Archives

by B. K. Shrivastava

John Kerry

George W. Bush

On first Tuesday after the first Monday of November in every year divisible by four the United States elects its President, the Vice President, the members of the House of the Representatives and one third members of the Senate. In every year divisible by two it elects one-third members of the Senate and members of the House of the Representatives.

Five states

There are five states that have deliberately chosen to delink their elections from the national elections by holding state elections in odd number years. Anthony King, a well-known British analyst of American politics, has observed that there is no year in the United States when a major statewide election is not being held somewhere.

Even in times of war or national calamity the elections have not been postponed or cancelled. The United States is a country that chooses largest number of public officials through elections - from its President to the proverbial dogcatcher. This brief essay deals with American presidential election alone.

Constitution

The Constitution of the United States provides that an electoral college would elect the President and the Vice President. The Founding Fathers believed that the people were swayed by their momentary concerns and transient moods. Therefore they placed an intermediary institution between the people and the election of the President.

They devised an electoral college that legally elects the President and the Vice President. As the Untied States is "indestructible union of the indestructible states", the Constitution gave the right to choose the electors to the States. Each state has electors in number equal to its representation in the Congress.

As the seats in the House of Representatives are allotted on the basis of the population the number of electors of states keep on changing after every census that is carried out in every zero year.

With every change in the number the constituencies in the states have to be redrawn. That itself is long drawn out political process. In the presidential election of 2004 California, the most populous state in the US, has 54 and Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware and Vermont have just three electors.

The founding fathers

There is no mention of political parties in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers equated parties with factions and considered them divisive. But representative democracy cannot function without political parties. And political parties soon came into existence after the constitution became operative in the United States.

From the time of Jefferson, the Federalists and the Republicans had named their candidates in secret congressional caucuses. The system was used for the last time in 1824. There was popular revolt against the system that was dominated by a few influential persons in the parties. By 1832 the system was replaced by national nominating conventions.

Party bosses

In turn the Party's national Conventions too came to be dominated by a few party bosses who represented special interest. The presidential candidates were decided in the smoke filled rooms. The rank and file of the party revolted against the practice. Under popular pressure the parties adopted primaries and caucuses. The parties adopted state primaries and caucuses to express their preference for a particular candidate.

The number of state primaries went on increasing. As a result it became possible for a presidential candidate to win the party nomination even if he did not have the support of party establishment. A candidate who proved his popularity in the primaries could not be ignored.

McGovern did not enjoy the support of Democratic Party's establishment in 1972 nor Ronald Reagan had the backing of the Republican Party establishment in 1980.

Own rules

The Party's delegates to the national nomination convention are chosen in state primaries and caucuses. The State formulate their own rules for the election of the delegates. There is a wide variation in these laws. Some states have binding primaries that means that the states delegates are bound to vote for the candidate who has won the primaries. Some states have non-binding primaries that means the delegates are not bound to vote for the winner of the primary.

These primaries are like "beauty contest". They provide the candidate to demonstrate his ability to win the presidential race. There are closed primaries in which the only registered members of the party can vote and there are open primaries in which any one registered as voter can cast his vote. Some states deliver all the delegates to the winner and some states distribute the delegates in proportion to the votes polled by the candidate.

The rationale behind such a practice is that in order to win in the general election party's presidential candidate will have to attract independent voters and at least a fraction of the members of other political party. Some states prefer to have precinct/district level and state level caucuses in which members of the party meet and express their choice of party's nominee.

Iowa and New Hampshire

By convention Iowa holds the first caucus and New Hampshire the first primary. Both these states are small. Iowa has just seven electors and New Hampshire has four. But the two states have gained in importance as winning here a candidates gets a momentum for his campaign. He gains in credibility and is able to attract campaign contributions.

The calendar of the primaries and caucuses has become very important and a contentious issue in American politics. There is clubbing of primaries on a single day and "front loading the primary and caucus calendar". In 2004, on February 3, seven states held their Democratic primaries and on March 2, eleven states held their Democratic primaries.

As in the latter group big states like California and New York were included, it became evident on March 3 itself that John Kerry, Senator from Massachusetts, was the prospective Democratic candidate.

He had secured 2,170 delegates out of 4,339 required for the nomination. By then Montana and New Jersey were still scheduled to hold their primaries in June. For the voters in these states primaries was shorn of any meaning.

Quite a few states concluded that holding primaries this year was not worth the expenditure the state had to incur in holding them. Michigan, Colorado, Kansas, Maine, North Dakota, Utah and Washington cancelled their primaries and the legislatures in Arizona and Mississippi voted to call off their primaries but the proposal was vetoed, as it was too late in the day.

This early selection of the party's candidate has prolonged the campaign of Kerry. And has given the Republicans too much time to attack him as they have come to know months in advance who is going to be their opponent.

