INTRODUCTION
The United States is - by size of electorate - the second largest
democracy on the globe (India is the largest and Indonesia comes third)
and the most powerful nation on earth, politically, economically and
militarily, but its political system is in many important respects
unlike any other in the world. This essay then was written originally to
inform non-Americans as to how the American political system works.
What has been striking, however, is how many Americans - especially
young Americans - have found the essay useful and insightful. There is
considerable evidence that many Americans know and understand little
about the political system of their own country - possibly more than is
the case with any other developed democratic nation.
In the U.S., the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
tests what American students are learning. It has found that the two
worst subjects for American students are civics and American history.
One NAEP survey found that only 7% of eighth graders (children aged
13-14) could describe the three branches of government.
On a recent trip to the United States, I was eating cereal for breakfast
and found that the whole of the reverse side of the cereal packet was
devoted to a short explanation of the executive, legislative and
judicial branches of the American government. I find it hard to imagine
that many democratic nations would feel it necessary to explain such a
subject in such a format.
So I hope that this explanation helps ...
THE CONSTITUTION
Unlike Britain but like most nation states, the American political
system is clearly defined by basic documents. The Declaration of
Independence of 1776 and the Constitution of 1789 form the foundations
of the United States federal government. The Declaration of Independence
establishes the United States as an independent political entity, while
the Constitution creates the basic structure of the federal government.
Both documents are on display in the National Archives and Records
Administration Building in Washington, D.C. which I have visited several
times.
The United States Constitution is the shortest written constitution in
the world with just seven articles and 27 amendments. As well as its
brevity, the US Constitution is notable for being a remarkably stable
document. The first ten amendments were all carried in 1789 - the same
year as the original constitution - and are collectively known as the
Bill of Rights. If one accepts that these first 10 amendments were in
effect part of the original constitutional settlement, there have only
been 17 amendments in over 200 years (the last substantive one -
reduction of the voting age to 18 - in 1971).
One of the major reasons for this relative immutability is that - quite
deliberately on the part of its drafters - the Constitution is a very
difficult instrument to change. First, a proposed amendment has to
secure a two-thirds vote of members present in both houses of Congress.
Then three-quarters of the state legislatures have to ratifiy the
proposed change (this stage may or may not be governed by a specific
time limit).
At the heart of the US Constitution is the principle known as
'separation of powers', a term coined by the French political,
enlightenment thinker Montesquieu. This means that power is spread
between three institutions of the state - the executive, the legislature
and the judiciary - and no one institution has too much power and no
individual can be a member of more than one institution.
This principle is also known as 'checks and balances', since each of the
three branches of the state has some authority to act on its own, some
authority to regulate the other two branches, and has some of its own
authority, in turn, regulated by the other branches.
Not only is power spread between the different branches; the members of
those branches are deliberately granted by the Constitution different
terms of office which is a further brake on rapid political change. So
the President has a term of four years, while members of the Senate
serve for six years and members of the House of Representatives serve
for two years. Members of the Supreme Court effectively serve for life.
The great benefit of this system is that power is spread and
counter-balanced and the 'founding fathers' - the 55 delegates who
drafted the Constitution - clearly wished to create a political system
which was in sharp contrast to, and much more democratic than, the
monarchical system then in force in Britain. The great weakness of the
system is that it makes government slow, complicated and legalistic
which is a particular disadvantage in a world - unlike that of 1776 - in
which political and economic developments are fast-moving and the USA
is a - indeed the - super power.
Since the Constitution is so old and so difficult to change, for it to
be meaningful to contemporary society it requires interpretation by the
courts and ultimately it is the Supreme Court which determines what the
Constitution means. There are very different approaches to the
interpretation of the Constitution with the two main strands of thought
being known as
originalism and the
Living Constitution.
Originalism is a principle of interpretation that tries to discover the
original meaning or intent of the constitution. It is based on the
principle that the judiciary is not supposed to create, amend or repeal
laws (which is the realm of the legislative branch) but only to uphold
them. This approach tends to be supported by conservatives.
Living Constitution is a concept which claims that the Constitution has a
dynamic meaning and that contemporary society should be taken into
account when interpreting key constitutional phrases. Instead of seeking
to divine the views of the drafters of the document, it claims that
they deliberately wrote the Constitution in broad terms so that it would
remain flexible. This approach tends to be supported by liberals.
