Elections

AP Government

The issuesDemocrats

Liberal Pro spending on social

programs Pro choice Gay rights Secular Relax immigration rules Gun control Affirmative Action Campaign regulations Anti death penalty Federal government power Proactive on environment

Embrace change

Republicans Conservative Pro spending on military Pro life Pro traditional marriage Allow religion in public life Border control Second Amendment rights Individualism Economic freedom on

campaigns Pro Death Penalty State government power Environmental regs hurt

businesses EmbraceTradition

The issues

Voting Coalitions of the Two Parties:

Democrats

Young (18-21) Women African American Jewish North Eastern &

Western Regions Urban Union

Republicans Upper Income Protestant/

church going Military families South Midwest Rural

The Functions of Elections Elections serve

to legitimize governments to fill public offices and organize

governments to allow people with different views

and policy agendas to come to power to ensure that the government remains

accountable to the people.

The Functions of Elections

Most political change in the United States comes about because of elections.

Elections generally have allowed us to avoid: Riots General strikes Coups d'etats

Why Don’t Americans Vote? Long and complex ballots

Confusing to voters People are poorly informed Disaffection

Elections are determined by money and special interest support

Loss of trust in government Alienation

Legal barriers Some groups were not allowed to vote 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th

Amendments fixed this

Demographics & Political Behaviors “Vital Statistics in American Politics” by CQhttp://www.cqpress.com/product/Vital-Statistics-on-American-

Politics-6.html

Race – African American, Hispanic, Asian

Gender

Region – South, Mid West, West, North East

Socioeconomic – high/low

Age – (18-21)

Religion – Catholic, Jewish, Protestant

Urban/Rural

Union

African American voters in the 2004 Election

Race in 2010Mid Terms:

Registering To Vote

Voter Registration A system adopted by the states that

requires voters to register in advance Motor Voter Act

Requires states to permit people to register to vote when the apply for their driver’s license.

Millions added to electorate but the election outcomes were not affected

Efforts to Lower Costs Voting Same day registration Easing of registration regulations

No picture ID required in most states Show many forms of ID

Expansion of ballot access absentee or mail balloting other mechanisms (internet)??

Same Day Registration

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Turnout

MaineMinn.Wisc.N. D.Nation

Produces higher turnout At least 30% of

American adults change their home address every 2 years --- and hence must re-register!

The Political Consequences of Turnout

Do fewer voters help Republicans or Democrats?

Who usually wins elections- challengers or incumbents?

Who does higher turnout help the incumbent OR the challenger?

The Political Consequences of Turnout Do fewer voters help Republicans or

Democrats? Usually Republicans But increasing categories of voters can

make a difference in either party Who usually wins elections- challengers or

incumbents? Incumbents (90%+ in House and 70%+ in Senate)

Who does higher turnout help the incumbent OR the challenger?

Generally helps the challenger but incumbents usually still win

Do we vote for the Candidate or the Campaign?

Today, most people vote for a candidate not the campaign He/she is even more important

than money Campaigns are able (most of the

time) to downplay a candidate’s weaknesses and emphasize his/her strengths.

However, even the best campaigns cannot put an ineffective candidate in the win column – most of the time

Six Types of Elections

Caucus Primary Elections General Elections Initiatives Referendums Recall elections

Caucus A caucus is when a political party gathers

to make policy decisions and to select candidates.

Straw ballots or nonbinding elections may take place in a caucus

The Iowa Caucus The Iowa Caucus is the most

important because it is first As a result, Iowa garners a

vastly disproportionate number of candidate visits and amount of media attention. 

A better than expected showing on caucus night can boost a candidacy, while a poor performance can spell the end of a candidate's hopes.

Howard Dean after losing Iowa: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5FzCeV0ZFc

Primary Elections Primary elections select party nominees for the

general election Held on different days in different states

Most states force voters to vote in only one primary (Dem or Rep)

Primaries are run by the parties for the benefit of the parties In one-party states, the primary election IS the

only election that matters

New Hampshire

The Most Important Primary is held in NH

The major testing ground for candidates for the Republican and Democratic nominations. Most important because it is FIRST Attracts the most attention of the

press corps Candidates who do poorly usually

have to drop out. Little known, under funded

candidates who do well suddenly become contenders, as they gain huge amounts of media attention and money

Some candidates spend 8-12 months there BEFORE the election

Primary elections: different types

Open primaries You can enter the voting booth and then decide

on the party primary in which you will vote Closed primaries

You must reveal your party OR be a registered member of that party to vote

Blanket (or love) Primaries In blanket primaries voters may choose from

both party ballots in a primary For instance, a voter might select a Democrat

for governor and a Republican for senator. California’s blanket primary was struck down as

unconstitutional in 2001

General Elections In general elections we elect office holders Two types of general elections

