Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects Emilie van Haute Week 3.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects Emilie van Haute Week 3."— Presentation transcript:

1 POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects Emilie van Haute Week 3

2 Part I Parties and Politics in the U.S. Outline I.1. Party Eras I.2. Party System I.3. Party Organization I.4. Party Ideology, Issues and Polarization

3 3. Party Eras 1.The First Party System (1800-1824): Federalists vs. Jeffersonian Republicans 2.The Second Party System (1828-1856): Whigs vs. Jacksonian Democrats 3.The Third Party System (1856-1896): Ascendant Republicans vs. Democrats 4.The Fourth Party System (1896-1928): Republican Dominance Renewed 5.The Fifth Party System (1932-1968): The Democratic New Deal Era 6.The Sixth Party System (1968-2008): The Era of Dealignment and Divided government

4 3.1. First Party System (1800-1824) Federalists vs. Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans (1) Disappearance of the Federalists as a national political party (uncompetitive) One-party dominance (Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans) = “Era of Good Feelings” - At the end of Jefferson’s terms: no competition (Monroe unopposed for reelection in 1820) - Roots of parties did not run deep (no party identification, filiations, loyalty) - Growth of dominance // Weakening of the party discipline - Factionalism among leaders of the Republicans - Decline of the authority & legitimacy of the national government - Washington DC = desolate place (8.000 inhabitants in 1800 - burned down by the British/Canadian troops in 1814 as a vengeance for the destruction of Toronto) - Growth of regional rivalries: West vs. East (financial dominance); South vs. North (opposition to slavery)

5 3.1. First Party System (1800-1824) Federalists vs. Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans (2)

6 3.1. First Party System (1800-1824) Federalists vs. Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans (3) 1824: presidential election (congressional caucus system of nomination) - Andrew Jackson: 99 electoral votes; John Quincy Adams: 88; William Crawford: 41; Henry Clay: 34 (262 votes) - No candidate with a majority of the electoral votes - House of Representatives has to choose between the top 3 and chose Adams (Clay got appointed secretary of State)  Constitutional crisis: most popular candidate did not win / suspicion of bribery / caucus seen as undemocratic as suffrage expanded Jackson (military hero) gathers popular discontent (South, West) Van Buren (NY): wants to reduce the risk & control Jackson by reinvigorating the Jeffersonian party (NY-Virginia alliance), give Jackson leadership against promise to accept party discipline

7 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (1) Transitional era (1828-1832) - 1828: Jackson defeated Adams - 1832: Jackson defeated Clay - Transitional era of bifactional politics within the Democratic-Republican Party: Jackson & Adams used the Republican name in their label Democratization of American political life - Qualifications for voting dropped (expansion of suffrage) - Slates of presidential electors were popularly elected - Increase of electoral participation - Opening of nominating procedures (congressional caucus replaced by national convention)  Need for organization, management, communication  From then on: real two-party competition

8 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (2) From then on: real two-party competition (Democrats & Whigs) - 1830s: emergence of parties as we know them - Birth of the Democratic party: National Party Convention in 1832 - 1832: Jackson switched to Democratic label >< Clay as Republican - 1834: opposition to Jackson formed a party: the Whigs - Fight for the new electorate - Development of campaigning (parades, rallies, picnics, symbols, etc.) - Development of party organization at the state & local levels - Development of party identification

9 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (3) Democrats (Dominant party – first half of the period) - First to make a positive case for parties: parties seen as vehicles for common citizens to enact political views & control government if well organized - Parties seen as the only actor capable of taming presidential ambition (Van Buren: wanted to build a real party system >< one party-rule he experienced: need opposition, threat of defeat to keep discipline & cohesion) - Democratized version of Jefferson’s view of limited government: small government, low taxes, and individual freedom, decentralization & democratization of political & economic power; against government intervention because it would favor the wealthy > the common man - Won 5 presidential elections out of 7 between 1828 and 1856 (Andrew Jackson 1828-1836; Martin Van Buren 1836-1840; James Polk 1844-1848; Franklin Pierce 1852-1856)