Links:
Full text of the US Constitution
click here
Guide to the US Constitution
click here
Constitution Day in the United States
click here
THE PRESIDENCY
Although the 'founding fathers' wanted to avoid a political system that
in any way reflected the monarchical system then prevalent in Britain
and for a long time the Presidency was relatively weak, the vast
expansion of the federal bureaucracy and the military in the 20th
century has in current practice given a greater role and more power to
the President than is the case for any single individual in most
political systems.
The President is both the head of state and the head of government, as
well as the military commander-in-chief and chief diplomat. He presides
over the executive branch of the federal government, a vast organisation
numbering about 4 million people, including 1 million active-duty
military personnel. Within the executive branch, the President has broad
constitutional powers to manage national affairs and the workings of
the federal government and he may issue executive orders to affect
internal policies.
The President may sign or veto legislation passed by Congress and has
the power to recommend measures to Congress. The Congress may override a
presidential veto but only by a two-thirds majority in each house.
The President has the power to make treaties (with the 'advice and
consent' of the Senate) and the power to nominate and receive
ambassadors. The President may not dissolve Congress or call special
elections, but does have the power to pardon criminals convicted of
offences against the federal government, enact executive orders, and
(with the consent of the Senate) appoint Supreme Court justices and
federal judges.
The President is elected for a fixed term of four years and may serve a
maximum of two terms. Originally there was no constitutional limit on
the number of terms that a President could serve in office and the first
President George Washington set the precedent of serving simply two
terms. Following the election of Franklin D Roosevelt to a record four
terms, it was decided to limit terms to two and the relevant
constitutional amendment was enacted in 1951.
Elections are always held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to coincide with Congressional elections.
The President is not elected directly by the voters but by an Electoral
College representing each state on the basis of a combination of the
number of members in the Senate (two for each state regardless of size)
and the number of members in the House of Representatives (roughly
proportional to population). The states with the largest number of votes
are California (55), Texas (38) and New York (29). The states with the
smallest number of votes - there are six of them - have only three
votes. The District of Columbia, which has no voting representation in
Congress, has three Electoral College votes. In effect, therefore, the
Presidential election is not one election but 51.
The total Electoral College vote is 538. This means that, to become
President, a candidate has to win at least 270 electoral votes. The
voting system awards the Electoral College votes from each state to
delegates committed to vote for a certain candidate in a "winner take
all" system, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska (which award their
Electoral College votes according to Congressional Districts rather
than for the state as a whole). In practice, most states are firmly
Democrat - for instance, California and New York - or firmly Republican -
for instance, Texas and Tennessee. Therefore, candidates concentrate
their appearances and resources on the so-called "battleground states",
those that might go to either party. The three largest battleground or
swing states are Florida (29 votes), Pennsylvania (20) and Ohio (18).
Others are Virginia (13), Wisconsin (10), Colorado (9), Iowa (6) and
Nevada (6).
This system of election means that a candidate can win the largest
number of votes nationwide but fail to win the largest number of votes
in the Electoral College and therefore fail to become President. Indeed,
in practice, this has happened three times in US history, most recently
in 2000. If this seems strange (at least to non-Americans), the
explanation is that the 'founding fathers' who drafted the American
Constitution did not wish to give too much power to the people and so
devised a system that gives the ultimate power of electing the President
to members of the Electoral College. The same Constitution, however,
enables each state to determine how its members in the Electoral College
are chosen and since the 1820s states have chosen their electors by a
direct vote of the people. The United States is the only example in the
world of an indirectly elected executive president.
The President may be impeached which means that he is removed from the
office. The House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching,
while the Senate has the sole power to try all such impeachments. Two
U.S. Presidents have been impeached by the House of Representatives but
acquitted at the trials held by the Senate: Andrew Johnson (1868) and
Bill Clinton (1999). Richard Nixon resigned before he would certainly
have been impeached (1974).
Since 1939, there has been an Executive Office of the President (EOP)
which has consistently and considerably expanded in size and power.
Today it consists of some 1,600 staff and costs some $300M a year.