Presidential election years (2000-2004-2008) Party nominated candidates and

independents First Tuesday after the first Monday in

November Midterm elections (2002-2006-2010)

General election but no presidential race Still first Tuesday after the first Monday in

November Both party-nominated candidates and

independents but fewer voters

General Election Turnout Voter turnout is the highest for general

elections In presidential years, the general election

turnout is the highest In midterm elections, general election

turnout decreases in most states

Initiatives Initiatives allow citizens to propose

legislation and submit it to popular vote.

Popular in California and western states Initiative 85 - Parental Notification before

Termination of Teen's Pregnancy Initiative 86 - Increase on Cigarette Tax Initiative 87 - Funding for alternative forms of

energy Initiative 88 - Property Parcel Tax to fund for

Education

Referendum A referendum allows the legislature

to submit proposed legislation for popular approval.

Special elections on certain topics or issues

State voters approve or disapprove proposed legislation.

Often used for constitutional amendments

The Georgia Legislature recently sponsored the “Marriage Amendment”

It passed with overwhelming support

Recall ElectionsRecall elections allow citizens to

remove someone from office. Voters decide whether or not to vote out

an official California recalled Governor Gray Davis

and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger The“Governator”

Yellow Dog Democrat

A Yellow Dog Democrat is a staunch loyalist to the Democratic Party.

The term, Yellow Dog Democrat, first occurred in the 1928 elections, when Al Smith ran for President against Herbert Hoover. Southerners hated Hoover, hence, the popular saying, "I'd

vote for a yellow dog if he ran on the Democratic ticket" was born!

Blue Dog Republican is a more modern term, and less well known term…means the same thing

The Electoral College Framers wanted president chosen by the

elite of the country The Electoral College was established

Winner-Take-All system gives bigger emphasis to more populated states Except for NE and ME which use a divided

elector system State parties choose the electors

Electors are usually party elite

The Electoral College How it works:

Each state has as many votes as it does Representatives and Senators.

Winner of popular vote typically gets ALL the Electoral College votes.

Except for NE and ME which divide electoral votes Electors meet in December, votes are reported

by the vice president in January. If no candidate gets 270 votes (a majority), the

House of Representatives votes for president, with each state getting ONE vote.

A History of American Elections

From George Washington’s Farewell Address

As he addressed Congress and his administration he warned about the dangers of political parties

“…the spirit of Party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise People to discourage and restrain it.”

Thanks but “NO THANKS” George

Political Parties immediately formed And the rest is history!!

1800 Federalists v Anti-Federalists Big Government v Small Government Hamilton v Jefferson

Party Realignment/Critical Elections Occurs when a new voting coalition appears in an

election year Often after a long period of little party change

These are called critical or realigning elections 1800 (Republican Democrats) 1828 (Jacksonian Democrats) 1860 (Republicans- abolitionists) 1896 (Democrats-Populists and farmers;

Republicans-City and business interests) 1932 (New Deal Coalition Democrats)

Four instances in which winner of the popular vote didn’t get the presidency:

1824: House selects John Quincy Adams (loser: Andrew Jackson)

1876: Samuel Tilden wins popular vote, Rutherford Hayes wins presidency.

1888: Benjamin Harrison edged in popular vote by Grover Cleveland, but Harrison wins in electoral college.

2000: Gore wins popular vote, Bush takes presidency after US Supreme Court decides Florida dispute.

Important Elections to Know

* Critical/Realigning Elections

1800* 1828 1860* 1896 1932* 1960

Who ran? Who won? Why did they win?

Who voted for them? Where did they live? What party? What were their

political beliefs?

1972 1980 1992 1994 2000 2004 2006

Important Cases Concerning Elections

Baker v CarrShaw v Reno

Buckley v ValeoMcConnell v Federal Election Commission

Baker v Carr 1961 Facts of the Case Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee

citizens alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion the seats for the state's General Assembly was virtually ignored. Baker's suit detailed how Tennessee's reapportionment efforts ignored significant economic growth and population shifts within the state.

Question Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction

over questions of legislative apportionment?

Baker v Carr 1961 Conclusion In an opinion which explored the nature of

"political questions" and the appropriateness of Court action in them, the Court held that there were no such questions to be answered in this case and that legislative apportionment was a justifiable issue.

