new Republican Party (also known as the Grand Old Party or GOP), which claimed success in saving the Union, abolishing slavery and enfranchising the freedmen, while adopting many Whiggish modernization programs such as national banks, railroads, high tariffs, homesteads, social spending (such as on greater Civil War veteran pension funding), and aid to land grant colleges. While most elections from 1874 through 1892 were extremely close, the opposition Democrats won only the 1884 and 1892 presidential elections. The northern and western states were largely Republican, save for closely balanced New York, Indiana, New Jersey, and Connecticut. After 1874, the Democrats took control of the “Solid South. “

The Fourth Party System (1896-1932)

The Fourth Party System lasted from about 1896 to 1932, and was dominated by the Republican Party, excepting the 1912 split in which Democrats held the White House for eight years. American history texts usually call it the Progressive Era, and it included World War I and the start of the Great Depression. The period featured a transformation from the issues of the Third Party System, instead focusing on domestic issues such as regulation of railroads and large corporations (“trusts”), the money issue (gold versus silver), the protective tariff, the role of labor unions, child labor, the need for a new banking system, corruption in party politics, primary elections, direct election of senators, racial segregation, efficiency in government, women’s suffrage, and control of immigration. Foreign policy centered on the 1898 Spanish-American War, Imperialism, the Mexican Revolution, World War I, and the creation of the League of Nations.

7.8.5: The Modern Era of Political Parties

Modern politics in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.

Learning Objective

Demonstrate knowledge of the key issues that divide the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States

Key Points

• These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress since at least 1856.
• The Democratic Party, since the division of the Republican Party in the election of 1912, has positioned itself as progressive and supporting labor in economic as well as social matters.
• Today, the Republican Party supports an American conservative platform, with further foundations in economic liberalism, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism.

Key Terms

two-party system

A two-party system is a system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and, as a result, nearly all elected officials are members of one of the two major parties.

Republican Party

The Republican Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States of America.

Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is one of two major political parties in the United States.

Modern politics in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. One of these two parties has won every United States presidential election since 1852 and has controlled the United States Congress since at least 1856.

Modern Two-Party System

The 2008 elections, while won by a Democrat, reflect the relatively even divide in the United States between the Republican and Democratic Parties.

The Democratic Party is one of two major political parties in the United States, and is the oldest political party in the world. Since the division of the Republican Party in the election of 1912, it has positioned itself as progressive and supporting labor in economic as well as social matters. The economic philosophy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which has strongly influenced American liberalism, has shaped much of the party’s agenda since 1932, and Roosevelt’s New Deal coalition controlled the White House until 1968.

In 2004, it was the larger major political party, with 72 million voters (42.6% of 169 million registered) claiming affiliation. The current President of the United States, Barack Obama, is the 15^th Democrat to hold the office, and since the 2006 midterm elections, the Democratic Party has held a majority in the United States Senate.

A 2011 USA Today review of state voter rolls indicates that registered Democrats declined in 25 of the 28 states that register voters by party. Democrats were still the largest political party with more than 42 million voters (compared with 30 million Republicans and 24 million independents). However, in 2011, the number of Democrats shrank 800,000, and from 2008 they were down by 1.7 million, or 3.9%.

The other major contemporary political party in the United States is the Republican Party. It is often referred to as the GOP, which stands for “Grand Old Party,” or “Gallant Old Party”. Founded in 1854 by Northern anti-slavery expansion activists and modernizers, the Republican Party rose to prominence with the election of Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican to campaign on the Northern principles of anti-slavery. The party presided over the American Civil War and Reconstruction but was harried by internal factions and scandals toward the end of the 19^th century. Today, the Republican Party supports an American conservative platform, with foundations in economic liberalism, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism.

Former President George W. Bush was the 19^th Republican to hold that office. The party’s nominee for President of the United States in the 2012 presidential election is former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Since the 2010 midterm elections, the Republicans have held a majority in the United States House of Representatives.

USA Today’s review of state voter rolls indicates that registered Republicans declined in 21 of the 28 states that register voters by party, and that Republican registrations were down 350,000 in 2011. The number of independents rose in 18 states, increasing by 325,000 in 2011, and was up more than 400,000 from 2008, or 1.7%.

7.9: Party Functions

7.9.1: Hosting Conventions

The major political parties in the U.S. host the Democratic and Republican National Conventions to select candidates and rally supporters.

Learning Objective

Describe the informal aims of the national conventions

Key Points

• The formal purpose of hosting presidential nominating conventions is to select a party’s presidential and vice presidential candidates, to develop a party platform, and to adopt the rules governing the election cycle.
• Presidential nominating conventions are also significant in rallying support for a given party, unifying party views, and showcasing a party’s leadership to a national audience.
• The most prominent presidential nominating conventions include the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention.
• Because of a recent trend of Democratic and Republican presidential nominees being known well in advance of these conventions, the Democratic and Republic National Conventions have steered away from their formal purposes to serve more as a point of party unification.

Key Terms

presidential nominating convention

Convention in which presidential and vice presidential candidates are determined, party platforms are established, and rules governing the election cycle are adopted. The most influential presidential nominating conventions include the Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

platform

A political stance on a broad set of issues, which are called planks.

delegate

A person authorized to act as representative for another; in politics, a party representative allocated to nominate a party candidate.

Political parties in the United States that will be fielding nominees in an upcoming U.S. presidential election are responsible for hosting presidential nominating conventions. The formal purpose of the conventions is to select the party’s candidates for president and vice president. The conventions develop a statement of party principles and goals known as a party platform. Another formal purpose of presidential nominating conventions is to adopt the rules for a given party’s activities, such as the presidential nominating process for the following election cycle.

Nominating conventions also carry significance beyond their formal purposes. Conventions are an opportunity to rally political supporters and reward the party faithful by allowing them to participate asdelegates. Due to the national media presence surrounding presidential nominating conventions, they are also excellent tools to showcase a given party’s leaders and policies to prospective voters.

The two major political parties in the U.S. host the quadrennial Democratic National Convention and Republican National Convention to determine their respective presidential and vice presidential candidates. The Democratic National Committee administers the Democratic National Convention while the Republican National Committee administers the Republican National Convention. In recent years, candidates from the Democratic and Republican parties have been known in advance of these conventions. Subsequently, the more modern focus of the Democratic and Republican National Conventions has been to unify each respective party by having delegates vote on issues that the nominee can incorporate into their presidential campaign. The conventions also generate positive publicity towards each respective party.

Democratic National Convention

Presidential nominating conventions, like the Democratic National Convention, host influential speakers to increase party unity.

Some minor political parties in the U.S. also utilize conventions to select their presidential candidates. Examples of such minor parties include the Green Party, Socialist Party USA, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, and Reform Party USA.

7.9.2: Selecting Candidates

Election candidates have often been determined before conventions, but are still formally declared as their party’s official candidates at the conventions.

Learning Objective

Describe the roll call method of voting during a convention

Key Points

• The two major parties in the U.S. formally select their candidates during the quadrennial Democratic National Convention and Republic National Convention.
• Presidential and vice presidential candidates are often known well in advance of presidential nominating conventions because of changes in election laws, earlier primaries and caucuses, and the manner in which political campaigns are now run.
• The Democratic and Republican Parties have their own formulas for determining the size of state delegations that will vote for a presidential and vice presidential candidate during presidential nominating conventions.

Key Terms

rolling roll call of the states

an alphabetical calling of the states during a presidential nominating convention to either declare its delegate count or pass

delegate

A person authorized to act as representative for another; in politics, a party representative allocated to nominate a party candidate.

primary

A primary election; a preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

caucus

A meeting, especially a preliminary meeting, of persons belonging to a party, to nominate candidates for public office, or to select delegates to a nominating convention, or to confer regarding measures of party policy; a political primary meeting.

Introduction

The Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee create the rules governing the caucuses and primaries in which the field of presidential nominees is narrowed. These nominees then proceed to the presidential nominating conventions where a candidate will officially be determined.