The position of Vice-President is elected on the same ticket as that of
the President and has the same four-year term of office. The
Vice-President is often described as 'a heart beat away from the
Presidency' since, in the event of the death or incapacity of the
President, the Vice-President assumes the office. In practice, however, a
Vice-Presidential candidate is chosen (by the Presidential candidate)
to 'balance the ticket' in the Presidential election (that is, represent
a different geographical or gender or ethnic constituency) and, for all
practical purposes, the position only carries the power accorded to it
by the President - which is usually very little (a major exception has
been Dick Cheney under George W Bush). The official duties of the
Vice-President are to sit as a member of the "Cabinet" and as a member
of the National Security Council and to act as ex-officio President of
the Senate.
Although the President heads the executive branch of government, the
day-to-day enforcement and administration of federal laws is in the
hands of the various federal executive departments, created by Congress
to deal with specific areas of national and international affairs. The
heads of the 15 departments, chosen by the President and approved with
the 'advice and consent' of the Senate, form a council of advisors
generally known as the President's "Cabinet". This is not a cabinet in
the British political sense: it does not meet so often and does not act
so collectively.
In fact, the President has powers of patronage that extend way beyond
appointment of Cabinet members. In all, the President appoints roughly
3,000 individuals to positions in the federal government, of which about
a third require the confirmation of the Senate. As the divisions in
American politics have deepened, so the confirmation process has become
more fractious and prolonged - when first elected, Barack Obama had to
wait ten months before all his nominees were in their jobs.
The first United States President was George Washington, who served from
1789-1797, so that the current President Barack Obama is the 44th to
hold the office. Four sitting Presidents have been assassinated: Abraham
Lincoln in 1865, James A. Garfield in 1881, William McKinley in 1901,
and John F. Kennedy in 1963.
The President is sometimes referred to as POTUS (President Of The United
States) and the Presidency is often referred to by the media as
variously the White House, the West Wing, and the Oval Office.
Such is the respect for the Presidency that, even having left office, a
President is referred to by the title for the remainder of his life.
Links:
White House
click here
Current members of the cabinet
click here
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES
An important feature of the American political system is that the two
major parties - the Democrats and the Republicans - hold a system of
primaries to determine who will be their candidate in the general
election. These primaries are particularly important when it comes to
the four-yearly Presidential election.
The key point to understand is that formally the Democratic and
Republican Parties choose their Presidential candidate through a vote of
delegates at a national convention and not directly through the various
ballots in the various primaries.
Each party allocates delegates to each state, roughly proportionate to
its size in numbers of citizens. There are two types of delegates. The
normal delegates are those who are chosen by voters to back a specific
candidate. Technically these delegates are pledged to that candidate but
there are circumstances in which they can switch their support. Then
there are what the Democrats call super delegates and the Republicans
call unpledged delegates who are notable figures in the party such as
former presidents, state governors and members of the two houses of
Congress who are free to back whichever candidate they wish. They can do
this any time they like. They can also change their mind before the
convention.
For the 2008 convention, the Democrats had a total of 4,049 delegates
including super delegates and so, to win the nomination, the Democratic
front runner needed a total of 2,025 delegates. For the 2012 convention,
the Republicans had a total of 2,226 delegates including unpledged
delegates and so, to win the nomination, the Republican front runner
needed a total of 1,114 delegates.
How the normal delegates are chosen is a matter for each party in each of the 50 states.
Some hold caucuses which require voters to turn up to discussions on the
merits of the contending candidates. Most hold conventional-style
elections. In the case of the Democrats in Texas, there is both a
caucus and an election. Another variation is that, in some cases, one
can only take part in a caucus or election if one is registered for that
political party but, in other cases, anyone in the state - including
those registered for another party or none - can vote.
How normal delegates are then allocated to the different candidates is
also a matter for each party in each of the 50 states. In most of the
Republican contests (but not all), the candidate who wins the most votes
in that state's primary wins all the party's delegates for that state -
a system known as 'winner takes all'. In all the Democrat contests,
delegates are allocated roughly proportional to the vote secured by the
candidate subject to a minimum performance. The allocation process
varies, but typically it is based on the performance of the candidate in
particular Congressional districts.
In practice, the parties have clearly decided on a candidate well before
the holding of the convention which becomes more a coronation than a
selection.