In his opinion, Justice Brennan provided past examples in which the Court had intervened to correct constitutional violations in matters pertaining to state administration and the officers through whom state affairs are conducted.

Brennan concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection issues which Baker and others raised in this case merited judicial evaluation.

Shaw v. Reno- 1993 Case concerned reapportionment and civil rights North Carolina created a congressional district

which was, in parts, no wider than the interstate road along which it stretched in order to create a black-majority district AKA… The creation of a “Majority-minority

district” Five North Carolina residents challenged the

constitutionality of this unusually shaped district, alleging that its only purpose was to secure the election of additional black representatives.

Was this gerrymandering case constitutional?

North Carolina District under scrutiny in Shaw v Reno

Ruling and Importance The Court said NO in this case! It ruled although North Carolina's

reapportionment plan was racially neutral on its face, the resulting district shape was bizarre enough to suggest that it constituted an effort to separate voters into different districts based on race.

Districts can not just be based on one factor alone- race The unusual district, while perhaps created

by noble intentions, seemed to exceed what was reasonably necessary to avoid racial imbalances.

Left door open for some instances in future.

Election of 1800*

Thomas Jefferson (RD) (Republican Democrats)

Jeffersonians- “common man” John Adams (F)

Election of 1828

Andrew Jackson (D) “Common man” voters No land requirements

John Quincy Adams (F)

Election of 1860* Abraham Lincoln (R)

Anti-slavery Stephen Douglas

No. Democrat John C. Breckenridge

So. Democrat Bell

Constitutional Unionist

Election of 1896

William McKinley (R) Pro business and city dwellers

William Jennings Bryan (D)

Election of 1932*

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D) New Deal coalition

Herbert Hoover (R)

Election of 1960

John F. Kennedy (D) Television

Richard Nixon (R)

Election of 1968 and 1972

Richard Nixon (R) Silent majority Southern strategy

Humphrey- 68 George McGovern (D) 72

Election of 1980 Ronald Reagan (R)

“Anyone but Carter” Conservative voters

Jimmy Carter (D)

Election of 1992 Bill Clinton (D)

“It’s the economy, stupid” Used Bush’s promise of “Read my lips, no new

taxes” brilliantly (James Carville) Perot took away some of the votes that would

have gone to Bush George HW Bush (R) Ross Perot (Reform)

Midterm election Ushered in the “Conservative

Revolution” headed by Newt Gingrich AKA…the “Devolution Revolution” Gingrich and his fellow Conservative

Republicans offered Americans a “Contract with America”

Election of 1994

Election of 2000 George W. Bush (R)

Squeaker election Florida was swing state

Thrown in to Supreme Ct. VP AL Gore v Governor Jeb Bush

Al Gore (D) Ralph Nader (Green)

Green’s took away some of the natural base of Democrats

Election of 2004 George W. Bush (R)

9-11 War on terror Character issues

John Kerry (D) Was “swiftboated” by Vietnam war

vets

Midterm election Brought Democrats back to power in

both Houses of Congress for first time in over 10 years

The War in Iraq was factor President Bush’s unpopularity was also a

factor

Election of 2006

•2000: Bush $ 193; Gore $ 134 million. •Total 2000 = $ 327 million

•2004: Bush $ 293: Kerry $ 252 million•Total 2004 = $ 545 Million

A 60 % increase in 4 years!! •.09 % of population gives at least $ 1,000 to political campaigns, but 55% of funds raised this way!!•FYI

¼ of Congress are millionaires compared to 1% of U.S. citizens!!

Money and Politics

Buckley v Valeo (1976)

Facts The issue of campaign contributions came under

scrutiny after the Watergate scandal The Federal Election Committee set guidelines

and limits on money given to campaigns Was this constitutional??

The Court also had to decide whether or not you can be limited by the amount you can spend on your OWN personal campaign

Was this constitutional??

Importance Yes! The case upheld limits on campaign spending set

by the FEC Today it is $2300 per election per

candidate

No! Spending your own money on your campaign was

found to be a free speech right. Steve Forbes, Ross Perot, and other wealthy

Americans have taken advantage of their personal wealth in their quest for office.

McConnell v Federal Election Commission

(2003) Facts of the Case In early 2002, the Bipartisan Campaign

Finance Reform Act of 2002 a which reformed the way that money is raised for--and spent during--political campaigns was passed. (AKA “McCain-Feingold” Act)

Its key provisions were: A ban on unrestricted ("soft money") donations

made directly to political parties (often by corporations, unions, or well-healed individuals) and on the solicitation of those donations by elected officials

Limits on the advertising that unions, corporations, and non-profit organizations can engage in up to 60 days prior to an election

Restrictions on political parties' use of their funds for advertising on behalf of candidates

McConnell v Federal Election Commission

(2003) Questions the Court considered: #1. Does the "soft money" ban of the

Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 exceed Congress's authority to regulate elections under Article 1, Section 4 of the United States Constitution and/or violate the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech?

