+ All Categories
Home > Documents > VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Date post: 16-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: christian-boyd
View: 212 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
23
VOTING and ELECTIONS VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 (Conclusion) July 16 th th , , 2003 2003
Transcript
Page 1: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

VOTING and ELECTIONS VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16(Conclusion) July 16thth, 2003, 2003

Page 2: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Explaining Voter TurnoutExplaining Voter Turnout

• strategic votingstrategic voting– vote in elections that are close racevote in elections that are close race– vote in elections with candidates that voter has vote in elections with candidates that voter has

strong feelings for/againststrong feelings for/against– vote in elections with issues of relevance to votervote in elections with issues of relevance to voter

• the “Seinfeld” election in 2002?the “Seinfeld” election in 2002?– vote in elections where multiple offices/issues in vote in elections where multiple offices/issues in

playplay

Page 3: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Explaining Voter TurnoutExplaining Voter Turnout

• low voter turnoutlow voter turnout• voter fatiguevoter fatigue• voter satisfactionvoter satisfaction• voter disaffectionvoter disaffection

Page 4: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Explaining Voter Turnout – Explaining Voter Turnout – Voter DisaffectionVoter Disaffection

• do elections matter?do elections matter?– incumbencyincumbency

• elections are referendums on incumbentselections are referendums on incumbents• incumbent has to do something to loseincumbent has to do something to lose• challenger finds it hard to get money, hard to challenger finds it hard to get money, hard to

break cyclebreak cycle

– primariesprimaries

– winner-take-allwinner-take-all

Page 5: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Explaining Voter TurnoutExplaining Voter Turnout

• decliningdeclining voter turnout voter turnout– demographicsdemographics

– fewer differences between partyfewer differences between party• electoral strategyelectoral strategy• less interest in who winsless interest in who wins

– less effort at voter mobilization by partiesless effort at voter mobilization by parties

Page 6: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Referendums and Initiatives – Referendums and Initiatives – What are They?What are They?

• What are They?What are They?– initiative – proposal to put some issue to a initiative – proposal to put some issue to a

referendumreferendum• requires 3%-15% of voters to signrequires 3%-15% of voters to sign

– propositionproposition• referendum question put directly on the ballotreferendum question put directly on the ballot

Page 7: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Referendums and Initiatives – Referendums and Initiatives – How and When Are They Used?How and When Are They Used?• allowed by 24 statesallowed by 24 states

– half of all initiatives take place in five stateshalf of all initiatives take place in five states• Oregon, California, North Dakota, Colorado, Oregon, California, North Dakota, Colorado,

ArizonaArizona

• success ratesuccess rate• 50% once they are on the ballot50% once they are on the ballot

• CaliforniaCalifornia• 8-12 propositions on EACH ballot8-12 propositions on EACH ballot• some propositions of VERY considerable importancesome propositions of VERY considerable importance

Page 8: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Main Point!Main Point!

• the American political system is geared the American political system is geared towards providing considerable towards providing considerable opportunities for mass political opportunities for mass political participationparticipation

• actual levels of mass participation may actual levels of mass participation may not reach the “ideal”; however, consensus not reach the “ideal”; however, consensus that the “ideal” is high mass participationthat the “ideal” is high mass participation

Page 9: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

AMERICAN POLITICAL AMERICAN POLITICAL PARTIESPARTIES

JUST HOW DIFFERENT ARE THEY?JUST HOW DIFFERENT ARE THEY?

July 16July 16thth, 2003, 2003

Page 10: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Parties – How Important are They?Parties – How Important are They?

• what do parties do?what do parties do?

• how well do they do it?how well do they do it?

Page 11: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Americans Parties – The Americans Parties – The ContextContext• American constitutional designAmerican constitutional design

– no provision for political partiesno provision for political parties

• American political practiceAmerican political practice– arose to fill a need in the American political systemarose to fill a need in the American political system

• how does the system maintain levels of mass political how does the system maintain levels of mass political participationparticipation

• how does the system how does the system managemanage high levels of mass political high levels of mass political participationparticipation

– aggregate interestsaggregate interests– structure the vote – simplify voting choicesstructure the vote – simplify voting choices– create social consensuscreate social consensus

» filters out political “noise”filters out political “noise”» ensure that debate takes place within the bounds of a public ensure that debate takes place within the bounds of a public

consensusconsensus

Page 12: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Americans Parties – The Americans Parties – The ContextContext• American constitutional designAmerican constitutional design

