Political Participation
0 Schumpeter criticized classical conception of
democracy (“rule by the people”)
0 Political elites more competent than ordinary citizens to make
decisions
0 Politics a “market” where voters/consumers choose among
competing elites
0 Authors stress active citizenship, political
participation
0 Most privileged (more time, money, organization)
tend to be most politically active; politicians more
responsive to their demands
0 Political inequality not inevitable
0 When large numbers mobilized at polls, in interest groups,
and through social movements
Political Parties
0 Political parties organize, transmit will of majority to
government = heart of any democracy
0 Committed to winning elections
0 Educate and mobilize voters
0 Recruit and nominate candidates
0 Advocate policies
0 Parties emerged quickly in U.S., a democratizing force
0 Expanded participation, mobilized voters, broke
down deferential system
0 Throughout 19th century, parties developed solid
organizational bases and mass followings
Two-Party Political System
0 Plurality voting = whoever gets the most votes wins
0 “Winner-take-all” process for electing President
0 Strong media bias against third parties
0 Democratic and Republican parties marginalize
splinter parties
0 In two-party systems, tendency for each party to
assemble plurality by melding votes of centrist
elements with core supporters
0 Fosters moderation, stability, and predictability
0 Limits innovation and representation
0 Governance vs. representation; plurality vs. PR
Critical Elections and Party Decay
0 Two-party systems limit voter choices; encourage
broad coalitions of diverse, sometimes conflicting
groups
0 Citizens seek answers outside existing party system
through protests and social movements
0 Eventually, one party (usually minority party)
capitalizes on dissatisfaction by seeking to recruit
those whose concerns are not adequately represented
0 Tidal shift is often referred to as critical or realigning
election
0 Critical or realigning elections are rare
0 Winning party reshapes ideological agenda; party
conflict reorganized around new set of issues
0 Voters are realigned and party coalitions shift
Change in American Party System
0 Late 19th century highpoint
0 Powerful, grass-roots, press, nomination process and platforms,
turnout high, integrated immigrants
0 High turnout among low-income voters
0 Decline when pro-business Republican party took over
(1896)
0 Turnout declined, class bias in turnout emerged
0 Business groups and middle class reformers weakened parties
0 merit-based civil service, nonpartisan local races, legal barriers to
voting (disenfranchising ¾ of all citizens in the south, mainly
blacks and poor, uneducated whites); in the North, residency
requirements, early registration depressed turnout
0 Since, campaigns more candidate-centered,
professionalized
0 Money, polling organizations, political consultants; less reliance
on political parties
0 Wealthy candidates and those with close ties to interest
groups have clear advantage
Turnout and American Voters
0 U.S. ranks fourth lowest in turnout among over 34
democratic countries. Why?
0 Widespread popular cynicism
0 Younger generation less in the habit of voting
0 Casting a ballot is especially difficult (registration, voter
identification requirements; restrictions on convicted felons)
0 Elections on Tuesday (not a national holiday or weekend)
0 Burnham: a hole in American electorate where working-
class, less educated, and low-income Americans should be
0 Least likely to turnout to vote; most in need of policy change
0 Wayne: “those who are most disadvantaged, who have the
least education, and who need a change in conditions the
most actually participate the least. Those who are the most
advantaged, who benefit from existing conditions and
presumably from public policy as it stands, vote more
often”
Money and Elections
0 Increasing importance of money; campaign spending has
0
0
0
0
0
0
skyrocketed
Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010)
overturned limit on corporate spending
Business firms and wealthy individuals provide most
contributions (investments)
Campaigns last longer, cost more, are less regulated, and are
financed by a higher proportion of private (rather than
public) funds than in any other Western democracy
Increases chances of better-financed candidates
Increases public cynicism about politics
Those at top of income pyramid provide bulk of political
contributions
0 Political finance connected to increasing economic inequalities
0 Increases in economic inequality and political spending go hand
in hand; increase in one contributes to increase in the other
New Deal and Reagan Coalitions
0 Two durable coalitions dominated American politics
and policy
0 New Deal coalition
0 Led by Democratic party (1932-1968)
0 Reagan Coalition
0 Led by Republican party (1980-2008)
0 Shaped political agenda: defined most pressing issues
and policy responses
0 Policies designed to reward social base, cement
power, and ensure reelection
0 Obama (2008-): will this produce durable
realignment?
