3rd Political Party in the US

WHY HAS THERE BEEN NO CONTINUOUS AND VIABLE 3RD POLITICAL PARTY IN THE U.S.
Author:
Institution:
Date of Submission:
A critical look at the political landscape in the United States reveals that the electoral system in the country has remained a two-party state since the founding of the country into a democratic state. These first two major parties emerged from the debate concerning the ramification of the Constitution. These were the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist parties. Currently, the Democratic and Republican parties have dominated the electoral landscape with no discernible change in the near future. The major question that arises out of this scenario regards the apparent lack of a viable third party in U.S politics. This question premises from the fact that the formation of third political force in the country’s electoral scene has been a herculean task, and even those parties that attempt to enter into the scene do not last past their first anniversary. It is notable that one of the core elements of the transition to democracy involves the formation of formidable political blocs, meaning the organization of a palpable environment of political pluralism. In order to solve the mystery surrounding the non-viability of a third political party in the U.S, it is important to look at the factors appear the most likely contributors to this scenario. This paper attempts to analyze this situation from a number of perspectives. Firstly, it appears that the electoral laws in the U.S are not very accommodating of other political parties apart from the two dominant parties that define the electoral contests in the country. Secondly, the nature of the political contests itself has a major contribution to the over-domination of the political field by the two major parties. Thirdly, the issue of financing for political parties, coupled with several laws that tend to regulate political party financial resources has become a major hindrance factor for the aspiring political parties in the country.
It is notable that the same factors that encourage the propagation of the two-party system also serve to demean and discourage the emergence and development of third parties (Kalen, 2006). In instances where third parties have emerged in the country’s political field, they have always been short-lived. In many of the cases, the ideas or issues advocated by the third parties have been “snatched” by the leading contenders from the two major parties. In fact, the ideological position taken by the third party candidates sometimes become incorporated into the political platform of either of the existing dominant parties. In so doing, the dominant party takes over the support of the voters who initially formed the support base for the third party and its candidate. With no formidable ideological strand to stand on, third party candidates fade slowly into oblivion.
Financial Regulation
The regulatory process in the United States is partly to blame for the decline of political room for a third political party in the country. The particular concern in this regard is attributable to the political action committees (PAC) in the country. The major roles of the PAC revolve mainly around the regulation of financial issues for the political parties. Unlike political parties in other countries, political parties in the U.S are not entitled to financial aid from government coffers. In many democracies across the world, there are laws that restrict financial support from external sources for the political parties. However, the laws are made in such a way that there are provisions for the government to fund the political parties in proportion to their apparent strength and representation in the legislature. In the U.S, such laws are no longer in existence and the public authority has no obligation to subsidize political party activities. Thus, those willing to enter into the political contest have to find their own financial resources in order to proceed with their voter wooing campaigns. With the emergence of PAC, political parties have been dealt a heavy blow in attracting financial support from outside sources. Many political scholars have interpreted this as the beginning of political party decline in the country and a major restricting factor for prospective third parties. By limiting the parties’ sphere of influence to financial resources, the new environment has only precipitated a to a gradual decline in the prospects of a third political force ever emerging on the country’s political landscape (Lewis, 2012).
It does not go without notice that the country’s current electoral laws tend to portray some of discrimination that is based on the status of any given political party. It is notable that the laws impose varying statutory requirements on the major parties, minor parties, and the independent candidates. Under this law, candidates nominated by the major parties get an automatic listing on the ballot owing to the fact that their party acquired a given percentage of votes in the previous electoral contest. Under such criterion, it becomes next to impossible for new political parties to go past such a regulation. It is notable that a third party must strive to overcome an increasingly heavy battery of procedural and substantive barriers (McCombs, Holbert, & Wanta, 2011).
Electoral Legal Framework
When it comes to the legal framework of the modern ballot access regulations, it appears that the law first appears to be value-neutral, with the party-based classifications appearing a bit rational. However, this legal model precipitates a conflict of interest for politicians from the dominant parties since they are the ones who have the sole responsibility to enact ballot access laws through their respective state legislatures. Given that major party candidates are not under legal obligation to comply with the requirements of this law, the politician derive some form of incentive to deliberately exclude potential competitors in the race (Lewis-Becl, & Squire, 1995). Thus, there is a tendency by these politicians to enact laws that are extremely restrictive in nature. It is plausible that as ballot access laws continue to become more restrictive with each election, the “permanent minor parties” that once dotted the political landscape have gradually become fewer and fewer on state ballots. The discernible trend in this situation is that as the dominant parties desire to maximize their vote shares from among the available voter groups, they devote more of their resources in developing greater barriers that will swiftly eliminate potential competition by newcomers, especially in the high-stake states. In fact, it is notable that ballot access barriers are greater in states with more electoral votes where the dominant parties are out rightly unwilling to share their spoils (Thompson, 2005).
Promotion of Political Stability
Another state interest that appears to be advanced through the ballot access regulations is the interest of promoting the stability of the political landscape in two major varieties. Firstly, the government has an inherent interest in promoting political stability by consolidating all political activity under two major parties. Even though the state does not portray any form of hostility to the minor parties, there is a palpable feeling that the state’s sole interest lies in avoiding the proliferation of minor parties over the political landscape. This is swiftly achieved by the state’s mechanisms employed in the protection of the pre-dominance of the major political parties. The state’s major argument for its mode of protecting political stability premises from the perception that the presidential democracy in the country needs a two-party system in order for it to function effectively. The state seems to have an inherent belief that multi-party politics are best suited for parliamentary democracies but not in a presidential democracy. However, a critical analysis of this argument reveals that its conclusion does not follow from its foundation. It is important to note that the American political system has been in existence since the country’s founding. This was long before the discriminatory and restrictive ballot access laws were introduced. The initial system, was not historically one within which two parties existed; rather, it was one in which two dominant parties pre-dominated over other minor parties that had active participation in the electoral c...