The presidential candidates of the two major political parties in the United States are formally confirmed during the Democratic National Convention and Republican National Convention. Each party determines its own rules for the format of the convention and how participation is to be apportioned. Generally, each U.S. state and territory is allotted a select number of voting representatives, known individually as delegates and collectively as the delegation. The size of each delegation depends upon the unique formula used by a given political party. Such formulas usually consider the population of a given state, the state’s previous presidential voting patterns, and the number of Congressional representatives or government officials in a state who are members of the party.

2004 Republican National Convention Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were declared the official presidential and vice presidential candidates at the 2004 Republican National Convention.

Voting Using the Rolling Roll Call

The voting method used during a convention is known as a rolling roll call of the states. The spokespersons of the states are called upon in alphabetical order by state name to announce their delegation count or to pass. After all states have either declared or passed, those states that passed must announce their delegate count. The decision to pass is usually made beforehand to give either the delegation of the presidential or vice presidential candidates’ home state the honor of casting the majority-making vote.

In recent years, presidential nominees have been known well in advance of the Democratic and Republican National Conventions due to changes in election laws, earlier primary elections and caucuses, and the manner in which political campaigns are run. However, the presidential nominating conventions still serve as the official method of selecting presidential candidates.

7.9.3: Organizing Campaigns and Elections

Political parties play key roles in organizing campaigns and elections.

Learning Objective

Name other activities that fall under the auspicies of the national political committees

Key Points

• The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) are the central organizations devoted to campaign and political activity. They establish connections between followers of the Democratic and Republican parties with the respective leadership of each party.
• At the start of the preliminary election season, the DNC and RNC are responsible for establishing the rules for the caucuses and primary elections.
• The DNC and RNC supervise the presidential nominating conventions that officially declare the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Once a presidential candidate is chosen from each respective party, the Committees provide crucial candidate support and party-building activities.

Key Terms

presidential nominating convention

Convention in which presidential and vice presidential candidates are determined, party platforms are established, and rules governing the election cycle are adopted. The most influential presidential nominating conventions include the Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

caucus

A meeting, especially a preliminary meeting, of persons belonging to a party, to nominate candidates for public office, or to select delegates to a nominating convention, or to confer regarding measures of party policy; a political primary meeting.

primary

A primary election; a preliminary election to select a political candidate of a political party.

In addition to hosting conventions and selecting candidates to run in presidential elections, political parties play key roles in organizing campaigns and elections. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC), in particular, are the central organizations devoted to campaign and political activity in support of the Democratic and Republican Party candidates. The DNC and RNC are permanent offices maintained by the Democratic and Republican parties to govern the daily operations of each party, as well as the special election and campaign operations conducted every four years. The DNC and RNC establish connections between followers of the Democratic and Republican parties with the respective leadership of each party. Such connections play a vital role in allowing presidential candidates to maintain a base of supporters they can depend upon during elections.

The Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee connect voters with party leadership in a variety of ways. At the start of the preliminary election season, the DNC and RNC are responsible for establishing the rules for the caucuses and primary elections. These caucuses and primaries are usually not run by the DNC and RNC but instead by the state. Aside from the process of nominating a presidential candidate, the DNC and RNC’s roles in selecting candidates to run on the Democratic and Republican Party ticket is minimal.

Later, the DNC and RNC supervise the presidential nominating conventions that officially declare the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Once a presidential candidate is chosen from each respective party, the Democratic and Republican National Committees provide crucial candidate support and party-building activities. Candidate support activities range from collecting polling data to running ad campaigns. Meanwhile, party-building activities often include voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives. The DNC and RNC also engage in coordinating fundraising and election strategies.

Polling Data

The DNC and RNC collect polling data to produce maps showing where candidates have leads in certain areas. This information is helpful in developing campaign strategies.

7.9.4: Informing the Public

Informing the public by traditional and modern mass media is a goal of the DNC and RNC, who gain supporters by remaining.

Learning Objective

Describe the role the national committees play on behalf of the major political parties

Key Points

• The DNC and RNC utilize traditional mass media press releases and staged events as well as more modern social media sites, like Facebook and Twitter, to express their views and attract supporters.
• Informing the public and affecting what is reported on in the media is of vital importance in attracting voters, gaining campaign donations, and effectively promoting party leaders and causes.
• Political parties engage in spin with journalists and produce and air advertisements to manage the way their party is seen in the media.

Key Terms

Republican National Committee

The national leadership of the Republic Party that is responsible for promoting the Republic political platform and coordinating fundraising and election strategies

Democratic National Committee

The national leadership of the Democratic Party that is responsible for promoting the Democratic political platform and coordinating fundraising and election strategies

spin

To present, describe, or interpret, or to introduce a bias or slant so as to give something a favorable or advantageous appearance.

Public Relations

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) provide an important link between the Democratic and Republican leaders and the general public. The DNC and RNC vie for the attention of the public in hopes of attracting voters. using multimedia strategies that encompass both traditional as well as more modern approaches. Traditional mass media approaches include issuing press releases and coordinating staged events; more modern approaches include reaching out to prospective constituents through Facebook pages, Twitter feeds, and YouTube channels.

Both Democratic and Republican parties have developed sophisticated websites that provide extensive information about voting logistics, candidates and officeholders, and issue positions. These party websites also provide a means for direct participation in the DNC or RNC by providing information on volunteer activities and other opportunities to contribute to the Democratic and Republican Parties.

Political parties also play an active role in managing the media. In addition to hosting websites and populating social media, parties engage in spin with journalists and produce and air radio and television advertisements. It is important for parties to interact with the media in order to attract positive attention to their political candidates and remain viable in the public eye. Parties that have a strong media presence are the most effective in attracting volunteers and financial contributors.

Spin

Press conferences are one way in which politicians can engage journalists in spin, or interpreting an issue or event in the favor of their political party.

The role of parties in informing the public can most clearly be seen in the relationship between the DNC and the Obama administration. After his inauguration, Obama transferred his Obama for America organization to the DNC, which renamed it Organizing for America. Under the leadership of the DNC, Organizing for America controls the BarackObama.com domain and website and works closely with the White House New Media Director.

7.9.5: Checking the Power of the Governing Party

The legislative branch can significantly affect the power of the governing party by employing a series of checks and balances.

Learning Objective

Describe the relationship between the political parties and a system of checks and balances

Key Points

• The Democratic and Republican Parties can check the power of the governing executive party by holding the majority of seats in the legislative branch of government, also known as the Congress.
• The system of checks and balances prevents any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. However, this system can also prevent progress when one party is in office and another party occupies the majority of legislative seats.
• The legislative branch can check the power of the governing party by overriding presidential vetoes, starting investigations with the executive branch, ratifying treaties signed by the president, confirming presidential appointments, and having the power to impeach.

Key Terms

divided government

A situation in which one political party controls the White House while another party controls the majority of the Congress

executive branch

The branch of government that oversees the carrying out of the laws, led by the president.

checks and balances

A system for multiple parties wherein each has some control over the actions of each of the others.

legislative branch

The branch of government which is concerned with the making of laws; made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate, collectively known as the Congress

Checking the Power of the Governing Party

The Democratic and Republican Parties can check the power of the governing party by holding seats in the legislative branch of the government. The legislative branch of the United States government is composed of the Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate has the power to consider presidential appointments of judges and executive department heads. It also has the ability to ratify treaties. The House of Representatives has the ability to impeach and the Senate may remove executive and judicial officers. The legislative branch can also check the governing party by starting investigations against the executive branch. The House and Senate may, additionally, override presidential vetoes and have the sole power to declare war.

If one political party holds the executive branch of government then another political party can check the power of the executive branch by holding a majority of seats in the legislative branch . Several examples exist throughout history of this scenario. One such example can be found from the Obama administration in 2010. While the Democratic Party occupied the executive branch, the Republican Party held the majority of seats in the legislative branch. This division of parties between the executive and legislative branches impairs the ability of the president to enact policies, since the legislative branch must first approve these policies. At the same time, the president can veto legislation passed by Congress. The tendency of the Democratic Party to embrace a more active government role in the lives of citizens versus the tendency of the Republican Party to favor limited government intervention in citizens’ lives, highlights the difficulties that arise when a divided government exists.

Congress

The U.S. Congress holds legislative power.

Checks and Balances

While the checks and balances system between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches prevents any one branch from becoming tyrannical, this system has also been criticized for maintaining the status quo in government rather than promoting changes. There is a strong possibility for disagreement and conflict within the legislature and between the branches.

