Transcript Is America Hopelessly Divided? How Hyper-Partisanship, Party Polarization, and Governmental Dysfunction Will Soon Give Way to a New American Political Order Artemus Ward Dept.

Is America Hopelessly Divided?
How Hyper-Partisanship, Party Polarization,
and Governmental Dysfunction Will Soon Give
Way to a New American Political Order
Artemus Ward
Dept. of Political Science
Northern Illinois University
[email protected]
Introduction
• Through much of the 20th century, the Republican and Democratic parties
had sizable liberal and conservative factions. Yet those factions have only
grown.
• The roots of the rise of polarization both in America and in Congress that has
characterized the past several decades began with the struggle of African
Americans for civil rights and continued through Vietnam, Watergate, the
rise of new media and the 24-hour news cycle, and the Reagan revolution
and resulting conflicts in the New Right political regime.
• The ultimate result has been that there are now, more than ever before, two
Americas—Democratic America and Republican America that have inevitably
led to government by crisis (shutdowns, sequestrations, fiscal cliffs, and debt
ceiling threats).
• Yet there are new, cross-cutting issues that appeal to voters in the middle—
often young voters—in both Americas.
• As a result, the new American Center may soon provide the basis for a new
era of political consensus where the traditional Democratic and Republican
parties as we know them will be a thing of the past.
•
in 1982 the centrists — or at least those who by voting record were somewhere near the middle of their
respective parties — comprised 79 percent of the House. In 2012 they made up 2.5 percent of the House.
• Most
members
of the
House in
Congress
won their
2012
races by
large
margins.
• Only 62
out of
435
legislators
won in
close
races.
• Why?
Relative Competitiveness of Presidential Vote in
House Districts: 1976 v. 2012
• America has become increasingly polarized.
• The presidential vote in congressional districts was close in most
districts in 1976.
• By 2012, there were far fewer districts where the presidential
vote was close.
Relative Competitiveness of Presidential Vote in
States: 1976 v. 2012
• Like the previous charts, these also show how America has become
increasingly polarized.
• Many states were decided by a close margin in the 1976 presidential
race.
• By contrast, very few states were decided by a close margin in 2012.
Two Americas
• There are two political Americas. Neither understand each other very well and
there’s little chance they will get to know one another any better because they
don’t a) live in the same places b) watch the same TV shows or movies c) buy the
same cars or d) read the same newspapers, watch the same news or read the
same blogs (or any blogs at all).
•
Source: Census Bureau’s 2012 American Community Survey. NBC-WSJ poll, Oct. 8, 2013.
Party Polarization: Realignment
• The 2 major parties, as we have known them in our lifetimes, have been
in the process of realigning and therefore becoming more homogeneous
and polarized.
• For example, the Republican Party was once the party of Lincoln and the
North. The Democrats were the party of the South. But now the
Republicans are the party of the South and Democrats the party of the
North. How did this happen?
Party
Polarization:
Civil Rights
• Several events accelerated the exodus of white, Southern conservative
Democrats to the GOP. For example:
– President Harry S. Truman’s (D) executive order to desegregate the military
in 1948, which preceded the emergence of the segregationist “Dixiecrats” —
a short-lived splinter party that nominated future GOP senator Strom
Thurmond for president that year.
– President Lyndon B. Johnson’s (D) push to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
which outlawed many forms of racial, religious and gender discrimination, is
also widely credited with speeding the realignment of the parties. “I think
we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come,”
Johnson is famously reported to have said after signing the bill into law.
Vietnam
• As American public opinion turned against the war in Vietnam (19551975) in the late 1960 and early 1970s, the locus of opposition to the
conflict in Congress sat within the Democratic Party, a major factor in
Johnson’s decision to not seek reelection in 1968. Still, a handful of
mostly Northern congressional Republicans publicly opposed the war—
remnants of the party’s former isolationist wing.
• In 1972, Sen. George McGovern (D-S.D.) received his party’s presidential
nomination while running on a liberal, antiwar platform that opponents
derided as “Acid, Amnesty [for draft-dodgers] and Abortion.”
• Incumbent President Richard Nixon and his plumbers destroyed moderate
Democrats and wanted to run against McGovern who they knew they
could defeat and who would push the party to the left. It worked. Nixon
trounced McGovern and his campaign helped to solidify the Democratic
Party’s dovish reputation for decades to come.
Watergate
• The resignation of President Richard Nixon in 1974 in
the wake of the Watergate investigation, which
revealed numerous abuses of power by the White
House, severely damaged public trust in government.
• A November 1974 Pew Poll found that just 36% of
Americans said they trust the government “just about
always/most of the time” — at the time a new low
and a precipitous drop from the peak of the Kennedy
and early Johnson administrations, when about 75%
Americans gave that response.
The “Reagan Revolution” and the Rise
of the New Right Political Regime
• The election of President Ronald Reagan in
1980 ushered in a new era of conservative
governance, in particular with the rise of
more business-friendly “supply-side”
economic policies that favored tax cuts and
greatly reduced spending on domestic social
safety-net programs, while at the same time
implementing large increases in defense
spending.
