Election Rules and Factions

In todays elections, the voters themselves must be knowledgeable about each candidate to make a decision on who to vote for. Campaigns and reforms to the election process has provided a more democratic process because it has given more power or voice to the people. Partisanship and factionalism has increased, due to the unintended consequences of these reforms and the modern, media centeredness of the nomination process but so has nominations revolving around a particular candidate, not the party. Primaries, caucuses, campaign money and the media’s role in the overall election process has increased factionalism and candidate centered elections.

There are many unintended consequences of primaries and the nomination process in general that the book mentions. The different type of primaries complicate the nomination process for voters and gets them more involved, because it is up to them and in a sense it strengthens factions to come together as a party to select the correct candidate for nomination, not the correct party. For example, in closed primaries, candidates must be registered with a party to vote which strengthens partisanship. Closed primaries also make it difficult to register for vote, especially if a citizen wants to vote for the other party. Open primaries allow nonparty members to influence the choice of a party’s nominee which is problematic to party’s because of partisan crossovers. Members who are not affiliated with a party can affect a party’s nomination. Also in the blanket system, which is candidate centered and party’s don’t matter. Other problems are that people who are hostile to party politics can capture nominations, and our process allows anyone to be a member of any particular party, which opens up the possibility that the party will have to deny a candidate who has been forced upon it. While the system makes it more democratic, the different ways in which we hold elections affect partisanship and pose a problem for candidates that their nomination is not guaranteed.

Today’s elections and politics is revolved around the media, it is how citizens gain information about their candidates to make a decision come Election Day. This is another unintended consequence of the modernized political process. Partisanship has increased as a result of this modernized political nomination process because the media plays a huge role in educating the voters therefore, plays a significant role to the candidates than do party structures and leaders (Hetherington and Keefe, 77). The role of the media increases intra-party conflict and factionalism because in the early phases of nominations, candidates have to differentiate themselves from the other candidates in their party to clinch the nomination. Oftentimes, media evaluations create the winners and losers because they publicize the factional appeals of candidates in primaries and caucuses.

Another issue and problem is the amount of money each party and candidate must raise in order to run an effective campaign. The book made it quite evident that you could be the smartest politician out there, but if you lacked funds, you had no chance in being elected into office. The reason why money plays such a big role is because campaigning, gaining voter support, and media attention all requires money. Regulations on how to raise campaign funds and the election process of primaries and caucus make it even more difficult for candidates to do successfully in elections. As I have said before, modern campaigning is a media centered issue which requires a lot of money in order to succeed. However, the regulations on how to raise money, by trying to get the public more involved with fund raising and donating, limit PACs, and limited the wealthy from donating to an extent – has made it harder for candidates to raise adequate funds and it leads them to begin their campaigning process even earlier so they have a head start on their opponents. Laws have been passed that eliminated soft money donations and have limited the donations and contributions of wealthy groups and individuals. Soft money donations supported individual candidates and not parties, which affects partisanship.

The influence of all factions cannot be purged from American elections because of the heterogeneity of our nation. We have had 2 distinct dominant parties since our Founding Fathers and that has not changed. The influence of factions is what makes politics interesting, it determines the winners from the losers and political influence in elections will always be there. We have opinions and different interests and it is the basis of democracy, if factions were eliminated it wouldn’t be democratic, it would be autocratic and elections would not be necessary.