7.9.6: Uniting Competing Factions Within the Party

Democratic and Republican Parties have historically taken ideologically ambiguous positions in order to attract a wide range of supporters.

Learning Objective

Differentiate between the Democratic and Republican parties

Key Points

• The Democratic and Republican Parties unite their diverse members by adopting party platforms that take middle-of-the-road positions on issues, use generic language, and contain special sections for factions and interest groups within parties.
• In recent decades the Democratic and Republican Parties have developed more polarized positions on national issues.
• Party platforms serve as a way to unite competing factions within parties by embracing broad viewpoints that will appeal to a wide audience and by containing special sections for factions and interest groups within a party.

Key Terms

free market economic system

A market where the price of a good or service is, in theory, determined by supply and demand, rather than by governmental regulation

presidential nominating conventions

Conventions in which presidential and vice presidential candidates are determined, party platforms are established, and rules governing the election cycle are adopted; the most influential presidential nominating conventions include the Democratic and Republican National Conventions

platform

A political stance on a broad set of issues, which are called planks.

The two major Democratic and Republican Parties in the United States have historically been ideologically ambiguous in order to accommodate citizens representing a broad spectrum of interests. Instead of adopting polarizing ideological views, the Democratic and Republican Parties stand for the core American values of liberty, democracy, and equal opportunity that appeal to many Americans.

However, some broad differences still exist between the Democratic and Republican Parties. The Democratic Party is most associated with a liberal attitude toward politics that emphasizes a more active government role in regulating the economy, ensuring equality, and providing a social safety net. Meanwhile, the Republican Party tends to favor a more conservative view advocating a free market economic system and limited government intervention in the lives of citizens. Some have even contended that American parties have become more ideologically distinct in the last three decades as party leaders begin to express polarized opinions on national issues.

Even with evidence of increasing polarization between political parties, they still encompass a wide range of constituents with varying viewpoints. Parties unite these disparate viewpoints by developing party platforms that outline party positions on issues and the actions leaders will take to implement them if elected. These platforms frequently adopt middle-of-the-road positions to encompass the interests of a diverse range of supporters. Most of the language used in party platforms is generic to appeal to a wide audience while other sections are narrowly written to appeal to certain factions or interest groups in the party.

Republican National Convention

Platforms created during presidential nominating conventions unite diverse factions within a party by adopting middle-of-the-road positions on issues and addressing special interest groups in some sections.

Platforms are created during presidential nominating conventions where delegates have an opportunity to vote on salient issues. These votes present a majority view on how issues should be handled and how they can be used by the presidential candidate to unite divergent viewpoints under one popular view.

7.9.7: Coordinating and Promoting Party Policy

Democratic and Republican National Committees help coordinate and promote party policies but do not organize the creation of policies.

Learning Objective

Summarize the role the two national committees play in the formation and promotion of policy

Key Points

• The DNC and RNC do not play a key role in creating party policies but are useful in promoting these policies.
• The mass media is an important tool in promoting party goals and policies.
• The planks of party platforms can lead to highly politicized debates between parties that may evolve into policy stances.

Key Terms

plank

A political issue that is of concern to a faction or a party of the people and the political position that is taken on that issue.

platform

A political stance on a broad set of issues, which are called planks.

media

Means and institutions for publishing and broadcasting information.

Coordinating and Promoting Party Policy

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) help to coordinate and promote party policies, although they are not the central organizations that develop these policies. These organizations are responsible for developing and promoting party platforms, which express the types of views each party embraces. While the planks of platforms do not all necessarily become policies, they can lead to highly politicized debates between parties that become party policy stances. The DNC and RNC promote party policy in a variety of ways through the mass media.

The DNC and RNC coordinate party policy during the Democratic and Republican National Conventions where party platforms are adopted. These conventions allow delegates to vote on issues that can later be incorporated into a presidential candidate’s campaign. While relatively little of the party platform is adopted as public policy, the platforms often become politicized because they are more ideological than pragmatic. For example, the debate over abortion between the Democratic and Republican parties has resulted in policy stances that either support or ban the practice of abortion.

Meanwhile, party policy is promoted through a variety of interactions between parties and the mass media . The mass media is utilized to reach out to a nationwide audience. Traditional mass media techniques of issuing press releases and staging televised debates are used to generate attention toward a party’s policies. Parties also take advantage of more modern social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. The Democratic and Republican Parties, additionally, maintain sophisticated websites where they can offer comprehensive overviews of various party policies. Television and radio advertisements serve as yet another influential way in which parties can promote their policies.

Media

The DNC and RNC utilize various forms of mass media to promote their party’s policies.

7.10: Party Organization

7.10.1: Party Organization

Political parties are political organizations that typically seek to influence government policy by nominating candidates for office.

Learning Objective

Describe the organization of the Democratic and Republican parties in U.S. politics

Key Points

• Parties participate in electoral campaigns and educational outreach or protest actions. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests.
• The need to win popular support in a republic led to the American invention of political parties in the 1790s. Americans were especially innovative in devising new campaign techniques that linked public opinion with public policy through the party.
• The modern political party system in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress since at least 1856.

Key Terms

two-party system

A two-party system is a system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and, as a result, nearly all elected officials are members of one of the two major parties.

political party

A political organization that subscribes to a certain ideology and seeks to attain political power through representation in government.

Example

• The president of the United States, Barack Obama, is the 15th Democrat to hold the office, and since the 2006 midterm elections, the Democratic Party is the majority party for the United States Senate.

Introduction

A political party is a political organization that typically seeks to influence government policy, usually by nominating candidates with aligned political views and trying to seat them in political office. Parties participate in electoral campaigns and educational outreach or protest actions. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests. Throughout most of its history, American politics have been dominated by a two-party system. However, the United States Constitution has always been silent on the issue of political parties; at the time it was signed in 1787, there were no parties in the nation. Indeed, no nation in the world had voter-based political parties. The need to win popular support in a republic led to the American invention of political parties in the 1790s. Americans were especially innovative in devising new campaign techniques that linked public opinion with public policy through the party.

Political scientists and historians have divided the development of America’s two-party system into five eras. The modern two-party system consists of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. In general, since the 1930s the Democratic Party positions itself left of center in American politics, while the Republican Party positions itself as right of center. Several third parties also operate in the United States and from time to time, elect someone to local office.

Modern U.S. Political Party System

The modern political party system in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress since at least 1856.

The Democratic Party is one of two major political parties in the United States. It is the oldest political party in the world . The Democratic Party, since the division of the Republican Party in the election of 1912, has positioned itself as progressive and supporting labor in economic as well as social matters. The economic philosophy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which has strongly influenced American liberalism, has shaped much of the party’s agenda since 1932. Roosevelt’s New Deal coalition had controlled the White House until 1968. In 2004, it was the largest political party, with 72 million voters (42.6% of 169 million registered) claiming affiliation. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, is the fifteenth Democrat to hold the office, and since the 2006 midterm elections, the Democratic Party is the majority party for the United States Senate.

Andrew Jackson

Democrats hail Andrew Jackson as the founder of the party.

7.10.2: National Convention

A United States presidential nominating convention is a political convention held every four years in the United States.

Learning Objective

Explain the proceedings of the national convention

Key Points

• The formal purpose of such a convention is to select the party’s nominee for President, as well as to adopt a statement of party principles and goals known as the platform and adopt the rules for the party’s activities, including the presidential nominating process for the next election cycle.
• Generally, usage of “presidential nominating convention” refers to the two major parties’ quadrennial events: the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention.
• From the point of view of the parties, the convention cycle begins with the Call to Convention. Usually issued about 18 months in advance, the Call is an invitation from the national party to the state and territory parties to convene and select a presidential nominee.
• Each party sets its own rules for the participation and format of the convention. Broadly speaking, each U.S. state and territory party is apportioned a select number of voting representatives, individually known as delegates and collectively as the delegation.
• The convention is typically held in a major city selected by the national party organization 18–24 months before the election is to be held. As the two major conventions have grown into large, publicized affairs with significant economic impact, cities today compete vigorously.