• American political practiceAmerican political practice

• the Conundrum of American Partiesthe Conundrum of American Parties– crucial element of the American systemcrucial element of the American system– Americans are suspicious of partiesAmericans are suspicious of parties

Page 13: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

American Parties – The ContextAmerican Parties – The Context• two party systemtwo party system• legal barriers to entry of third partieslegal barriers to entry of third parties

– getting on the ballotgetting on the ballot• established parties typically have automatic accessestablished parties typically have automatic access

– campaign financingcampaign financing• federal grants paid after election depending on federal grants paid after election depending on

outcome of electionoutcome of election– 5% of the vote required5% of the vote required– proportional to voteproportional to vote

• dominant pattern of socializationdominant pattern of socialization• parties and the legislative systemparties and the legislative system

– flexibility of parties to co-opt other political viewpointsflexibility of parties to co-opt other political viewpoints

Page 14: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Are Parties Different?Are Parties Different?

• How to Measure Differences Between How to Measure Differences Between PartiesParties– the ideological spectrumthe ideological spectrum

Page 15: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

The American Ideological SpectrumThe American Ideological Spectrum

The Left -- The Left -- LiberalLiberal

The Right -- The Right -- ConservativeConservative

•government regulation of government regulation of the economythe economy

•policies to help policies to help disadvantaged groupsdisadvantaged groups

•policies to redistribute policies to redistribute incomeincome

•fewer government fewer government regulationsregulations

•no special treatment for no special treatment for special interest groupsspecial interest groups

•lower taxeslower taxes

More Gov’tMore Gov’t Less Gov’tLess Gov’t

Page 16: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Are Parties Different?Are Parties Different?

• How to Measure Differences Between How to Measure Differences Between PartiesParties– the ideological spectrumthe ideological spectrum

– parties on the spectrumparties on the spectrum• what people thinkwhat people think• who parties attractwho parties attract

Page 17: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

The American Ideological SpectrumThe American Ideological Spectrum

The Left -- The Left -- LiberalLiberal

The Right -- The Right -- ConservativeConservative

•government regulation of government regulation of the economythe economy

•policies to help policies to help disadvantaged groupsdisadvantaged groups

•policies to redistribute policies to redistribute incomeincome

•fewer government fewer government regulationsregulations

•no special treatment for no special treatment for special interest groupsspecial interest groups

•lower taxeslower taxes

More Gov’tMore Gov’t Less Gov’tLess Gov’t

Page 18: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Are Parties Different?Are Parties Different?

• How to Measure Differences Between How to Measure Differences Between PartiesParties– the ideological spectrumthe ideological spectrum

– parties on the spectrumparties on the spectrum• what people thinkwhat people think• who parties attractwho parties attract

– the issue of perspectivethe issue of perspective• a comparative perspectivea comparative perspective

Page 19: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

The American Ideological Spectrum in The American Ideological Spectrum in Comparative PerspectiveComparative Perspective

The Left -- The Left -- LiberalLiberal

The Right -- The Right -- ConservativeConservative

US

Canada

Italy/FranceItaly/France

Page 20: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Are Parties Different?Are Parties Different?

• How to Measure Differences Between How to Measure Differences Between PartiesParties– the ideological spectrumthe ideological spectrum– parties on the spectrumparties on the spectrum

• what people thinkwhat people think• who parties attractwho parties attract

– the issue of perspectivethe issue of perspective• a comparative perspectivea comparative perspective• the American perspectivethe American perspective

Page 21: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Are Parties Different?Are Parties Different?

• measuring difference between partiesmeasuring difference between parties• explaining differences between partiesexplaining differences between parties

– forces determining degree of party forces determining degree of party differencedifference• forces pulling parties away from the political forces pulling parties away from the political

centrecentre– ““product differentiation”product differentiation”

• forces pulling parties toward the political centreforces pulling parties toward the political centre– political “saleability”political “saleability”

Page 22: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Main Point!!Main Point!!

• American parties are necessary for both American parties are necessary for both creatingcreating and and managingmanaging mass participation mass participation– these two functions may be contradictorythese two functions may be contradictory

• to the extent that American parties are effective to the extent that American parties are effective in in managingmanaging mass participation, they may mass participation, they may undermine the value of mass participationundermine the value of mass participation

• to the extent that American parties provide to the extent that American parties provide limited choices, it is limited choices, it is becausebecause they are they are responding to the imperatives of mass responding to the imperatives of mass participationparticipation

Page 23: VOTING and ELECTIONS (Conclusion) July 16 th, 2003.

Recommended