10 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (4) Whigs = Minority party - Coalition of Henry Clay, Webster (Connecticut & Massachussets), Weed & Seward ‘NY) Stevens (Pennsylvania) to oppose Jackson - Name: identification with the English party - Renewed Federalist agenda: defend industrial interests & wealth, a more active role for the national government (building roads, canals to benefit interstate commerce), to raise the tariff on imported products, to establish a national banking & financing system, but to diminish the power of the president - Tried to match the Democrats’ organization & electoral techniques - Run military heroes for presidents (4 elections out of 7) but only successful twice (1840: William Henry Harrison; 1848: Zachary Taylor) – constant feature of us politics (Grant, Eisenhower, etc.) - In 9 out of 11 congressional elections: no control on Congress - Won 20 governorships by 1840

11 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (5) Real competition in each region / few regional variations from 1840 to CW - Whigs: more support from manufacture & trade, planters, Protestants, wealth - Democrats: new voters, western farmers, Catholics & new immigrants, ‘common people’ BUT - Both parties: true national scope - Old bastions of Jefferson’s support (North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana): divided evenly between parties; Middle Atlantic states: idem - Both parties try to balance the interests of all sections of the electorate - Few really divisive issues until the 1850s (racial & slavery issues) - Both liberal (free enterprise & private property) - Both democratic (basic principles of the Constitution & Declaration of Independence) - None of the parties truly ideologically coherent; more based on a common hatred of the enemy than on positive attachment to an issue

12 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (6) Decentralization - Electoral votes allocated state by state => party organization built at the state level for the presidential election - In order to get the support of the party, the presidential candidate has to reward the state party branches - State parties are dependent on local leaders & local organization => localities could make powerful demands on higher levels, especially because of the close match between the two parties => the entertainment (rallies, picnics, etc.) happens at the local level => local parties as link between the wider world of politics and the individuals in a large democracy (unthreatening, stimulus for citizenship)

13 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (7) Parties and slavery - Fundamental dispute since the independence - 1820: Missouri compromise in Congress on regulation of slavery in the Western territories (balance) - Both parties: pro- and antislavery factions because they both wanted to survive as national parties - Mid-1840s: Pressure to admit new states and difficulties to maintain the balance between the pro- and antislavery forces - Growing cultural, moral & economic differences between North & South in the 1840 & 1850 => political conflicts, increasing with the expansion of the country (new free or slave states)

14 3.2. Second Party System (1828-1856) (Jacksonian) Democrats vs. Whigs (8) Democrats and slavery: Regional loyalty outweigh party loyalty: - In Congress: Democrats dominated by southerners - In national convention: South also strong thanks to veto possibility: ex: 1844: Van Buren (opposed to the expansion of slavery) as front-runner for the presidential nomination but the South opposed it because he didn’t support the annexation of Texas. Van Buren didn’t have 2/3 of the delegates at the convention and couldn’t convince his supporters to change the rule of the nomination (9 ballots) => James Polk won the nomination and got elected, thanks to the discipline of the southern state delegates same for 1852 (Franklin Pierce) & 1856 (James Buchanan): weak candidates - Focused on protecting slavery > defend their democratic & egalitarian principles Whigs and slavery: slavery has lead the party to dissolve - Traditionally: national integration, accommodation North/South => position undermined in both regions, schism between wings - Emergence of a Republican party in the North => loss electoral support in 1854 => dissolution

15 3.3. Third Party System (1856-1896) Ascendant Republicans vs. Democrats (1) Transition period (1854-1856) - Democrats (Buchanan) vs. new Republican Party (Fremont) vs. Whigs (Fillmore): No majority of the popular vote 1860: Deterioration - South: Democrats (Breckenridge) vs. Bell (Whig) - North: Republicans (Lincoln) vs. Democrats (Douglas): - Douglas tried to avoid the debate on slavery within his party - Lincoln committed his party to the principle of no territorial expansion for slavery = realignment: Republican majority in most parts of the country except the South; destruction of the Whigs Civil War (1861-1865) – Lincoln elected first Republican President (second highest turnout: 82% of the electorate)+ control Congress, governorship of every northern state