Key Terms

party platform

A statement of principles and purpose issued by a political party.

planks

Planks refer to the goals and proposals in the platform of a political party.

presidential nominating convention

Convention in which presidential and vice presidential candidates are determined, party platforms are established, and rules governing the election cycle are adopted. The most influential presidential nominating conventions include the Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

Example

• The selection of individual delegates and their alternates is also governed by the bylaws of each state party, or in some cases by state law. The 2004 Democratic National Convention counted 4,353 delegates and 611 alternates. The 2004 Republican National Convention had 2,509 delegates and 2,344 alternates.

Introduction

A United States presidential nominating convention is a political convention held every four years in the United States by most of the political parties who will be fielding nominees in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The formal purpose of such a convention is to select the party’s nominee for President, as well as to adopt a statement of party principles and goals known as the platform and adopt the rules for the party’s activities, including the presidential nominating process for the next election cycle . Due to changes in election laws, the primary and caucus calendar, and the manner in which political campaigns are run, conventions since the latter half of the 20^th century have virtually abdicated their original roles, and are today mostly ceremonial affairs.

1876 Democratic National Convention

The 1876 Democratic National Convention at the Merchants Exchange Building in St. Louis, Missouri.

Generally, usage of “presidential nominating convention” refers to the two major parties’ quadrennial events: the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention . Some minor parties also select their nominees by convention, including the Green Party, Socialist Party USA, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, and Reform Party USA.

Roll Call DNC 2008

Roll call of states during the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

Logistics

From the point of view of the parties, the convention cycle begins with the Call to Convention. Usually issued about 18 months in advance, the Call is an invitation from the national party to the state and territory parties to convene to select a presidential nominee. It also sets out the number of delegates to be awarded to each, as well as the rules for the nomination process.

Each party sets its own rules for the participation and format of the convention. Broadly speaking, each U.S. state and territory party is apportioned a select number of voting representatives, individually known as delegates and collectively as the delegation. Each party uses its own formula for determining the size of each delegation, factoring in such considerations as population, proportion of that state’s Congressional representatives or state government officials who are members of the party, and the state’s voting patterns in previous presidential elections. The selection of individual delegates and their alternates is also governed by the bylaws of each state party, or in some cases by state law. The 2004Democratic National Convention counted 4,353 delegates and 611 alternates. The 2004 Republican National Convention had 2,509 delegates and 2,344 alternates.

The convention is typically held in a major city selected by the national party organization 18–24 months before the election is to be held. As the two major conventions have grown into large, publicized affairs with significant economic impact, cities today compete vigorously to be awarded host responsibilities, citing their meeting venues, lodging facilities, and entertainment as well as offering economic incentives. Historically, Midwestern cities such as Chicago, Illinois—which since 1860 has held 25 Republican and Democratic Conventions combined, more than any other urban center in the USA—have become the favored hosts.

Proceedings

Each convention produces a statement of principles known as its platform, containing goals and proposals known as planks. Relatively little of a party platform is even proposed as public policy. Much of the language is generic, while other sections are narrowly written to appeal to factions or interest groups within the party . Since the 1970s, voting has for the most part been perfunctory; the selection of the major parties’ nominees have rarely been in doubt, so a single ballot has always been sufficient. Each delegation announces its vote tallies, usually accompanied with some boosterism of their state or territory. The delegation may pass, nominally to retally their delegates’ preferences, but often to allow a different delegation to give the leading candidate the honor of casting the majority-making vote.

1976 Republican National Convention

President Gerald Ford, as the Republican nominee, shakes hands with nomination foe Ronald Reagan on the closing night of the 1976 Republican National Convention. Vice-Presidential Candidate Bob Dole is on the far left, then Nancy Reagan, Governor Ronald Reagan is at the center shaking hands with President Gerald Ford, Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller is just to the right of Ford, followed by Susan Ford and First Lady Betty Ford.

The evening’s speeches are reserved for major speeches by notable, respected public figures. The speakers at the 2004 Democratic convention included Ted Kennedy, a forty-year veteran of the United States Senate, and Jimmy Carter, a former Democratic President, while at the Republican convention speakers included Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Governor George Pataki of New York, two of the largest states in the nation.

The final day of the convention usually features the formal acceptance speeches from the nominees for president and vice president. Despite recent controversy maintaining that recent conventions were scripted from beginning to end, and that very little news comes out of the convention, the acceptance speech has always been televised by the networks, because it receives the highest ratings of the convention. In addition, the halls of the convention are packed at this time, with many party loyalists sneaking in. Afterwards, balloons are usually dropped and the delegates celebrate the nomination.

7.10.3: The National Party Organization

American political parties have no formal organization at the national level and mainly raise funds through national committees.

Learning Objective

Explain the history of political party organization and the significance of party committees for each of the major political parties

Key Points

• The modern political party system in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
• Among the two major parties, the Democratic Party generally positions itself as left-of-center, while the Republican Party generally positions itself as right-of-center.
• The two major parties, in particular, have no formal organization at the national level controlling membership, activities, or policy positions.
• Party identification becomes somewhat formalized when a person runs for partisan office. In most states, this means declaring oneself a candidate for the nomination of a particular party and intent to enter that party’s primary election.
• At the federal level, each of the two major parties has a national committee that acts as the hub for fundraising and campaign activities. The most significant of these are the Hill committees, which work to elect candidates to each house of Congress.

Key Terms

hill committees

The Hill committees are the common name for political party committees that work to elect members of their own party to United States Congress (“Hill” refers to Capitol Hill, where the seat of Congress, the Capitol, is located).

two-party system

A two-party system is a system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and, as a result, nearly all elected officials are members of one of the two major parties.

Introduction

The modern political party system in the United States is a two-party system dominated by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. These two parties have won every United States presidential election since 1852 and have controlled the United States Congress since at least 1856. Third parties have achieved relatively minor representation at national and state levels. Among the two major parties, the Democratic Party generally positions itself as left-of-center in American politics and supports a modern liberal platform, while the Republican Party generally positions itself as right-of-center and supports a conservative platform.

National Republican Elephant

“The Third-Term Panic” by Thomas Nast, originally published in Harper’s Magazine 7 November 1874.

Democratic Party Logo

Logo of the Democratic Party of the United States. Light blue D inside a darker blue circle.

Many minor or third political parties appear from time to time. They serve as means to advocate policies that the two major political parties eventually adopt. At various times, the Socialist Party, the Farmer-Labor Party and the Populist Party had considerable local strength, and then faded away. Some exceptions exist, like Minnesota’s Farmer–Labor Party merging into the state’s Democratic Party. At present, the Libertarian Party is the most successful third party. New York State has a number of additional third parties that sometimes run their own candidates for office or nominate the nominees of the two main parties. In the District of Columbia, the D.C. Statehood Party has served as a strong third party behind the Democratic Party and Republican Party.

Organization of American political parties

American political parties are more loosely organized than those in other countries. The two major parties, in particular, have no formal organization at the national level that controls membership, activities, or policy positions. Thus, for an American to say that he or she is a member of the Democratic or Republican party is quite different from a Briton stating that he or she is a member of the Conservative or Labour party.

In the United States, one can often become a “member” of a party merely by stating that fact. Such participation does not restrict one’s choices in any way. It also does not give a person any particular rights or obligations within the party, other than possibly allowing that person to vote in that party’s primary elections. A person may choose to attend meetings of one local party committee one day and another party committee the next day. The sole factor that brings one “closer to the action” is the quantity and quality of participation in party activities.

Party Identification

Party identification becomes somewhat formalized when a person runs for partisan office. In most states, this means declaring oneself a candidate for the nomination of a particular party and intent to enter that party’s primary election. A party committee may choose to endorse one or another of those seeking the nomination, but in the end the choice is up to those who choose to vote in the primary.

The result is that American political parties have weak central organizations and little central ideology. A party cannot prevent a person who disagrees with the majority of positions of the party or actively works against the party’s aims from claiming party membership , so long as the voters who choose to vote in the primary elections elect that person. Once in office, an elected official may change parties simply by declaring such intent.

Both parties have stopped being engines for voter mobilization, however. Fewer and fewer Americans identify with one another party, preferring instead to be known as “independent” voters. For example, a 2011 USA Today review of state voter rolls indicates that registered Democrats declined in 25 of 28 states. Democrats were still the largest political party with more than 42 million voters (compared with 30 million Republicans and 24 million independents). But in 2011 Democrats numbers shrank 800,000, and from 2008 they were down by 1.7 million, or 3.9%

Party Committees

At the federal level, each of the two major parties has a national committee that acts as the hub for fundraising and campaign activities. The exact composition of these committees is different for each party, but they are made up primarily of representatives from state parties and affiliated organizations. However, the national committees do not have the power to direct the activities of members of the party .

Political parties

The symbol of the Republican Party in the U.S.

Both parties also have separate campaign committees which work to elect candidates at a specific level. The most significant of these are the Hill committees; the common name for the political party committees that work to elect members of their own party to United States Congress (“Hill” refers to Capitol Hill, where the seat of Congress, the Capitol, is located, ). The four major committees are part of the Democratic and Republican parties and each work to help members of their party get elected to each house.

Aerial View of Capitol Hill

Aerial view of Capitol Hill showing the Capitol, Supreme Court Building, Library of Congress, and congressional office buildings.

7.10.4: State and Local Party Organization

The organization of parties is generally at three different levels: national, state, and local.

Learning Objective

Review the organization of parties at the national, state and local level

Key Points

• State parties consist of state central committees, state conventions and congressional district committees.
• National Committees are the national policy creators of each party. Chairpersons are usually selected by the president of the party in power and the party national committee chooses the chairperson for the other party.
• At the local level, there is a president and a president pro tempore in city councils. Usually the majority party (i.e. Democrat or Republican) has the president in their party. The city is split into districts in which the councilman or councilwoman represents.
• Linkage institutions provide a way for people to get involved in government and the political process.
• Political parties provide many ways for individuals to become involved in the political process, from working to get votes or to actually running for office. They are not the only linkage institutions; others include blogs, non-partisan local governments, and school boards.

Key Terms

city council

A governing body of people elected to oversee management of a city and represent the interests of residents.

chairpersons

National Committees are the national policy creators of each party. Chairpersons are usually selected by the president of the party in power and the party national committee chooses the chairperson for the other party.

linkage institutions

Linkage institutions provide a way for people to get involved in government and the political process.

Example

• Currently, the majority of the overall number of seats held in the state legislatures has been switching between the two parties every few years. As of the U.S. gubernatorial elections of 2010, the Republican party holds an outright majority of approximately 440 with 3,890 seats (53% of total) compared to the Democrat party’s number of 3,450 (47% of total) seats elected on a partisan ballot.

Introduction

The organization of parties is generally at three different levels: national, state, and local. National consists of the quadrennial national convention, the party’s national chairpersons, and the party’s national committee. Next is the state, which consists of state central committees and state conventions, and congressional district committees. Lastly, there is the local level of organizations, which include city and county committees, precinct and ward committees, party activists and volunteers, and party identifiers and voters. Recent trends between the three levels are that they tend to overlap, and more often then not, state and local parties have more influence than the national party around their region, and their decisions tend to override those of the national party .

Tea Party National Rally

Tea Party protesters walk towards the United States Capitol during the Taxpayer March on Washington, September 12, 2009.

The basic structure of a political party would be National Committees, Leadership, National Conventions, States and Localities, and informal groups. National Committees are the national policy creators of each party. Chairpersons are usually selected by the president of the party in power and the party national committee chooses the chairperson for the other party. National conventions are held every four years for nominating presidential candidates. Parties are structured at State and Local levels. Informal groups would be groups like interest groups or the National Federation of Democratic Women.

Both parties also have separate campaign committees which work to elect candidates at a specific level. The most significant of these are the Hill committees, which work to elect candidates to each house of Congress. State parties exist in all fifty states, though their structures differ according to state law, as well as party rules at both the national and the state level.

Political Party Strength in State Governments

Currently, the majority of the overall number of seats held in the state legislatures has been switching between the two parties every few years. As of the U.S. gubernatorial elections of 2010, the Republican party holds an outright majority of approximately 440 with 3,890 seats (53% of total) compared to the Democrat party’s number of 3,450 (47% of total) seats elected on a partisan ballot. Of the 7,382 seats in all of the state legislatures combined, independents and third parties account for only 15 members, not counting the 49 members of the Nebraska Legislature, which is the only legislature in the nation to hold non-partisan elections to determine its members. Due to the results of the 2010 elections, Republicans took control of an additional 19 state legislative chambers, giving them majority control of both chambers in 25 states versus the Democrats’ majority control of both chambers in only 16 states, with 8 states having split or inconclusive control of both chambers (not including Nebraska); previous to the 2010 elections, it was Democrats who controlled both chambers in 27 states versus the Republican party having total control in only 14 states, with eight states divided and Nebraska being nonpartisan.

Local Government in the United States

Local government in the United States is structured in accordance with the laws of the various individual states, territories, and the District of Columbia. Typically each state has at least two separate tiers of local government: counties and municipalities. Some states further have their counties divided into townships. There are several different types of local government at the municipal level, generally reflecting the needs of different levels of population densities; typical examples include the city, town, borough, and village.

Parties in City Councils

Most cities have City Councils. These are sometimes elected officials who meet for a portion of the year on designated days and hours. There is a president and a president pro tempore in city councils. Usually the majority party (i.e. Democrat or Republican) has the president in their party. The city is split into districts in which the councilman or councilwoman represents.

Linkage Institutions

Linkage institutions provide a way for people to get involved in government and the political process. Political parties provide many ways for individuals to become involved in the political process, from working to get votes or to actually running for office. They are not the only linkage institutions; others include blogs, non-partisan local governments, and school boards.

7.10.5: Congressional Campaign Committees

Congressional Campaign Committees exist for both Democrats and Republicans, and work to elect candidates from each party to the House of Representatives.

Learning Objective

Identify the roles and responsibilities of the Congressional Campaign Committees for both major parties

Key Points

• They play a critical role in recruiting candidates, raising funds, and organizing races in districts that are expected to yield politically notable or close elections.
• Of the four congressional campaign committees, the DCCC, with a staff of 25, has the largest in-house research department.
• The position of DCCC committee chair was assumed by Rahm Emanuel after the death of the previous chair, Bob Matsui at the end of the 2004 election cycle. Emanuel led the Democratic Party’s effort to capture the majority in the House of Representatives in the 2006 elections.
• The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is the Republican Hill committee which works to elect Republicans to the United States House of Representatives.
• It supports the election of Republicans to the House through direct financial contributions to candidates and Republican Party organizations; technical and research assistance to Republican candidates and Party organizations; voter registration, education and turnout programs.

Key Terms

congressional caucus

a group of members of the United States Congress that meets to pursue common legislative objectives

national republican congressional committee

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is the Republican Hill committee which works to elect Republicans to the United States House of Representatives.

democratic congressional campaign committee

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is the Democratic Hill committee for the United States House of Representatives, working to elect Democrats to that body.

Democratic Party

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is the Democratic Hill committee for the United States House of Representatives, working to elect Democrats to that body. They play a critical role in recruiting candidates, raising funds, and organizing races in districts that are expected to yield politically notable or close elections. The structure of the committee consists, essentially, of the Chairperson, their staff, and other Democratic members of Congress that serve in roles supporting the functions of the committee. The Chairperson of the DCCC is the fourth ranking position among House Democrats, after the Minority Leader, the Minority Whip and the Democratic Caucus Chairperson.

Of the four congressional campaign committees, the DCCC, with a staff of 25, has the largest in-house research department. In a February 2012 profile of the department, Roll Call wrote that “The DCCC’s team of mostly 20-somethings researches opposition targets for eight weeks at a time, scouring news clips and YouTube videos and traveling across the country to comb through public records, all in hopes of finding a good hit. Discoveries go into hundred-page research books on their targets that are used as bait to recruit candidates, leaked to reporters or cited in campaign advertisements and mail pieces.”