Demonstrates unity

The party's national convention thus no longer elects its presidential and vice presidential candidate but serves the purpose to demonstrate the unity in the party after the bitter and acrimonious primary campaign.

It enthuses the party worker for the general election. After the parties nominate their respective candidates, the campaign begins on the Labour Day. Although no third party candidate has succeeded in being elected as the President in the history of the United States, in some years third party candidates have significantly affected the outcome.

In 2000, Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate and a renowned consumer rights activists, by taking away significant number of voters from Al Gore, sent George Bush to the White House. In 1992, Ross Perot garnered as much as 19 percent of the votes.

But the political system makes it very difficult for the third party to enter into the political arena. In order to do that they have to get their name on the ballot of as many states as possible. The states have requirements which are quite difficult for a new party to comply.

Even when they are able to fulfill the stiff conditions in some states as Anderson did in 1980, Ross Perot in 1992 and Ralph Nadir in 2000 the third parties do not survive for long. The first past the post system does not favour the emergence of the third parties.

Radically changes

In more than two hundred years of its existence the Untied States has radically changed and this has profoundly affected the dynamics of the presidential elections. The political system has become more inclusive.

After the end of the civil war the blacks were included by the XV amendment ratified in 1870, women were given the right to vote by the XIXth amendment, ratified in 1920; and by the XXVI amendment, ratified in 1971, the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 years. Electoral politics is affected by internal migration of population.

A large number of people have moved in the last few decades to southern and sunbelt states increasing their representation in the electoral college. Affluent population has moved into suburbia that generally tends to support the Republicans.

Impact of the influx

Nothing illustrates this more than the impact of the influx of the Cuban migrants on the politics of Florida. The US economy has undergone tremendous change resulting in the dislocation of jobs and growing inequality of income.

The Labour Unions do not have the same clout as they had before because their membership has declined. Their loyalties are now divided between the Democrats and the Republicans.

The Republicans generally take conservative positions that are more responsive to the affluent and the business class. Since the 1980s an effort is being made to redefine the boundary between the market place and the state. The Republicans oppose the expansion of the role of the government, the Democrats want to support programs that would support the less affluent class.

The Republicans favour tax cuts the Democrats favour progressive taxation. The Republicans favour lowering of capital gain tax the Democrats oppose it on the ground that it favours the rich and affluent. Besides, the two parties third parties championing single issue, like the Green Party fighting for the preservation and protection of environment, are also throwing their weight around in the electoral battleground.

Candidate oriented

The presidential election in the United States is candidate oriented. The primaries have made it much more so. To become the standard bearer of the party the candidate has to fight an intra-party battle with other aspirants. He must therefore have his own organizational set up loyal to him, get campaign contributions for his campaign, and attract volunteers who would work for him.

After a candidate succeeds in being nominated, he normally retains substantial part of his personal organization and inducts it in to national campaign committee. This remains a separate structure and exists alongside other party structures but independent of them.

Against this background the parties have redefined their role. Presidential candidates are contesting election on their party's platform. After the election the President also becomes the leader of his party.

Modern technologies

The use of modern technologies like political advertisement on TV channels has made the election very expensive. The cost of running the long presidential campaign has been mounting in every successive elections. Though public funding of the campaign has been an important source, it also places a limit on the expenditure a candidate can incur.

Rich and affluent candidates opt out of federal funding and spend their own money without let or hindrance. Nonetheless their dependence on special interest groups has increased because these groups can provide huge sums of money. The ever growing influence of special interest on the governance is of great concern to the American public.

Major changes

As the American society changed the structure that the Founding Fathers had placed for the election of the President also changed. Major changes in the dynamics of the election have taken place outside the formal structure.

Professionals run presidential campaigns. These professionals write the speeches, conduct polls, manage the media, research the background and the weaknesses of the opposition, create messages for the electorate, and creatively use modern technologies to boost the prospects of their clients.

McGinn entitled his book, about the election of Nixon in 1968; "Selling of the President". He contended that the presidential candidate in the United States is packaged attractively and sold to the voters like any other commodity. Dennis W. Johnson, a consultant, contended nearly thirty years later in 2001 that there is no place for amateurs in elections.

Without the help of the professionals candidates cannot even hope to compete much less to win elections. His conclusion was devastating: political consultants are reshaping American democracy.

Undoubtedly, the use of modern technologies and professionals have become more importance but it is equally true that without the active and passionate involvement of citizens volunteers who flock to the banner to battle for their candidate and party presidential candidates cannot win. Winning the election depends on many inputs.

The most important being the lack. It is the quality of leadership, credibility, and ability to inspire and charisma of the candidate that eventually wins the election. There is no substitute for leadership.

(Courtesy - World Focus, April-May 2004)

www.crescat.com

www.ceylincoproperties.com

www.Pathmaconstruction.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright © 2003 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager