Question:

Discuss the political preconceptions about political parties and elections, particularly the 2012 election, explain the concepts of voting and voting behavior, discuss the factors which affect voting and voting behavior, discuss the role that political parties play in elections, develop a position on what we should do about the contemporary election issues you find most pressing, and explain how you might create solutions to some of these most pressing problems (the electoral college, younger generations low voter participation rate, the amount of money spent to run for office and should there be an absolute limit on public and private donations allowed).
Make recommendations for solving some of the problems facing elections today. 
If you support a particular position, you need to explain why that position is right using evidence from readings or other sources.

Sources/References (If possible,these are text books used in class):

1. Is This Any Way to Run a Democratic Election? Fourth Edition, by Stephen J. Wayne

2. The Apartisan American: Dealignment and Changing Electoral Politics, by Russell J. Dalton

The paper will be graded on:

1. The paper discusses relevant ideas and issues dealing with elections and voting behaviors.

2. The paper shows great depth and breadth of thought.

3. The paper offers insight and understanding of the topic. 

4. Paragraphs are well developed with clear transitions. 

5. The paper fully addresses the topic (AND DOES NOT STRAY FROM THE TOPIC).

6. NO ERRORS IN PUNCTUATION, CAPITALIZATION, SPELLING, SENTENCE STRUCTURE, AND WORD USAGE. 

7. All citations are done correctly.

Answer:

 

Political Parties and Elections

Introduction

During the 2012 US elections, several political preconceptions about political parties and elections became evident. Many issues have been raised relating to the way US elections are held. One of the issues raised is about the voting behavior, where majority of the citizens vote along partisan lines. Indeed political parties play a critical role in US elections. Some of the most pressing issues include the Electoral College system, lower participation rate among younger voters, and the amount of money that candidates spend while running for office (Rabinowitz, 1986).

Some commentators have argued that an absolute limit should be imposed on the private and public donations allowed. All these are pressing problems for those who oversee election issues in the US. Many people agree that these issues need to be addressed and changes made in order for the culture of democracy in the US to be preserved. This paper explores the factors influencing voting behavior and the role of political parties in the US elections. The paper also examines three issues in the context of the 2012 US elections: the Electoral College system of voting, low voter turnout among the younger generation, and the amount of money that candidates spend while running for office. The paper takes a position in each of these issues and on this basis recommendations are made.

Factors influencing voting behavior in the US elections

Many factors influence the US elections. These factors were at play during the 2012 elections. First, special interests continue to exert a lot of influence on the outcome of presidential elections. Moreover, the issue of incumbent advantage has also been raised many times. Moreover, the US is often accused of being scandal-obsessed, an aspect that causes dramatic changes in approval ratings of candidates seeking various elective positions. There is also increased partisanship in the US elections. This was evident during the 2012 elections.

The critics who express these concerns create the impression that the election process in the US has gone wrong (Wayne, 2012). The concerns have in recent years influenced commentators to make suggestions on the changes that need to be done. In this process, the commentators have had to confront the issue of differences between which changes are ideal and which ones are practical. Such changes would change the US electoral environment as well as the elections themselves.

During the 2012 elections, the nominations were competitive and there was a high primary turnout for both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. It is expected that the high primary turnout as well as the competitiveness of the nominations will have a far-reaching impact on nomination contests in the future.

Today, public funding  has been surpassed by private funding in the US elections. Most of this funding comes in the form of small contributions.  Additionally, the new media has become the newest platform for presidential campaigns. During the 2012 elections, the Obama campaign used the internet in a revolutionary manner to win different voting blocs. On the same note, the new media has changed the sources of news on the elections. This has at times triggered concerns about unbalanced reporting and the so-called “Obama spin” (Clayton, 2010).

The partisan parity also appears to have ended, particularly in the context of the 2012 elections. According to Dalton (2012), party ties have been eroded in America. Dalton (2012) argues that this demonstrates the emergence of a “dealignment” trend that has led to the emergence of a new independent voter bloc known as the “Apartisan America”. This new bloc appears to have increased the level of volatility in US electoral politics. According to Dalton (2012), the same trend towards dealignment is also occurring in all other established democracies. It is imperative to understand the dynamics of elections because they tend to have a far-reaching influence on voting behavior.