16 3.3. Third Party System (1856-1896) Ascendant Republicans vs. Democrats (2) CW-1874: dominance of the Republicans Republicans (GOP) - Composed of former Whigs (Lincoln), antislavery Democrats, & abolitionists - Dedicated to the principle of ending slavery - Big campaign & debates, and carried on with discussions at the state & local levels through party channels - Identified with the Union, patriotism, humanitarianism - Alliance with interest groups: farmers (Homestead Act and free land in the West), business & labor (high protective tariff), entrepreneurs (big federal grants), and veterans (pensions) - Dominant in the North & West; little support in the South - Control of presidency (Lincoln, Johnson, Grant) & Congress from 1860 to 1874 Democrats - Southern-based party; support in the North from business (free-trade), new Catholic immigrants

17 3.3. Third Party System (1856-1896) Ascendant Republicans vs. Democrats (3) 1974-1896: competition (Alternated control of Presidency & Congress) Republicans - Unable to integrate freed slaves into the economic & political life - Southern states negate the Fifteenth amendment (vote for former slaves) and Republicans unable to stop it - Loyalty based on the Civil War (veterans); assassination of Lincoln (1865); support of Northern Protestants (anti-gambling, anti-alcohol); pro-business (// Federalists & Whigs) - No support in the South; Northern African Americans + Northern WASPs - Control the Senate + 3/5 presidency (Hayes, Arthur, Harrison) Democrats - Weak in Midwest / New England; South + Northern Catholic bastions - Control the House + 2/5 presidency (Cleveland) - Party of the former Confederate States; agriculture; anti-tariff stand; support of the Catholics (Northern cities) Configuration stable for the next 100 years

18 3.3. Third Party System (1856-1896) Ascendant Republicans vs. Democrats (4) Main features of the period - Growth of patronage-based party organizations (Middle Atlantic & Midwestern states): organize services for communities (build railroads, create jobs) // industrialization (immigration, rise of corporations) = Republican feature (in Pennsylvania: 20.000 Republican paid workers) => weakens loyalty and discipline - Introduction of the Australian ballot / Massachusetts ballot = secret ballot > party-printed ballot: ↑ voter independence from parties Emergence of the People’s Party (Populists) - Emergence in the economically depressed grain-growing areas of the Midwest - Want laws to protect farmers, defend more equality, income tax, nationalization of railroads & telephone/telegraph companies = More liberal & progressive than de Ds & the Rs (conservative) - Growth of support by the mid-1880s (elected representatives in Midwest states & Southern farmers); 1892: over 1 million votes

19 3.4. Fourth Party System (1896-1928) Republican Dominance Renewed (1) Economic & Social Revolution - Industrialization > agrarian society - Urbanization (NY, Chicago, Philadelphia, LA > 1.000.000 by 1920s) - Development of transportation (railroads: 8.500 miles in 1850 to 193.000 in 1900) - Rise of corporation (Standard Oil, US steel) - New immigration - Rise of labor organizations Rise of third parties - Radical agrarian movements (Grangers Farmers’ Alliance; Greenbackers) - People’s Party in 1896; Progressives in 1912

20 3.4. Fourth Party System (1896-1928) Republican Dominance Renewed (2) Transition: Presidential election of 1896 - Democrats divided between Cleveland (limited government) & William Jennings Bryan (populist ideas): Bryan appealed to farmers & western interests => South, Plains, West (major turn from limited government) - Republicans (McKinley) opposed inflation, favored stability, high tariffs (money & protectionism) & renewed the support of business interests, but also urban workers & shopkeepers => all North & cities - High turnout (82%) - Democrats lost => took years to recover (won 2 presidency in 36 years) 1896-1912: Dominance of the Republicans Republicans - Won 4 presidencies in a row (McKinley, T. Roosevelt – 2, Taft) - Control of Congress until 1910 Democrats - Nothing until Wilson during WWI