#2. Do regulations of the source, content, or timing of political advertising in the Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 violate the First Amendment's free speech clause?

Conclusion- “No” on Both Counts!

Question #1- No The Court held that the restriction on free speech was

minimal and justified by the government's legitimate interest in preventing "both the actual corruption threatened by large financial contributions and... the appearance of corruption" that might result from those contributions.

The Court also found regulation was necessary to prevent the groups from circumventing the law. Justices O'Connor and Stevens wrote that "money, like water, will always find an outlet" and that the government was therefore justified in taking steps to prevent schemes developed to get around the contribution limits.

Question #2- No The Court also rejected the argument that Congress had

exceeded its authority to regulate elections and said that that would only affect state elections in which federal candidates were involved and since the law did not prevent states from creating separate election laws for state and local elections it was constitutional.

PAC’s are private groups organized to elect or defeat government officials and promote legislation There are over 4,000 PACs

registered with the Federal Election Commission.

PAC’s gave over $200 million to congressional candidates in 1996 (individuals gave $444 million).

PACs may donate $5,000 per candidate, per election Primaries, general elections and

special elections are counted separately

Political Action Committees(PAC’s)

Money from PACS PACs may receive up to $5,000 from any one

individual, PAC or party committee per calendar year.

PACs can give $5,000 to a candidate committee per election (primary, general or special). They can also give up to $15,000 annually to any national

party committee, and $5,000 annually to any other PAC. PACS support candidates with campaign money

½ sponsored by corporations; 1/10 by unions 1/3 liberal and 2/3 conservative (2001)

Incumbents get the most PAC money!!

Money Limits Individuals can give up to $2300 to a

candidate but PACS can give $5,000 to a candidate Federal money will match presidential campaign

money but…. Parties need at least 5% of vote in previous year

for presidential candidate to receive funds If that doesn’t happen you need PAC’s!!!

Top PAC’s in 20041. EMILY's List $22,767,521 2. Service Employees International Union $12,899,352 3. American Federation of Teachers $12,789,296 4. American Medical Association $11,901,542 5. National Rifle Association $11,173,358 6. Teamsters Union $11,128,729 7. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

$10,819,724 8. National Education Association $10,521,538 9. American Federation of State, County and Municipal

Employees $9,882,022 10. Laborers' International Union of North America $9,523,837

Hard Money/Individual Contributions

Hard money is money given directly to the candidates

This is limited by law The Federal Election Commission (FEC)

limits individuals to contributions of $2,300 per election, per candidate ($2,300 in the primary and another $2,300 in the general election).

Soft Money Soft money is money with no limits or rules that

is raised and spent outside of federal election guidelines. PAC’s contribute soft money to campaigns Soft money is often used to pay for ads that do not

expressly advocate the election or defeat of a particular candidate.

As long as these ads do not use the words "vote for", "elect", "vote against“… ads can be paid for with unregulated soft money.

Many argue that the huge infusion of unregulated soft money has “destroyed the federal campaign laws”.

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act The BCRA was passed in

2002 Also known as the

McCain-Feingold Act Banned national political

party committees from accepting or spending soft money contributions The original intent has

been lost in loopholes

527’s 527’s are groups that developed

from the loopholes in the McCain-Feingold Act

Many 527s are run by special interest groups and used to raise unlimited amounts of money to spend on issue advocacy and voter mobilization.

They do not give money to any particular campaign or candidate thus ARE NOT regulated by the FEC

‘Swiftboating” On May 5, 2004, the RNC

accused MoveOn.org and others 527’s of coordinating their efforts with the John Kerry campaign

On August 20, 2004, the John Kerry campaign accused “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” of coordinating their efforts with the George W. Bush campaign

http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=Ads

Does “Low” Turnout Matter? Demographics of those who

turnout differ significantly from those who do not: Whites higher income higher educational attainment residentially stable

But there is scant evidence that their issue preferences differ significantly from those who do not turnout

Consider…. How can you know what parties or

candidates will do once in office? It is difficult if not impossible to predict the

future How much can you believe politicians

during election campaigns?

Conclusions on Improving Turnout Reducing cost (time) is

key determinants Registration and access

are the keys for improving turnout

New innovations in registration and ballot access could increase turnout

The End