20
Parties and voting

Parties and voting

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Parties and voting. Hiram Johnson and the Progressives of early 1900s. Middle class reform movement against: Control over government by elite special interests (SPR) Strong (corrupt) party “machines”, based on favors and patronage So favored: Accountable government - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Parties and voting

Hiram Johnson and the Progressives of early 1900s

• Middle class reform movement against:• Control over government by elite special interests (SPR)• Strong (corrupt) party “machines”, based on favors and patronage

• So favored:• Accountable government

• direct democracy—”people power”

• Weak party organizations

Partisan versus non-partisan elections

• local elections and state judges are virtually all “non-partisan”

State elections--More “Progressive” legacy

• special elections• Called by governor or by petition

• recall

• Initiatives and referenda• (As opposed to usual way law is made--

majority in one house, then other, conference, then signed (or vetoed) by governor)

• The voice of the people or special interests?

• Constraining the role of the legislature?

Primaries and General Elections

• Primary: Choosing the candidates to compete in the General Election

• General Election: choosing among the candidates to hold office

Partisan primaries

• Federal and state offices are partisan• 1996 CA voters passed proposition for “open

primary”—thrown out by USSC• Now we have “semi-closed” primary

Redistricting

• Every 10 years, after census CA legislature redraws district boundaries for themselves and CA Representatives to the House in DC

“Gerrymandering”

Example:

60% Rep and 40% Dem

Version A--three safe Rep districts

Version B--two safe Rep, one safe Dem district

1 23

Gerrymandering, contd

• Current trend:• Computers exacerbate gerrymandering

• Types• Partisan

• Racial

• Incumbent

Incumbency Advantage

• Of the 101 CA incumbents who ran for reelection in 2002 and 2004, all were reelected, and 99 of these 101 incumbents won by landslides.

• Why?• Self-fulfilling prophecy

• term limits?• at state level, not federal

• CA—6 ys Assembly 8 ys Senate, lifetime ban—most stringent in the nation

Results of Term Limits

• More diverse—20 Latinos• Citizen legislators?—not really• Of 40 Senators, 36 are former assemblymembers

• Less experience and knowledge• From 1960s-1990s, CA often described as model “professional

legislature”

• Shorter time horizon• Increased power of lobbyists and advocacy groups• Increased power of Governor

Who votes?

• The old

• The educated

• The wealthy

• The white

Who Can’t

• In CA— the convicted, while they are in prison lose the right to vote

Campaign finance

• Campaigns increasingly expensive--mostly for TV ads

• Especially in CA

Attempts to fix the problem

• 1976 USSC throws out mandatory spending limits

• 2002 Campaign finance--McCain Feingold

• but campaign spending continues to grow

Election Reform

1. Money--public funding for candidates--”clean elections”--including funds to match opponents private funding

• AB 583

1. More competition--redistricting reform

2. More choices--instead of “single member district winner take all”:

• party lists, cumulative voting, choice or instant run-offs, etc.• see http://msnbc.com/modules/mockracy/

Political Divide—recall election

Method of voting

• Growth of electronic voting

• But big story—growth of voting by mail

• Increased convenience resulting in greater turnout?