The position of DCCC committee chair was assumed by Rahm Emanuel after the death of the previous chair, Bob Matsui at the end of the 2004 election cycle. Emanuel led the Democratic Party’s effort to capture the majority in the House of Representatives in the 2006 elections. After Emanuel’s election as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Chris Van Hollen became committee chair for the 110^th Congress, and thus for the 2008 elections. He continued through the 2010 elections. For the 2012 election cycle, Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi appointed congressman Steve Israel to serve as the committee’s chair.

Republican Party

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is the Republican Hill committee which works to elect Republicans to the United States House of Representatives. The NRCC was formed in 1866, when the Republican caucuses of the House and Senate formed a “Congressional Committee”. It supports the election of Republicans to the House through direct financial contributions to candidates and Republican Party organizations; technical and research assistance to Republican candidates and Party organizations; voter registration, education and turnout programs; and other Party-building activities. It is a registered 527 group, and its current slogan is “Building a Lasting Majority.”

The NRCC is governed by its chairman, U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions (TX-32) , and an executive committee composed of Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The Chairman is elected by the House Republican Conference after each Congressional election. Republican Leader John Boehner and the seven other elected leaders of the Republican Conference of the House of Representatives serve as ex-officio members of the NRCC’s executive committee.

Pete Sessions

Congressman Pete Sessions, chairman of the NRCC.

7.10.6: The Party in Government

A majority government is a government formed by a governing party that has an absolute majority of seats in the legislature or parliament.

Learning Objective

Discuss how a divided government affects legislation and national policy

Key Points

• In the United States, divided government describes a situation in which one party controls the White House and another party controls one or both houses of the United States Congress.
• Divided government is suggested by some to be an undesirable product of the separation of powers in the United States’ political system.
• In the United States, the constitution is designed to create conflict between the executive and legislative branches of government.
• Despite the perceived problems of divided government, the President and Congress are often able, out of necessity, to establish an effective working relationship.

Key Terms

majority party

the party in a two-party political system that typically holds more than 50% of the seats in the legislature

divided government

A situation in which one political party controls the White House while another party controls the majority of the Congress

majority government

A majority government is a government formed by a governing party that has an absolute majority of seats in the legislature or parliament in a parliamentary system. This is as opposed to a minority government, where even the largest party wins only a plurality of seats and thus must constantly bargain for support from other parties in order to pass legislation and avoid being defeated on motions of no confidence.

Example

• Despite the perceived problems of divided government, the President and Congress are often able, out of necessity, to establish an effective working relationship.

Introduction

A majority government is a government formed by a governing party that has an absolute majority of seats in the legislature or parliament in a parliamentary system. This is as opposed to a minority government, where even the largest party wins only a plurality of seats and thus must constantly bargain for support from other parties in order to pass legislation and avoid being defeated on motions of no confidence. The term “majority government” may also be used for a stable coalition of two or more parties to form an absolute majority. One example of such an electoral coalition is in Australia, where the Liberal and National parties have run as an electoral bloc for decades.

Another example is the current coalition government in the United Kingdom, which is composed of the Conservative and Liberal Democratic parties. The conservatives won the most seats of any single party in the 2010 election, but fell short of an absolute majority. However, by combining with the Liberal Democrats a solid majority in the House of Commons was created. This is the first true coalition government in the UK since World War II.

Divided Government

In the United States, divided government describes a situation in which one party controls the White House and another party controls one or both houses of the United States Congress . Divided government is suggested by some to be an undesirable product of the separation of powers in the United States’ political system. Earlier in the 20^th century, divided government was rare, but since the 1970s it has become increasingly common. Mainly in part due to the Watergate scandal which has popularized the idea that a divided government is a beneficial for the country.

Some conservative and libertarian groups see divided government as beneficial, since it may encourage more policing of those in power by the opposition, as well as limiting spending and the expansion of undesirable laws. In Parliamentary systems such as the United Kingdom, the executive relies on Parliamentary support for its existence. In the United States, however, the constitution is designed to create conflict between the executive and legislative branches of government. Despite the perceived problems of divided government, the President and Congress are often able, out of necessity, to establish an effective working relationship.

Divided Government in the United States

Graphical depiction of the party division of U.S. Congress, 1933-2009.

7.11: Minor Political Parties

7.11.1: The Role of Third Parties

American politics operate as a two-party system, and third party candidates do not play a major role in elections.

Learning Objective

Describe how and why third parties form, their key successes, and hurdles to still further success

Key Points

• In the U.S., “third party” refers to any party other than the major two, which are the Democratic and Republican parties at present.
• Third parties have sometimes launched large campaigns and have won public offices, but have not obtained significant or consistent representation in the federal government.
• Barriers to third party success include a winner-take-all election format, ballot access laws, debate rules, and the vast resources of the two major parties.

Key Terms

two-party system

A two-party system is a system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections at every level of government and, as a result, nearly all elected officials are members of one of the two major parties.

ballot access laws

Statutes governing whether a candidate will be listed on a state election ballot, which may require fees or signed petitions.

third party

A political party in opposition to the main parties in a two-party system.

Example

• Ross Perot’s 1992 candidacy for president as a member of the Independent Party is the last time a third party candidate gained significant traction. Due in part to an agreement by the two major party candidates to allow him to appear in televised debates, Perot received 19% of the popular vote that year.

American politics operate on a two-party system, meaning that two major political parties dominate voting in most elections and consequently dominate elected offices. In modern United States elections, the two major parties are the Democratic and Republican parties. These parties are associated with liberal and conservative views respectively, and nearly all elected officials are affiliated with one of the two. Campaign endorsements, funding, and resources are allocated to candidates on the basis of nomination by one of these two parties.

Although the American political structure has consistently been a two-party system, third parties occasionally influence elections, and third party candidates sometimes obtain elected positions. “Third party” technically refers to the third largest party in a two-party system, but in the U.S. it generally refers to any party running in an election other than the major two. Many third parties have gained some traction throughout American history — at one point, the Socialist Party held 600 mayoral offices, and Theodore Roosevelt obtained a signifiant number of votes in his presidential bid as the Progressive Party candidate in 1912. Today, the largest three “third parties” as measured by the number of registered voters affiliated with them are the Libertarian Party, the Green Party, and the Constitution Party. None of them hold a substantial number of public offices.

There are numerous logistical reasons third parties have not been more successful in the U.S. (as they have been in other democratic countries), including the country’s election structure, ballot rules, and debate rules. American elections are structured as “winner-take-all” votes — in other words, regardless of the margin of victory, the candidate that wins the popular vote attains office while the runner-up does not gain representation. This system is in contrast to proportional representation systems, in which parties are allocated representation based on the proportion of the popular vote they receive. With regards to ballot access, candidates for major elections, such as presidential elections, must meet state-determined criteria to be included on election ballots. Ballot access laws often mandate that candidates pay large fees or collect a large number of signatures to be listed, which often restricts the ability of third party candidates to be put on the ballot. Lastly, since the onset of televised presidential debates in the 1960s, with only a couple of exceptions, third party candidates have been barred from participation. This policy limits their ability to publicize their views and gain a following among the electorate.

While many electoral policies in the U.S. stack the odds against third party success, perhaps the greatest barrier to third party candidates is the vast amount of resources that major parties hold. The two major parties have shifted names, platforms, and constituencies over time, but they have always served as gatekeepers to financial and human resources. Moreover, throughout the past few decades, major party politicians have been able to neutralize third party threats by adopting or discrediting the views of third party candidates. Both major parties are at risk of losing voters if third party campaigns gain traction, so they have both tended to act in ways that promote the two party system.

Ross Perot

Ross Perot is the last third party presidential candidate to gain a substantial number of votes in the general election.

7.11.2: Ideological Third Parties and Splinter Parties

Third party politicians tend to be more ideological than Republicans or Democrats because they do not have to play to the American middle.

Learning Objective

Describe the largest and most significant third parties in American electoral politics

Key Points

• American elections are held between two main political candidates, one a Democrat and one a Republican.
• Third parties are any party other than the Democratic and Republican parties.
• Third parties tend to be much more ideological than their counterparts from the Democratic or Republican parties.