However, it is not unknown for a party to reach the convention with no
clear choice. A deadlocked convention happens when no candidate arrives
with a majority of votes. A second ballot takes place and delegates are
then free to vote for whomever they want. This could include the other
candidates or even people who are not candidates. Delegates keep on
voting until someone wins a majority. The most famous deadlocked
convention - it involved the Democrats - took place in 1924. It required
103 ballots to chose the Democratic candidate - who then lost to the
Republican candidate in the general election.
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
The House of Representatives is the lower chamber in the bicameral
legislature known collectively as Congress. The founders of the United
States intended the House to be the politically dominant entity in the
federal system and, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the House
served as the primary forum for political debate. However, subsequently
the Senate has been the dominant body.
The House consists of 435 members, each of whom represents a
congressional district and serves for a two-year term. House seats are
apportioned among the states by population according to each decennial
(every 10 years) census. Typically a House constituency would represent
around 500,000 people.
Members of the House are elected by first-past-the-post voting in every
state except Louisiana and Washington, which have run-offs. Elections
are always held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November
in even numbered years. Voting in congressional elections - especially
to the House - is generally much lower than levels in other liberal
democracies. In a year when there is a Presidential election, turnout is
typically around 50%; in years when there is no Presidential election
(known as mid-terms), it usually falls to around one third of the
electorate.
In the event that a member of the House of Representatives dies or
resigns before the end of the two-year term, a special election is held
to fill the vacancy.
The House has four non-voting delegates from American Samoa (1981), the
District of Columbia (1971), Guam (1972) and the Virgin Islands (1976)
and one resident commissioner for Puerto Rico (1976), bringing the total
formal membership to 440.
Much of the work of the House is done through 20 standing committees and
around 100 sub-committees which perform both legislative functions
(drafting Bills) and investigatory functions (holding enquiries). Most
of the committees are focused on an area of government activity such as
homeland security, foreign affairs, agriculture, energy, or transport,
but others are more cross-cutting such as those on the budget and
ethics.
Each chamber of Congress has particular exclusive powers. The House must
introduce any bills for the purpose of raising revenue. However, the
consent of both chambers is required to make any law.
Activity in the House of Representatives tends to be more partisan than
in the Senate. One illustration of this is the so-called Hastert Rule.
This Rule's introduction is widely credited to former Speaker Dennis
Hastert (1999-2007); however, Newt Gingrich, who directly preceded
Hastert as Speaker (1995-1999), followed the same rule.
The Hastert Rule, also known as the "majority of the majority" rule, is
an informal governing principle used by Republican Speakers of the House
of Representatives since the mid-1990s to maintain their speakerships
and limit the power of the minority party to bring bills up for a vote
on the floor of the House. Under the doctrine, the Speaker of the House
will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority
party supports the bill. The rule keeps the minority party from passing
bills with the assistance of a small number of majority party members.
The House and Senate are often referred to by the media as Capitol Hill or simply the Hill.
Link: House of Representatives
click here
THE SENATE
The Senate is the upper chamber in the bicameral legislature known
collectively as Congress. The original intention of the authors of the
US Constitution was that the Senate should be a regulatory group, less
politically dominant than the House. However, since the mid 19th
century, the Senate has been the dominant chamber and indeed today it is
perhaps the most powerful upper house of any legislative body in the
world.
The Senate consists of 100 members, each of whom represents a state and
serves for a six-year term (one third of the Senate stands for election
every two years).
Each state has two Senators, regardless of population, and, since there
are 50 states, then there are 100 senators. This equality of Senate
seats between states has the effect of producing huge variations in
constituency population (the two senators from Wyoming represent less
than half a million electors, while the two senators from California
represent 34M people) with gross over-representation of the smaller
states and serious under-representation of racial and ethnic minorities.
Members of the Senate are elected by first-past-the-post voting in every
state except Louisiana and Washington, which have run-offs. Elections
are always held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November
in even numbered years.
In the event that a member of the Senate dies or resigns before the end
of the six-year term, no special election is held to fill the vacancy.
Instead the Governor of the state that the Senator represented nominates
someone to serve until the next set of Congressional elections when a
normal election is held to fill the vacancy.