21 3.4. Fourth Party System (1896-1928) Republican Dominance Renewed (3) 1912-1928: More competition Republicans - Internal divisions: traditional conservatives of the industrial-finance centers of the Northeast >< Progressive reformers of the Middle West - 1912: T. Roosevelt run for the Progressive Party vs. Taft for the Republicans => split of the Republican votes => favored the Democrats (Wilson) - After WWI: Progressive movement out => Renewed dominance: - Won 4 presidencies in a row (Harding, Coolidge – 2, Hoover) Democrats - WWI: took advantage of the Republican divisions & won 2 presidency (Wilson – 2) - After WWI: Recovery mode: popular vote jumped from 28.8% in 1924 to 40.8% in 1928 - Development of support in Catholic, urban & industrial centers

22 3.4. Fourth Party System (1896-1928) Republican Dominance Renewed (4) Main features of the period Republican dominance: average share of votes = 57.7% vs. 42.3% for the Ds - Gap between the 2 parties > 10% in 4 elections out of 7 - Same lack of competition for states elections: South = D; rest = R Women suffrage in 1920 (19 th amendment) Progressive revolts between 1900 & 1920: - Believed in the rational citizen; opposed party loyalties and irrational ties - Favored political regulation & party-weakening reforms - Support from T. Roosevelt (1912) - Want to cut away patronage; promoted a civil service reform - Support non-partisan local elections - Support the introduction of direct primaries for nominating candidates (1903 Wisconsin; 26 states adopted it by 1916) - Role of citizen enhanced by adoption of initiative, referendum - Regulation of parties BUT decrease in electoral participation

23 3.4. Fourth Party System (1896-1928) Republican Dominance Renewed (2)


25 3.5. Fifth Party System (1932-1968) The Democratic New Deal Era (1) Great Depression of 1929 - GNP fell by 1/3; unemployment grew from 5% to 25% Demographic change - Urban ethnics, Catholics, blue-collar workers & blacks = more significant - WASP, small town, middle-class business = shrinking Transition: the election of 1932 - Realignment from a Republican to a Democratic majority - Democrats: New Deal Coalition (F.D. Roosevelt): white southerners, Catholic urban workers (recent immigrants anti-prohibition), blue-collar workers (organized labor), African Americans (rising unemployment), Jews (Depression & Roosevelt’s leadership against Nazi Germany), young voters Support welfare policies, social security & unemployment compensations systems (weakened party patronage); federal government as THE employer Regulate the economy: Securities & Exchange Commission (1935), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1935), Banking Act (1935)

26 3.5. Fifth Party System (1932-1968) The Democratic New Deal Era (1) 1932-1948: Dominance of the Democrats Democrats - Won 5/5 presidency (F.D. Roosevelt, Truman) - Continuous control over Congress (except 1946) - Internal divisions in the late 1930s: North / South (dissent from social welfare policies) Republicans –Minority party – called dead several times but resilient

27 3.5. Fifth Party System (1932-1968) The Democratic New Deal Era (1) 1948-1968: More competition Democrats - Lost control Presidency (1952-1956) & Congress in 1952 - 1960-1964: normal majority reasserted (Kennedy & Johnson) - Huge congressional majorities => Johnson’s Great Society program - After 1964: intensification of internal divisions over the Vietnam War, defense policy, crime, civil disorder & social policy Republicans –Minority party – called dead several times but resilient –1952: won Congress & Presidency (national hero tactic with Eisenhower): “I like Ike”, “Peace & Prosperity”: support in the South; accepted New Deal programs => New Deal legacy no more divisive

Download ppt "POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects Emilie van Haute Week 3."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google