Key Terms

third party

A political party in opposition to the main parties in a two-party system.

two-party system

When two major political parties dominate in most elections and consequently dominate elected office

America’s democratic system is predominantly a two party system. This means that two major political parties dominate in most elections and consequently dominate elected office. Currently, the two major American parties are the Democratic and Republican parties, although the top two parties change over time. A third party is any party that supports a candidate for election other than the two major political parties; at the current moment, a third party would be any party other than the Democratic and Republican parties. Though third parties represent a very small fraction of Americans participating in politics, they do influence elections by drawing votes away from either of the two main parties. Third parties tend to be more ideological and extremist than the Democrats or Republicans. Since third party candidates do not have a legitimate chance of winning national election given the structure of the current system, most third parties do not tend to try to pursue moderate voters and instead stay close to their ideological roots.

The three main third parties are the Libertarian Party, the Green Party, and the Constitution Party . All have over 100,000 registered voters. However, even as these parties are the largest of the third parties, they represent only a fraction of American voters and are more ideologically oriented than Democrats or Republicans. The Libertarian Party supports laissez-faire policies, small government, and is characterized by being socially liberal and fiscally conservative. The Green Party is a progressive party that emphasizes eco-socialism. The Constitution Party is a socially and fiscally conservative party backed by the religious right.

Third Party Candidates

Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate, is accused of “stealing” votes away from Al Gore, a Democrat, in the 2000 election.

Beyond the Libertarian, Green, and Constitution Parties, third parties in American politics tend even farther towards the fringe, emphasizing ideology and avoiding speaking to a broad base. An example of a small right-wing third party would be the America First Party. The AFP is characterized as paleoconservative because they are socially and fiscally conservative. The AFP seeks to enact a smaller government by eliminating federal programs, such as the Department of Education. The AFP further seeks to cut taxes and allow for more robust integration of church and state.

An example of an extreme left wing party is the Peace and Freedom Party. The PFP was created in 1968 as a way to protest participation in the Vietnam War. Today, the PFP advocates to protect the environment. It seeks to advance personal liberties and universal, high quality and free access to education and health care. The PFP seeks to enact a more socialist economy.

Some third parties are organized entirely around one issue, rather than seeking to enact a broad, fringe ideology. For example, the United States Marijuana Party seeks to end the war on drugs and legalize marijuana. Though it is unlikely that anyone from the United States Marijuana Party will ever be elected to national office, they seek to raise attention to the issues that they find important and put these issues on the national stage.

7.11.3: The Impact of Minor Parties

Third-party candidates exert influence by focusing the election on particular issues and taking votes away from major candidates.

Learning Objective

Summarize the place of third parties in American political life

Key Points

• Third-party candidates rarely win election in American campaigns.
• Third-party candidates can shift national attention to particular issues.
• Third-party candidates can take votes away from major political party candidates, influencing the outcome of elections.

Key Term

third party

A political party in opposition to the main parties in a two-party system.

Example

• During the 2000 election, Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader took votes away from Democrat Al Gore, a situation that some people felt contributed to the victory of Republican George W. Bush

Third parties face many obstacles in American politics. They are usually not even allowed on ballots for due to lack of popular support and signatures to warrant a place under local laws. The problem feeds upon itself as the marginality of third parties means that they are not well known enough to attract national attention, and therefore unable to raise the funds that could promote their politics and make them well known. Numerically, third parties have won very few elected positions. Since 1877, there have been 31 U.S. senators, 111 U.S. representatives, and 22 governors that were not affiliated with a major political party.

However, third parties do play an important role in national politics. Third parties usually organize and mobilize around a single issue or position, putting pressure on candidates from major political parties to address these issues. For example, segregationist American Independent Party candidate George Wallace gained 13.5% of the popular vote in the 1968 election. In response, the Republican Party adopted a “Southern Strategy” to win the support of conservative Democrats in the South who opposed the new Civil Rights movement.

Although it is unlikely that a third party candidate will ever garner a plurality of the vote, they can influence the election by taking votes away from a major party candidate. This was at issue during the 2000 election when Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader took votes away from Democrat Al Gore, a situation that some felt contributed to the victory of Republican George W. Bush .

Third Party Candidates

Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate, is accused of “stealing” votes away from Al Gore, a Democrat, in the 2000 election.

7.12: Modern Political Parties

7.12.1: Red States vs. Blue States

The terms “red state” (Republican-voting) and “blue state” (Democratic-voting) were standardized during the 2000 US presidential election.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast red states with blue states

Key Points

• Since 2000, red states are states that vote predominately Republican during an election while blue states are states that vote predominately Democratic during an election.
• Prior to the 2000 presidential election, different media outlet employed divergent color schemes to display states’ party preferences.
• The confusion surrounding the outcome of the 2000 presidential election created conformity around the current understanding of red and blue states even though there was no coordinated media effort to standardize the colors and neither party’s national committee has formally endorsed either color.
• The red state-blue state designation has been criticized for not accurately predicting the outcomes of all elections, for ignoring closely divided states, and for not representing the outcomes of state and local elections accurately.

Key Terms

blue state

A state of the United States voting Democratic in a given election, or tending to vote Democratic in general.

red state

A state of the United States voting Republican in a given election, or tending to vote Republican in general.

electoral college

A body of electors empowered to elect someone to a particular office

During the 2000 US presidential election, the term “red states” was coined to mean those states whose residents primarily vote for the Republican Party and “blue states” as those states whose residents primarily vote for the Democratic Party . The terms have been expanded since 2000 to differentiate between conservative-leaning states, depicted in red, and liberal-leaning states, depicted in blue.

Red States and Blue States

News media frequently display maps in blue, red, and purple to indicate primarily Democratic-voting states, Republican-voting states, and middle ground states.

The association of states with colors to indicate their party voting preferences was not a new phenomenon prior to the 2000 presidential election. In fact, the advent of color television encouraged many television news reporters to depict state voting preferences through color-coded electoral maps. The 2000 presidential election, however, was the first time that red became the standardized color for the Republican Party and blue became the standardized color for the Democratic Party. Previously, color schemes differed across networks. For instance, in the 1980 presidential election NBC used blue for predominately Democratic-voting states and red for predominately Republican-voting states while ABC employed the opposite color scheme. Other networks alternated red and blue between the Democratic and Republican Parties every four years.

The 2000 presidential election proved significant in standardizing red and blue states with the Republican and Democratic Parties, respectively, because of the confusion surrounding the results of the election. Major media outlets started conforming to the same color scheme because the electoral map was continually in view and conformity created easy viewer comprehension. The association of blue with Democrats and red with Republicans is now part of the lexicon of American journalism and has informally been used by each party. Interestingly, though, there was no coordinated media effort to designate Democratic states blue and Republican states red on the 2000 election night and neither party’s national committee has officially accepted the red and blue color designations.

Despite the nearly nationwide acceptance of Republican red states and Democratic blue states, the paradigm has come under criticism. Some argue that assigning partisanship to states is only useful in understanding voting preferences in the Electoral College. The Republican and Democratic Parties within a given state may have platforms that depart from national party platforms. Such a situation can lead a state to favor one party in state and local elections and another party in presidential elections. The designation of states as either being red or blue also ignores those states that are closely divided between Democratic and Republican candidates. Another criticism of the red state-blue state paradigm is that it has not been entirely predictive of how states will vote. For example, in the 2008 presidential election Democratic candidate Barack Obama captured the majority vote in many red states that had not voted Democratic in many years, such as North Carolina, Indiana, and Virginia.

7.12.2: Party Realignments, Dealignments, and Tipping

Realignment refers to national elections in which there are sharp changes in issues that produce new structures that lasts for decades.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast realignment, dealignment and tipping point

Key Points

• Realignment means the coming to power for several decades of a new coalition, replacing an old dominant coalition of the other party.
• Political realignments can be sudden (1–4 years) or can take place more gradually (5–20 years).
• The central holding of realignment theory, first developed in the political scientist V. O. Key, Jr.’s 1955 article, “A Theory of Critical Elections,” is that American elections, parties and policymaking routinely shift in swift, dramatic sweeps.
• Dealignment is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation, without developing a new one to replace it.
• Many scholars argue that the trends in elections in the United States over the last several decades are best characterized as dealignment.
• A tipping point is a point in time when a group —or a large number of group members— rapidly and dramatically changes its behavior by widely adopting a previously rare practice.