Much of the work of the Senate is done through 16 standing committees
and around 40 sub-committees which perform both legislative functions
(drafting Bills) and investigatory functions (holding enquiries). Most
of the committees are focused on an area of government activity such as
homeland security, foreign relations, health, energy, or transport, but
others are more cross-cutting such as those on the budget and rules.
Each chamber of Congress has particular exclusive powers. The Senate
must give 'advice and consent' to many important Presidential
appointments. However, the consent of both chambers is required to make
any law.
Activity in the Senate tends to be less partisan and more
individualistic than in the House of Representatives. Senate rules
permit what is called a filibuster when a senator, or a series of
senators, can speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they
choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60
Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by
invoking what is called cloture (taken from the French term for
closure).
The Senate and House are often referred to by the media as Capitol Hill or simply the Hill.
Link: Senate
click here
THE SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court consists of nine Justices: the Chief Justice of the
United States and eight Associate Justices. They have equal weight when
voting on a case and the Chief Justice has no casting vote or power to
instruct colleagues.
The Justices are nominated by the President and confirmed with the
'advice and consent' of the Senate. As federal judges, the Justices
serve during "good behavior", meaning essentially that they serve for
life and can be removed only by resignation or by impeachment and
subsequent conviction.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States. The court
deals with matters pertaining to the federal government, disputes
between states, and interpretation of the Constitution. It can declare
legislation or executive action made at any level of the government as
unconstitutional, nullifying the law and creating precedent for future
law and decisions.
The Supreme Court in practice has a much more 'political' role than the
highest courts of European democracies. For example, the scope of
abortion in the USA is effectively set by the Supreme Court whereas, in
other countries, it would be set by legislation. Indeed in 2000, it made
the most political decision imaginable by determining - by seven votes
to two - the outcome of that year's presidential election. It decided
that George W Bush had beaten Al Gore, although Gore won the most votes
overall.
A recent and momentous instance of this exercise of political power was
the Supreme Court decision in the case of the challenge to Barack
Obama's signature piece of legislation, the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act, often dubbed Obamacare. No less than 26 states
challenged the legality of these health reforms under a clause in the
constitution governing interstate commerce. In the end, the Court ruled
by five to four that, while the individual mandate provision in the Act
is not itself a tax, the penalties imposed for not buying health
insurance do represent taxes and therefore the entire requirement falls
within the remit of Congress's right to impose taxes.
Given how difficult it is to change the US Constitution through the
formal method, one has seen informal changes to the Constitution through
various decisions of the Supreme Court which have given specific
meanings to some of the general phases in the Constitution. It is one of
the many ironies of the American political system that an unelected and
unaccountable body like the Supreme Court can in practice exercise so
much political power in a system which proclaims itself as so
democractic.
Since the Supreme Court makes so many 'political' decisions and its
members are appointed so rarely and then for life, the appointment of
Justices by the President is often a very charged and controversial
matter.
Below the Supreme Court, there is a system of Courts of Appeal, and,
below these courts, there are District Courts. Together, these three
levels of courts represent the federal judicial system.
A special feature of the American political system in respect of the
judiciary is that, although federal judges are appointed, nationwide 87%
of all state court judges are elected and 39 states elect at least some
of their judges. Outside of the United States, there are only two
nations that have judicial elections and then only in limited fashion.
Smaller Swiss cantons elect judges and appointed justices on the
Japanese Supreme Court must sometimes face retention elections (although
those elections are a formality).
Link: Supreme Court
click here
POLITICAL PARTIES & ELECTIONS
To an extent quite extraordinary in democratic countries, the American
political system is dominated by two political parties: the Democratic
Party and the Republican Party (often known as the 'Grand Old Party' or
GOP). These are very old and very stable parties - the Democrats go back
to 1824 and the Republicans were founded in 1854.
In illustrations and promotional material, the Democratic Party is often
represented as a donkey, while the Republican Party is featured as an
elephant. The origin of these symbols is the political cartoonist Thomas
Nast who came up with them in 1870 and 1874 respectively.