The demise of public funding and the rise of private funding

Public funding is no longer the main sources of funds for presidential candidates in the US. During the 2000 Republican Party primaries, former president George W. Bush rejected public financing. President Obama did the same thing during the 2008 and 2012 general elections. Many observers indicate that this is an indication of the demise of public funding and the rise of private. It is evident that these revolutionary decisions and the subsequent introduction of campaign finance reforms will have a far-reaching impact on US elections in the future.

Public financing of presidential elections in the US started in 1974 when the Federal Election Campaign Act was amended (Franz, 2010). In this law, public financing for presidential elections was made optional. Federal financing was introduced to enable underdog candidates to maintain competitiveness. It was also aimed at increasing competition during presidential primaries as well as to encourage each candidate to broaden his fundraising base.

President George W. Bush rejected public financing in 2000 because it would have imposed a limit on the amount of money that he could spend during his primary campaign (Lau, 2008). This would have greatly reduced his chances of winning the nomination. Presidential candidates who accept public funding also have to contend with spending caps as well as limits on the amount of money that they can spend during the campaigns.

By rejecting public financing, candidates are not constrained on the amount of money that they can raise. This increases their chances of securing the nomination of their party exponentially. During the 2004, both Bush and the Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Kerry rejected public financing. During the 2008 primaries, majority of the candidates, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and John McCain, rejected public financing (Scharl, 2008).

These decisions have revolutionized American politics. However, they have also made it very difficult to run a presidential campaign. This was evident during the 2012 election. During this election, Democratic Party raised $1.072 billion for President Barack Obama presidential campaign while the Republican Party managed to raise $992.5 million for their candidate Governor Mitt Romney (New York Times (2012).

Moreover, during the 2008 presidential elections, Senator Barack Obama broke history by rejecting public financial funding for use in the general action. This enabled him to raise more funds than all the other candidates that have run for presidency in the country’s history. During the final week of the 2008 elections, Barack Obama was able to outspend Senator John McCain, who accepted funding for the general election, by about $100 million (New York Times, 2012)

There is no doubt that campaign funding has a far-reaching impact on the outcome of presidential elections in the US. Candidates who reject public funding often appear to be taking a risky move because they have to put in place extra efforts in order to mobilize supporters to contribute to their campaigns. This means that apart from focusing on issues of policy, they have to spare some additional time to request supports to support their campaigns. In contrast, candidates who accept public funding are able to focus all their energies on issues of policy throughout their campaign tours.

Low voter participation rate among the younger generations

Low voter participation rate among young people in the US remains a major problem. During the 2012 election, it was expected that there would be low just like in past elections. In the 2008 election, the voter turnout stood at 52 percent while in 2012, it was 49.3 percent (MTV.com, 2012). The Center for Research and Information on Civic Learning and Engagement (2012) further reports that the turnout in 2008 was the highest in the US since 1972. This is an indication that younger voters are becoming a strong voting bloc.

Indeed, the strength of the young voting bloc was evident during the 2012 elections. Young voters emerged as a deciding factor in determining who would be the US president during the next four years. In swing states, the youth vote emerged as a deciding factor, and it greatly contributed to Obama’s reelection.

One of the reasons why young people in the US lose interest in voting is lack of faith in their elected officials. There is a need for the young voters to be encouraged to participate more actively in elections. If properly mobilized, the young would become a force to reckon with in future elections. It may be true to say that the 2012 presidential election demonstrated the potential power of young voters to influence election outcomes. A major challenge is on how to ensure that this power harnessed and properly utilized in future US elections.

The role of political parties in elections

Two parties continue to dominate electoral politics in the US since the 1860s; namely the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. However, when the founding fathers of the republic drafted the US constitution, they did not put into consideration the role of political parties. Instead, they had other constitutional arrangements in mind such as judicial and legislative arms of government, federalism, separation of powers within the executive, and indirect election of the US president through the Electoral College. In fact, this arrangement was aimed at insulating the new republic from factions and parties.

Today, the two parties continue to dominate US politics in part because they are seen to provide voters with sufficient choice. Another reason is that both parties continue to be open to new ideas, thereby attracting a nationwide constituency. Moreover, Americans are known have a historical dislike for political extremes.

However, in today’s political context, it may be appropriate to have three well-financed political parties instead of two. During the 2012 elections, the contest between the democratic and republican presidential candidates was so close that it was impossible to predict who would emerge victorious. Indeed, when all the votes were counted, President Obama had a very slight lead in terms of the majority vote. A slight majority vote win is in many ways an indication that the administration is going to appear weak in the eyes of Americans. The president appears to lack the mandate to govern the country. The weakness arises from the fact that it becomes difficult for such an administration to push crucial agendas through the country’s legislative channels.

When a presidential contest is as tightly contested as the 2012 election, the country ends up being deeply divided regardless of which party wins. This is a bad thing, considering that the incoming administration takes over the country’s administrative agenda from a position of weakness. It is for this reason that President Obama has declared his intention to adopt a bipartisan approach in his administration. This approach is necessary given the fact that following the 2012 elections, Democrats have a slight majority in the Senate while the Republicans have retained their grip on the House of Representatives.

The Electoral College system

            According to Holbrook (2005), the Electoral College system works to the disadvantage of a third party in the US. It contributes to the entrenchment of the two-party political system on the issue of choosing presidents. The requirement on absolute majority makes it nearly impossible for a candidate of a third party to win the presidential race. This is because of the winner-take-all situation in which the electoral votes of individual states are allocated.

When the founders of the American republic devised the system, their intention was to ensure that power was shared between all states and the federal government. They did not intend to prevent a third party from taking a foothold in the country’s elections. Today, it is necessary for this system to be abolished in favor of the popular vote system. This would enable the Americans to do away with the archaic rules that continue to put the integrity of the American democracy into question.

Conclusion and recommendations

Conclusion

In summary, the closely contested 2012 elections gave Americans an opportunity to put into perspective various problems facing the US elections. The main problems relate to campaign financing, the Electoral College system of voting, low voter turnout among the younger generation, and the domination by the country’s political landscape by only two major political parties. All these aspects have far reaching effects on voting behavior.

Recommendations

This paper makes the following recommendations:

1. Private financing needs to be embraced although a limit should be introduced to limit the takeover of the democratic process and the national agenda by special interests.
2. More young voters need to be encouraged to vote since they have the potential to become a powerful voting bloc.
3. A provision should be made for the introduction of a well-financed third political party. In the meantime, President Obama should continue using the bipartisan approach in order to succeed in pushing through the crucial policies of his administration.
4. Lastly, the Electoral College system is archaic and needs to be abolished to pave way for a new system where the president is elected solely through the popular vote.
   

 

References

Clayton, D. (2010). The Presidential Campaign of Barack Obama: A Critical Analysis of a Racially Transcendental Strategy. New York: Routledge.

Dalton, R. (2012). The Apartisan American: Dealignment and the Transformation of Electoral Politics. , Irvine: University of California.

Franz, M. (2010). Political Advertising and Persuasion in the 2004 and 2008 Presidential Elections. American Politics Research. 38(2), 303-329.

Holbrook, T. (2005). The Mobilization of Core Supporters: Campaigns, Turnout, and Electoral Composition in United States Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science 49(4), 689–703.

Lau, R. (2008). An Exploration of Correct Voting in Recent U.S. Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science 52(2), 395–411.

MTV.com (2012). Young Voters Show Up — and Help Decide the Election. 7 November 2012. Retrieved from http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1696938/youth-voter-turnout-2012-election.jhtml  on December 17, 2012.

New York Times (2012). The 2012 Money Race: Compare the Candidates. 4 November 2012. Retrieved from http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance  on December 16, 2012.

Rabinowitz, G. (1986). The Power of the States in U.S. Presidential Elections. The American Political Science Review 80(1), 65-87.

Scharl, A. (2008). An Automated Approach to Investigating the Online Media Coverage of U.S. Presidential Elections. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 5(1), 121-132.

Wayne, S. (2012). Is This Any Way to Run a Democratic Election? (Fourth Edition). New York: Columbia University Press.