New Deal Coalition
0 Blacks; Southerners; immigrant Jewish and Catholic workers;
Irish; some financiers and corporate executives
0 Marriage of convenience between Southern, white, segregationist
wing (hostile to federal policies benefiting blacks) and Northern,
liberal wing based in large urban areas with millions of first- and
second-generation working-class immigrants
0 Johnson’s reliance on Northern Democrats and moderate
Republicans to pass legislation outlawing discrimination (Civil
Rights Act (1964) and Voting Rights Act (1965)) caused
Southerners to desert Democratic party
0 Weakened by political and cultural conflict in Democratic party
(Vietnam War, feminism, gay rights, abortion, crime, etc.)
0 Traditional working–class economically liberal, socially
conservative
0 Wealthier, more educated supporters economically conservative,
socially liberal
0 Decline of labor unions
0 1970s, economic growth faltered, inflation and unemployment
increased; couldn’t satisfy demands of constituents
Reagan Coalition
0 White males became more Republican (candidates played to
0
0
0
0
0
fears of dismantling racial and gender hierarchies)
Base among religious fundamentalists
Business community united behind Republicans
Population growth in suburbs and Sun Belt
Republican Party rebranded by network of highly conservative
organizations working with Republican strategists; re-centered
party ideologically and geographically (secure base in South and
Rocky Mountain states)
Republican supporters
0 traditional base wealthier voters
0 Conservative turn secured by white Protestants (especially
evangelicals), Catholics, regular religious service attendees
0 White men, married couples, rural voters
0 Democratic supporters = Northeast and Pacific Coast; Low-
income voters (especially labor union members); African
Americans and ethnic minorities; unmarried people; Jews, young,
and less religious; Liberal and well-educated voters
2008 Presidential Election
0 Obama benefited from shift among women, young, and
0
0
0
0
0
0
unmarried voters
Pro-Democratic groups growing in size; pro-Republican
groups shrinking as proportion of electorate
Strong support among racial and ethnic minorities
(increasingly significant proportion of the electorate)
McCain supporters tended to be white, male, Protestant,
religiously observant, married, from rural areas and small
towns, and fairly affluent
Obama supporters tended to be ethnically and racially
diverse, young, female, single, low or high income, and less
religiously observant
Obama’s popular vote margin 53%-47%, majorities in 28
states, 2/3 electoral college delegates (365-173)
Regional voting patterns: Obama beat McCain in six
traditionally Republican states (North Carolina, Virginia,
Florida; Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada) and three
Midwest states (Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio)
Polarization and American Politics
0 Majority of voters consistently support same party’s
candidate (red and blue states); only a few change
majorities (swing states)
0 Political polarization tied to ideological polarization
0 Two parties’ social bases reinforce their distinctive
regional bases of support
0 South switched to staunchly Republican  race, religious
observance (especially evangelicals), conservative on
economic issues
0 Fiorina = political parties more ideologically
homogeneous; more distinct from each other
0 Hacker and Pierson = Republican Party moved further to
right than Democratic Party to left
0 Taken over by coalition of hard-right conservative groups,
including Christian Right and free-market economic
conservatives, organized in churches, interest groups,
voluntary associations, and think tanks
New Media and Public Opinion
0 Milestones in 2008 election
0 election of African American president
0 effective use of new media (internet) by Obama campaign
0 Media (newspapers, radio, and TV) continue to play a role
0 New media (internet, email, blogs, instant messages, social
media) increasingly important in fundraising, voter
registration, mobilization
0 Political significance of new media
0 Some argue it produces more involved, informed public
0 Others that it increases gap between politically connected and
uninterested
0 Hard to differentiate fact from fiction
0 May offset increased importance of money in politics
Conclusion
0 Democracy = preference of citizens deserve equal
consideration; citizens should have equal ability to influence
outcomes
0 Political participation is slanted toward rich (more advantaged
groups) in voter turnout, campaign contributions, and political
activism  disproportionate advantage to Republicans
0 Obama’s victory result of weakening link between wealth and
pro-Republican vote; campaign energized millions of voters who
are typically less connected (increased turnout)
0 When citizens are mobilized, political participation, which often
reinforces privilege and inequality, can counteract advantages of
class, race, and gender
0 Political parties and elections potentially enable citizens to
keep and deepen republican and democratic forms of
government
0 Requires citizens to mobilize, participate, and challenge power of
money; tendencies for inequalities in political participation to
parallel economic inequalities