The main reason for the dominance of these two parties is that - like
most other Anglo-Saxon countries (notably Britain) - the electoral
system is 'first past the post' or simple majority which, combined with
the large voter size of the constituencies in the House and (even more)
the Senate, ensures that effectively only two parties can play. The
other key factor is the huge influence of money in the American
electoral system. Since effectively a candidate can spend any amount he
can raise (not allowed in many other countries) and since one can buy
broadcasting time (again not allowed in many countries), the US can only
'afford' two parties or, to put it another way, candidates of any other
party face a formidable financial barrier to entry.
Some people tend to view the division between the Democratic Party and
the Republican Party in the United States as the same as that between
Labour and Conservative in Britain or between Social Democrats and
Christian Democrats in Germany. The comparison is valid in the sense
that, in each country, one political party is characterised as
Centre-Left and the other as Centre-Right or, to put it another way, one
party is more economically interventionist and socially radical than
the other. However, the analogy has many weaknesses.
-
The Centre in American politics is considerably to the Right of the
Centre in most European states including Britain, Germany, France, Italy
and (even more especially) the Scandinavian countries. So, for
instance, most members of the Conservative Party in the UK would support
a national health service, whereas many members of the Democratic Party
in the US would not.
-
As a consequence of the enormous geographical size of the United States
and the different histories of the different states (exemplified by the
Civil War), geography is a factor in ideological positioning to a much
greater extent than in other democratic countries. For instance, a
Northern Republican could be more liberal than a Southern Democract.
Conversely there is a group of Democratic Congressmen that are fiscally
very conservative - they are known as "blue dog" Democrats or even DINO
(Democrats In Name Only).
-
In the United States, divisions over social matters - such as abortion,
capital punishment, same-sex relationships and stem cell research -
matter and follow party lines in a way which is not true of most
European countries. In Britain, for instance, these sort of issues would
be regarded as matters of personal conscience and would not feature
prominently in election debates between candidates and parties.
-
In the USA, religion is a factor in politics in a way unique in western
democracies. Candidates openly proclaim their faith in a manner which
would be regarded as bizarre elswhere (even in a Catholic country like
France) and religious groupings - such as the Christian Coalition of
America [click here] - exert a
significiant political influence in a manner which would be regarded as
improper in most European countries (Poland is an exception here).
-
In the United States, the 'whipping system' - that is the instructions
to members of the House and the Senate on how to vote - is not as strict
or effective as it is in most European countries. As a consequence,
members of Congress are less constrained by party affiliation and freer
to act individually.
-
In the USA, political parties are much weaker institutions than they are
in other democracies. Between the selection of candidates, they are
less active than their counterparts in other countries and, during
elections, they are less influential in campaigning, with individual
politicians and their campaigns having much more influence.
-
The cost of elections is much greater in the US than in other
democracies which has the effects of limiting the range of candidates,
increasing the influence of corporate interests and pressure groups, and
enhancing the position of the incumbent office holder (especially in
the winning of primaries). As long ago as 1895, the Chairman of the
Republican National Committee Mark Hanna stated: "There are two things that are important in politics. The first is money, and I can't remember what the second one is."
-
Whereas in other countries, voters shape the policies and select the
candidates of a party by joining it, in the USA voters register as a
supporter of one of the major parties and then vote in primary elections
to determine who should be the party's candidate in the 'real'
election.
One other oddity of the American party system is that, whereas in most
countries of the world the colour red is associated with the Left-wing
party and the colour blue with the Right-wing party, in the United
States the reverse is the case. So the 'blue states' are those
traditionally won by the Democrats, while the 'red states' are those
normally controlled by the Republicans.
Two interesting features of American political elections are low turnout and the importance of incumbency.
Traditionally turnout in US congressional elections is much lower than
in other liberal democracies especially those of Western Europe. When
there is a presidential election, turnout is only about half; when there
is no presidential election, turnout is merely about one third. The
exception was the elections of 2008: the excitement of the candidacy of
Barack Obama led to an unusually high turnout of 63%, the highest since
1960 (the election of John F Kennedy).
While Congress as an institution is held in popular contempt, voters like
their
member of Congress and indeed there is a phenomenon known as 'sophomore
surge' whereby incumbents tend to increase their share of the vote when
they seek re-election. More generally most incumbents win re-election
for several reasons: they allocate time and resources to waging a
permanent re-election campaign; they can win "earmarks" which are
appropriations of government spending for projects in the constituency;
and they find it easier than challengers to raise money for election
campaigns.
