|
Papers > Politics > Path to Reform Third Party Constraints and the Barriers to Third Party Success A Critical Review
Featured Papers from Direct Essays |
|||
1. brazil 2
|
|||
This is a preview of a paper to view the full text you need to signup and login.
Path to Reform Third Party Constraints and the Barriers to Third Party Success A Critical Review |
|||
|
The Paths to Reform: Third Party Constraints and the Barriers to Third-Party Success – A Critical Review of the Literature Linda I. Bandov 6 May 2003 The Path to Reform: Third Party Constraints and the Barriers to Third Party Success – A Critical Review Linda I. ... Financial Constraints……………………………………………………. ... Campaign Finance Reform………………………………………………. ... The Co-Option of Third Party Agendas…………………………………. ... How has the two-party system remained dominant with a social environment so constructed for a multiparty system? Are the structural barriers for third party candidates created by the two-party political system removable? ... ” Institutional barriers must be functioning to keep the two-party system from becoming fractured by the American electorate. ... Methodology In searching for reasons that explain the institutional barriers for third party candidates, this literary review considers the seminal works on comparative electoral systems, from Maurice Duverger’s Law to more recently produced studies by William Riker (1982), Gary Cox (1997), Jae-On Kim and Mahn-Geum Ohn (1992), Alan Ware (1996) and Octavio Amorim Neto (1997). This review also covers studies by Howard Scarrow (1985) and Paul Abramson, John Aldrich, Phil Phaolino, and David Rohde (1995) that adapt this literature to the American system. More general reviews are also analyzed of third-party history by Steven Rosenstone, Roy Behr, and Edward Lazarus (1984), John Bibby and Sandy Maisel (1998) and David Gillepsie (1993). Lastly, dissertations by Joan Bryce (1996) and Jimmie McClellan (1984) that categorize the barriers for American third parties are combined with the literature on individual roadblocks and an overview by Theodore Lowi (1998) to present an overall picture of the barriers facing third parties in the United States. Sociological and an institutional framework are the two explanations for the barriers that exist for political parties in the United States. The focus of this paper is on the institutional barriers that are confronted by third party candidates in presidential politics. ... ” Ware generally accepts the institutionalist approach to explaining party systems but notes that their have been two major errors made in the approach: an extreme focus on electoral systems and a lack of consideration of the sociological approach. ... ” Institutional barriers are the only remaining explanation for the two-party system in American politics. Bryce’s review found that no one barrier limits party development and that the importance of each barrier has changed over time. ... Bryce found that institutional barriers such as the Electoral College and the direct primary had not changed in importance over the last half of the twentieth century; only the psychological barriers to third parties had decreased in importance. The structural barriers have different effects on each candidate and party. ... For John Anderson, ballot access and economic constraints were most critical to the problems he endured during his campaign. Institutional and psychological barriers had some impact. According to Bryce, Ross Perot suffered from most from institutional barriers and then ballot access. Whatever the analysis, the barriers combine to prevent a breakdown of the American two-party system. There is much debate among scholars on which barriers are the most devastating to third party candidates, but there is sound consensus that the constraints are quite high. ... divide the difficulties facing third parties into three categories: first, “barriers,” such as constitutional and legal boundaries, second, “handicaps,” such as few resources, and third, “major party strategies.” My research and analysis of the literature will follow Rosenstone et al’s approach with a review of the structural barriers, including the presidential electoral system, ballot access laws, and anti-fusion laws. Second, the handicaps will be reviewed including media coverage and financial constraints with a focus on campaign finance reform as the major obstacle that third party candidates face in the two-party political system. ... Duverger’s Law (The Wasted Vote and the Spoiler Effect) Maurice Duverger’s Law began the institutional approach to explanations of party systems with this premise: “the simple majority single-ballot system favors the two-party system.” Duverger’s Law is supported by a theory: the mechanical factor of conversion bias in non-proportional systems combines with the psychological factor, an aversion to vote wasting, to produce two-party systems. He was quite confident that the American two-party system confirmed his law. According to Riker, the part of Duverger’s theory indicating that plurality systems cause two-party systems is more defensible than the part that says proportional systems lead to multiparty politics. Riker said that Duverger’s Law needs to be modified to exempt cases where a national third party is a second party in some localities or where just one centrist party is the controlling party. ... Rational choice theory is implicit in the psychological barriers identified by Duverger that prevent voting for minority parties. The barriers can be divided into two separate phenomena: the avoidance of “wasting” one’s vote and avoidance of “the spoiler effect” where one’s least favorite candidate is elected through defection. ... ” The campaigns of Robert LaFollette, William Lemke, Henry Wallace, Eugene McCarthy and John Anderson all followed the traditional path of an early peak and a trend toward Election Day. In 1948, President Truman used the wasted vote argument against the Progressive Party, calling it powerless. ... ” Voters have been more likely to vote for third party candidates in elections where one party has a large lead. ... The presidency is clearly the most prominent electoral contest in American and it cannot be formed via party coalition government. ... As Ware has stated: “Undoubtedly, presidentialism in the United States was an extremely powerful force that helped to generate an otherwise puzzling outcome—a two-party systems within a highly heterogeneous society.” According to Riker: “In the election of single executives, if sophisticated voting occurs, it always works against third parties.” Neto and Cox found that presidential electoral rules work with a schism structure to produce the number of parties in competition for the presidency and that the close proximity of presidential elections produces legislative party systems influenced by the presidential party system. Third-party candidates have not performed well in presidential elections; third-party candidates and independents have received over ten percent (10%) of the vote only seven times since 1832, and over twenty percent (20%) only once. |
|||
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
Paper Information |
|||||
Title: Path to Reform Third Party Constraints and the Barriers to Third Party Success A Critical Review
|
|||||
Signup & Login |
|||||
If you don't currently have a login then Signup here |
|||||
| Pre-Written Papers | |||||
|
|||||
| Custom Papers | |||||
|
|||||
Copyright 2003-2008 doingmyhomework.com. All rights reserved.