CHAPTER FIVE
AMERICA’S THIRD PARTIES
The Information below on Third Parties in American history is designed to provide an
understanding of how they had an affect and impact on the American political scene. There are
basically four types of third parties: ideological, social protest, economic protest and splinter.
They are defined below.
Ideological – a party that advocates total change of political system.
Social protest – a party that opposes the social policies of the government in power.
Economic protest – a party that opposes the economic policies of the government in power.
Splinter – a party that breaks away or secedes from a major party because its own principles
go beyond the parameters of the two-party system.
People’s (Populist), 1892
Type: Economic Protest
Platform:
government ownership (for control) of the railroad, telephone, and telegraph
systems; income tax; direct election of senators; inflation based on free coinage of silver;
initiative and referendum
Significance: much of the party’s program was enacted during the later Progressive Era; won
twenty-two electoral votes and over one million popular votes
Socialist Labor Party, 1904
Type: Economic Protest
Platform:
control of production by workers
Significance: little success, although the pressure may have prompted the major parties to
push harder for economic reforms
Socialist Party, 1912
Type: Ideological
Platform:
government ownership of the means of production; public works projects to
relieve unemployment; women’s suffrage; direct election of president and vice president;
suffrage for women and residents of Washington, D.C.; minimum wage and maximum hours;
system of social security
Significance: received 6 percent of the votes in the election; many of it proposals became law
during the Progressive and New Deal eras
Progressive Party, 1912
Type: Splinter or Economic Protest
Platform:
tariff reform; government control over unfair business practices; eight-hour day;
end of child labor; worker’s compensation; currency reform
Significance: won 27 percent of popular vote, which was more than Republican William
Howard Taft won; party’s ideas formed the basis for several reforms of Woodrow Wilson’s
administration; examples include Federal Reserve System, tariff reform, and control of industry
Communist Party, 1932
Type: Ideological
Platform:
government control by the working class
Significance: had little effect because the philosophies of the two major parties offered
sufficient contrast for most voters even during the economic crisis of the Depression
Socialist Workers Party, 1948
Type: Ideological
Platform:
overthrow of the capitalist system; cost-of-living escalator clause in union
contracts, social security, and pension programs; end of permanent army
Significance: did not win significant number of votes, but several programs, such as cost-ofliving adjustments, became common practice
Progressive Party, 1948
Type: Splinter
Platform:
opposed President Harry S. Truman’s Cold War policies and wanted a conciliatory
policy toward the Soviet Union
Significance: won only 2.4 percent of the votes and lost more support after the group opposed
U. S. involvement in the Korean Conflict
States’ Rights Party, 1948
Type: Social Protest or Splinter Party
Platform:
opposed the Civil Rights movement
Significance: got 22.5 percent of the Southern vote and thirty-nine electoral votes;
encouraged Northern blacks to vote for Truman but may have ultimately strengthened the
Republican Party in the South, for many Dixiecrats became Republicans
American Independent Party, 1968
Type: Social Protest
Platform:
opposition to busing and civil rights, student protests, and urban riots; wanted
“law and order”
Significance: gained 13 percent of the popular vote, but party fell apart after the assassination
attempt on George Wallace’s life
Independent Party, 1980
Type: Splinter
Platform:
more centrist than any of the other movements; stood for conservative fiscal
policies and liberal social policies
Significance: won only 6.6 percent of popular vote
Independent Party, 1992
Type: Ideological
Platform:
centrist conservative policies; supported reform at the national level
Significance: carried 19 million votes, but had no significant influence on legislation
Reform Party, 1996
Type: Ideological
Platform:
centrist conservative fiscal policies as well as anti-GATT/NAFTA; took no position
on social issues
Significance: garnered 8 percent of total vote (8,085,000 votes); some local candidates ran
under party auspices
Green Party, 1996
Type: Ideological
Platform:
anti-corporate, environmentalism
Significance: appeared on twenty-two state ballots and carried approximately 700,000 votes
(fourth place – .8 percent of total vote); little significance in effecting legislative change
Reform Party, 2000
Type: Ideological
Platform:
hard-line ideological shift to the far right
Significance: appeared on ballot in forty-nine states and received 438,000 votes (fourth place
- .4 percent of total votes cast); little or no significance in legislative actions
Green Party, 2000
Type: Ideological
Platform:
anti-corporate, environmentalism
Significance: raised millions and appeared on ballots in 44 states; finished third with nearly 2.7
million votes (2.7 percent of total); vote totals were not enough to receive federal election
funds in 2004; no influence on legislative action