Links:
The Democratic Party
click here
The Republican Party
click here
THE FEDERAL SYSTEM
Understanding the federal nature of the United States is critical to
appreciating the complexities of the American political system.
Most political systems are created top-down. A national system of
government is constructed and a certain amount of power is released to
lower levels of government. The unique history of the United States
means that, in this case, the political system was created bottom-up.
First, some two centuries or so ago, there were were 13 autonomous
states who, following the War of Independence against the British,
created a system of government in which the various states somewhat
reluctantly ceded power to the federal government. Around a century
later, the respective authority of the federal government and the
individual states was an issue at the heart of the Civil War when there
was a bloody conflict over who had the right to determine whether
slavery was or was not permissable. With the exception of Switzerland,
no other Western democracy diffuses power to the same degree as America.
So today the powers of the federal government remain strictly limited by
the Constitution - the critical Tenth Amendment of 1791 - which leaves a
great deal of authority to the individual states.
Each state has an executive, a legislature and a judiciary.
The head of the executive is the Governor who is directly elected.
The legislature consists of a Senate and a House of Representatives (the
exception is the state of Nebraska which has a unicameral system).
The judiciary consists of a state system of courts.
The 50 states are divided into counties (parishes in Louisiana and boroughs in Alaska). Each county has its court.
Althought the Constitution prescribes precisely when Presidential and
Congressional elections will be held, the dates and times of state and
local elections are determined by state governments. Therefore there is a
plethora of elections in the United States and, at almost all times, an
election is being held somewhere in the country. State and local
elections, like federal elections, use the 'first past the post' system
of election.
The debate about federalism in the US is far from over. There are those
who argue for a stronger role for the federal government and there are
advocates of locating more power at the state level. The recent rise of
the electorally-successful Tea Party movement owes a good deal to the
view that the federal government has become too dominant, too intrusive
and too profligate.
Meanwhile many states - especially those west of the Rockies - have what
has been called "the fourth arm of government": this is the ballot or
referendum initiative. This enables a policy question to be put to the
electorate as a result of the collection of a certain number of
signatures or the decison of the state legislation. Over the last
century, some 3,000 such initiatives have been conducted - in some cases
(such as California) with profound results.
RECENT TRENDS
In all political systems, there is a disconnect between the
formal arrangements, as set out in the constitution and relevant laws, and the
informal
arrangements, as occurs in practice. Arguably, in the United States
this disconnect is sharper than in most other democratic systems
because:
- the US Constitution is an old one (late 18th century) whereas most
countries have had several constitutions with the current one typically
being a 20th century creation
- the US Constitution is relatively immutable so it is very
difficult to change the provisions to reflect the reforms that have come
about over time from the pressure of events
- since the US adopted its Constitution, the US has become the
pre-eminent world economic and political power which has brought about
major changes in how the Presidency operates, most especially in the
international sphere
What this means is that, in the last century and most especially since
the end of the Second World War, the reality of how the American
political system operates has changed quite fundamentally in terms which
are not always evident from the terms of the Constitution (and indeed
some might argue are in some respects in contravention of the
Constitution). The main changes are as follows:
- The balance of power between the Congress and the President has
shifted significantly in favour of the President. This is evident in the
domestic sphere through practices like 'impoundment' (when money is
taken from the purpose intended by Congress and allocated to another
purpose favoured by the President) and in the international sphere
through refusal to invoke the War Powers Resolution in spite of major
military invasions. Different terms for this accretion of power by the
Presidency are "the unitary executive" and "the imperial presidency".
- The impact of private funding of political campaigns and of
lobbyists and special interest groups in political decision making have
increased considerably. Candidates raise their own money for campaigns,
there is effectively no limit on the money that can be spent in such
campaigns (thanks to what is called super Political Action Committees),
and the levels of expenditure - especially in the presidential primaries
and election proper - have risen astronomically. In the presidential
race of 2012, both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney spent over one billion
dollars. All this has led to some observers describing the American
political system as a plutocracy, since it is effectively controlled by
private finance from big businesses, which expect certain policies and
practices to follow from the candidates they are funding, and big
donors, who often expect preferment such as an ambassadorship from a
candidate elected as President.