Key Terms

Tipping point

A tipping point is a point in time when a group —or a large number of group members— rapidly and dramatically changes its behavior by widely adopting a previously rare practice.

Realignment

Realignment means the coming to power for several decades of a new coalition, replacing an old dominant coalition of the other party.

Dealignment

Dealignment is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation, without developing a new one to replace it.

Example

• A great example of realignment came at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency. In the 2008 elections, the Democrats expanded their majorities in the Congress, and won the Presidency decisively. This was due to the momentum carried over from the Democrats’ 2006 successes, as well as the continued unpopularity of President George W. Bush, whose administration was now faced with a financial crisis and economic recession. Some people believe that 2008 is possibly a realigning election with a long-lasting impact, just as the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt was in 1932 and the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 were. President Obama was reelected in the 2012 election as well, becoming only the third Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote more than once while losing only two states that he had won in 2008.

Introduction

Realigning election are terms from political science and political history describing a dramatic change in the political system. Scholars frequently apply the term to American elections and occasionally to other countries. Usually it means the coming to power for several decades of a new coalition, replacing an old dominant coalition of the other party as in 1896 when the GOP became dominant, or 1932 when the Democrats became dominant. More specifically, it refers to American national elections in which there are sharp changes in issues, party leaders, the regional and demographic bases of power of the two parties, and structure or rules of the political system (such as voter eligibility or financing), resulting in a new political power structure that lasts for decades.

Political realignments can be sudden (1–4 years) or can take place more gradually (5–20 years). Political scientists and historians often disagree about which elections are realignments and what defines a realignment, and even whether realignments occur. The terms themselves are somewhat arbitrary, however, and usage among political scientists and historians does vary.

Realignment

The central holding of realignment theory, first developed in the political scientist V. O. Key, Jr.’s 1955 article, “A Theory of Critical Elections,” is that American elections, parties and policymaking routinely shift in swift, dramatic sweeps. V. O. Key Jr. concluded that systematic patterns are identifiable in American national elections such that cycles occur on a regular schedule: once every 36-years or so. This period of roughly 30 years fits with the notion that these cycles are closely linked to generational change. For social scientists, this point is important, since it helps to provide an objective sociological basis for the theory. Tipping refers to the end of an era and the crystallization of another.

A great example of realignment came at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency. In the 2008 elections, the Democrats expanded their majorities in the Congress, and won the Presidency decisively. This was due to the momentum carried over from the Democrats’ 2006 successes, as well as the continued unpopularity of President George W. Bush, whose administration was now faced with a financial crisis and economic recession. Some people believe that 2008 is possibly a realigning election with a long-lasting impact, just as the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt was in 1932 and the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 were. President Obama was reelected in the 2012 election as well, becoming only the third Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote more than once while losing only two states that he had won in 2008.

Dealignment

A central component of realignment is the change in behavior of voting groups. Realignment means the switching of voter preference from one party to another, in contrast to dealignment ­ where a voter group abandons a party to become independent or nonvoting. Dealignment, in short, is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation, without developing a new one to replace it.

Furthermore, dealignment refers to a decline by voters to their political party; that is a decrease in party loyalty and voters be less attached to their party. This dealignment shows that short term factors might play a larger role than usual in whether a candidate receives a vote from someone of his party. Several factors can be attributed to partisan dealignment, such as a greater political awareness and socialisation, intensive mass media coverage and decline of deference; disillusionment both with parties and politicians, and most importantly, the poor performance of government. Many scholars argue that the trends in elections in the United States over the last several decades are best characterized as dealignment.

Tipping

Tipping refers to the end of an era and the crystallization of another. More specifically, tipping point is a point in time when a group —or a large number of group members— rapidly and dramatically changes its behavior by widely adopting a previously rare practice. The phrase was first used in sociology by Morton Grodzins when he adopted the phrase from physics where it referred to the adding a small amount of weight to a balanced object until the additional weight caused the object to suddenly and completely topple, or tip. Grodzins studied integrating American neighborhoods in the early 1960s. He discovered that most of the white families remained in the neighborhood as long as the comparative number of black families remained very small. But, at a certain point, when “one too many” black families arrived, the remaining white families would move out en masse in a process known as white flight. He called that moment the “tipping point”.

Obama Campaign 2008

Some people believe that 2008 is possibly a realigning election with a long-lasting impact, just as the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt was in 1932 and the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 were. President Obama was reelected in the 2012 election as well, becoming only the third Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote more than once while losing only two states that he had won in 2008.

7.12.3: The Rise of Independents

In politics, an Independent or nonpartisan politician is an individual not affiliated to any political party.

Learning Objective

Describe independent voters in U.S. politics and the history of independents elected to national, regional and local offices

Key Points

• An Independent or nonpartisan politician is an individual not affiliated to any political party. Independents may hold a centrist viewpoint between those of major political parties.
• Historically, George Washington was the only president elected as an Independent, as he was not formally affiliated with any party during his two terms.
• There have been several Independents elected to the United States Senate throughout history. Examples include David Davis of Illinois (a former Republican) in the nineteenth century, and Harry F. Byrd, Jr. of Virginia (who had been elected to his first term as a Democrat) in the 20th century.
• In August 2008, there were 12 people who held offices as Independents in state legislatures. There were four state senators, one from Kentucky, one from Oregon, one from Tennessee, and one from New Mexico.

Key Terms

Whig Party

It is a party that was prevalent in the Jacksonian era of democracy.

independent

A candidate or voter not affiliated with any political party, a free thinker, free of a party platform.

Background

In politics, an independent or nonpartisan politician is an individual not affiliated to any political party. Independents may hold a centrist viewpoint between those of major political parties. Sometimes, they hold a viewpoint more extreme than any major party, or they may have a viewpoint based on issues that they do not feel that any major party addresses. Other Independent politicians may be associated with a political party, were former members of it, or have views that align with it but choose not to stand under its label.

Historically, George Washington was the only president elected as an Independent, as he was not formally affiliated with any party during his two terms. John Tyler was expelled from the Whig Party in September 1841 and remained effectively an Independent for the remainder of his presidency, later returning to the Democrats. He briefly sought re-election in 1844 as a National Democrat, but he withdrew, as he feared to split the Democratic vote. Recent prominent Independent candidates for president of the United States include John Anderson in 1980, Ross Perot in 1992, and Ralph Nader in the 2004 and 2008 elections. In 2008, Independent Presidential candidate, Ralph Nader formed Independent parties in New Mexico, Delaware, and elsewhere to gain ballot access in several states. This strategy has been pursued by several Independent candidates for Federal races, including Joe Lieberman (Connecticut for Lieberman), since in some states it is easier to gain ballot access by creating a new political party than to gather signatures for a nominating petition.

George Washington

First President of the United States

Independents in Congress

There have been several Independents elected to the United States Senate throughout history. Notable examples include David Davis of Illinois (a former Republican) in the nineteenth century, and Harry F. Byrd, Jr. of Virginia (who had been elected to his first term as a Democrat) in the twentieth century. Some officials have been elected as members of a party but became an Independent while in office (without being elected as such), such as Wayne Morse of Oregon or Virgil Goode of Virginia. Nebraska senator George W. Norris was elected for four terms as a Republican before changing to an Independent after the Republicans lost their majority in Congress in 1930. Norris won re-election as an Independent in 1936, but later lost his final re-election attempt to Republican Kenneth S. Wherry in 1942. Vermont senator Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party to become an Independent in 2001.

Independents in State and Local Offices

In August 2008, there were 12 people who held offices as Independents in state legislatures. There were four state senators, one from Kentucky, one from Oregon, one from Tennessee, and one from New Mexico. The representatives came from the states of Louisiana (two), Maine (two), Vermont (two), and Virginia (two). In the 2008 general elections, Wisconsin State Assemblyman Jeffrey Wood left the Republican Party and won reelection as an Independent. After the 2008 primary election, New Mexico State Senator Joseph Carraro left the Republican Party and registered as an Independent. He did not run for reelection.

In November 2005, Manny Diaz was elected Mayor of Miami, Florida as an Independent. On June 19, 2007, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg switched his party affiliation from Republican to Independent. Oscar Goodman, Mayor of Las Vegas, Nevada switched his affiliation to Independent from Democrat in December 2009.