- There has been a growth of what is called "pork barrel"
politics through the use of "earmarks". The term "pork barrel" refers to
the appropriation of government spending for projects that are intended
primarily to benefit particular constituents, such as those in marginal
seats, or campaign contributors. Such appropriations are achieved
through "earmarks" which can be found both in legislation (also called
"hard earmarks" or "hardmarks") and in the text of Congressional
committee reports (also called "soft earmarks" or "softmarks").
- The nature of political debate in the United States has
become markedly more partisan and bitter. The personal lifestyle as well
as the political record of a candidate might well be challenged and
even the patriotism or religiosity of the candidate may be called into
question. Whereas the politics of most European countries has become
more consensual, US domestic politics has become polarised and tribal.
As a result, the political culture is often more concerned with
satisfying the demands of the political 'base' rather than attempting to
achieve a national consensus.
One final trend worth noting is the frequency of the same family to
provide members of Congress. Low polling in elections, the high cost of
running for election, and the focus on the individual more than the
party all mean that a well-known name can work well for a candidate.
Everyone is familiar with the Kennedys, Clintons and Bushs in American
politics but, in 2014, there are no less than 37 members of Congress who
have a relative who has served in the legislature.
A DIVIDED DEMOCRACY
Of course, all nation states are divided, especially in terms of power
and wealth, but also - to different extents - by gender, race,
ethnicity, religion and other factors. Indeed the constitution and
institutions of a democratic society are deliberately intended to
provide for the expression and resolution of such divisions. However, it
is often observed that the USA is an especially divided democracy in at
least three respects:
- It is divided horizontally through the 'separation of
powers', so that the executive, the legislature and the judiciary are
quite distinct in terms of both powers and personalties.
- It is divided vertically through the federal system
of government with the division of powers between the federal government
and the state governments a very important issue that arguably was once
the subject of a civil war.
- It is divided politically through the sharp (and
often bitter) differences of view on many economic issues like tackling
the recession and reforming health care and social issues ranging from
gun control to gay rights. Since 2009, such differences have been
highlighted by the presence of the first black President in the White
House and the rapid emergence of a Tea Party movement that is both
virulently anti-Obama and anti-mainstream Republicanism.
One of the most visible and dramatic illustrations of how the divisons
in American politics frustrate decision-making is the regular failure to
agree a federal budget before the start of the new financial period.
This results in what is known as federal 'shutdown' when most federal
employees are sent home because they cannot be paid and many federal
institutions therefore close down. This is not an isolated occurrence:
it has happened 18 times since 1976 (the last one was in 2013).
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM
Reading this short essay, it will be evident to many (especially non-American) readers that the United States is
different
from other democracies. This observation has given rise to the notion
of "American exceptionalism". This is an ill-defined term which has been
used differently at different times.
One important version of "American exceptionalism" revolves around the
lack of a clear ideological or class-based division between the two
major political parties. The USA has never had a credible socialist or
anti-capitalist party; both the main parties are pro-capital and
pro-business and speak to the 'middle class'.
Other versions of the concept revolve around the alleged 'superiority'
of the United States because of its history, size, wealth and global
dominance plus the 'sophistication' of its constitution and power of its
values such as individualism, innovation and entrepreneurship.
In perhaps its most extreme form, the concept has a religious dimension
with the belief that God has especially chosen or blessed the country.
Of course, it is easy to view the American political system as
exceptional in negative terms such as the unusual influence of race,
religion and money as compared to other liberal democracies.
In truth, for all its special features, the American political system
needs to be seen as one among many models of democracy with its own
strenghs and weaknesses that need to be assessed in comparison to those
of other democracies.
Link: Discussion of "American exceptionalism"
click here
CONCLUSION
The debate about the effectiveness of the US political system is a part
of the wider debate about whether or not the United States is in
relative decline on the world stage. In his book "Time To Start
Thinking: America And The Spectre Of Decline" [for my review
click here], Edward Luce writes:
"Sometimes
it seems Americans are engaged in some kind of collusion in which
voters pretend to elect their lawmakers and lawmakers pretend to govern.
This, in some ways, is America's core problem: the more America
postpones any coherent response to the onset of relative decline, the
more difficult the politics are likely to get."