• Reagan built a new electoral coalition for
the GOP which included southern
Democrats who switched party allegiance
and Christian Evangelicals who previously
had not participated in politics.
Politicized Courts: The Rejection of Robert
Bork’s Nomination to the Supreme Court
• Reagan’s nomination of federal judge Robert
H. Bork to the Supreme Court in 1987 was a
flash point of congressional partisanship.
• Bork, a conservative former Yale law
professor who espoused “originalist” views
that the Constitution should be strictly
interpreted according to the intent of the
Founding Fathers, faced fierce opposition
from Senate Democrats, who challenged his
views on the Constitution and his opposition
to the right to privacy at the center of the
1973 Roe v. Wade decision on abortion.
• Bork’s nomination was defeated by
Democrats (led by Ted Kennedy) and (to the
fury of conservatives) a handful of
Republicans, ushering in an era in which
Supreme Court nominees seem to share as
little about their views as possible.
The 24-Hour News Cycle and the Rise
of Partisan Media
• In the late 1980s, a new voice arrived on the national
radio scene. Conservative firebrand Rush Limbaugh
rapidly became the most popular talk radio host in the
country with an estimated weekly audience of 14
million in 2011. With this enormous soapbox,
Limbaugh emerged as the leading voice of
conservative Republicans, and his show remains a
mecca for conservative lawmakers, while Republicans
who displease him frequently face his wrath.
• CNN’s dominance of the 24-hour cable news game
began to crumble after the 1996 launch of Fox News
Channel, which evolved into a home for a number of
conservative pundits, including Sean Hannity and Bill
O’Reilly, and is currently the most-watched cable news
channel. Also launched in 1996, another cable start-up
called MSNBC eventually emerged as a counterweight
to Fox News with a roster of liberal commentators
that now includes Rachel Maddow and Chris
Matthews.
Congressional
Conservatism
• The Republican wave election in 1994, in which the GOP
won 52 seats and took control of the House for the first
time in more than 40 years, was the culmination of the rise
of conservative politics that began with Reagan’s election in
1980.
• Led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.), the Republican
revolutionaries faced off with President Bill Clinton (D) on
numerous occasions in pursuit of their aggressive domestic
and government reform agenda. Clinton vetoed 37 bills
during his presidency, two of which were overridden by
Congress.
Government
Shutdown
(1995)
• The clashes between Clinton and House
Republicans came to a head in November
1995, when the president vetoed a bill to
raise the federal debt limit, to which
Republicans had attached numerous
amendments that would have mandated a
balanced budget and stripped the Treasury
Department of its ability to tap federal
trust funds to head off a borrowing crisis.
• For a total of 28 days in two stretches
between November 1995 and January
1996 (a temporary spending bill was
passed in November), the federal
government furloughed hundreds of
thousands of employees and shuttered
nonessential functions of agencies.
• The crisis ended when Republicans cut a
deal with Clinton to reopen the
government. After it was over, the
shutdowns were widely viewed as
disastrous for the GOP, which lost eight
House seats as Clinton cruised to
reelection in 1996.
Presidential
Impeachment
(1998)
• The ongoing war between Clinton and House Republicans reached its
climax when the House voted to impeach a sitting president for the first
time since Andrew Johnson in 1868.
• On a nearly party-line vote, the House charged Clinton with perjury and
obstruction of justice on Dec. 19, 1998, for allegedly misleading a grand
jury about his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, with
whom it was revealed he had an affair.
• Clinton was acquitted by the Senate, and the saga severely damaged
House Republicans. Polls showed that Clinton enjoyed some of the highest
job-approval numbers of his administration during his impeachment, while
Gingrich resigned from Congress in early 1999 after being held responsible
by many Republicans for losses in the 1998 midterm election.
Bush v. Gore
(2000)
• On Election Day in 2000, a virtual tie in the state of Florida
between Texas Gov. George W. Bush (R) and Vice President
Al Gore (D) prevented the declaration of a winner.
• The Florida recount continued for days in a highly charged
atmosphere, as the Gore campaign argued for votes to be
recounted in key Democratic-heavy counties where
irregularities were reported, while the Bush team pushed for
an end to the recount while the Republican candidate was
officially leading.
• The crisis ended when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a
ruling ordering Florida to stop the recount, handing the
victory to Bush.
Iraq War (2003-2011)
• After a rare, brief moment of national unity following the Sept. 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks, the country again found itself deeply polarized as
President George W. Bush, with the support of congressional Republicans
and many Democrats, launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq to rid the
country of alleged stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Early
opposition to the war was led primarily by liberals.
• While it took only days to topple the government of Saddam Hussein, a
deadly insurgency soon emerged. As the death toll of Iraqi civilians and
U.S. troops mounted in the years that followed, public opinion turned
against the conflict, and some of the largest demonstrations since the
Vietnam War were held in American cities.
• Despite growing dissatisfaction with his performance, Bush narrowly
defeated Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential election,
during which the Iraq war and national security were central issues.
• The war in Iraq also played a major role in the 2008 Democratic primary
campaign, in which then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) positioned himself as
an antiwar candidate, in contrast to then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), who
voted to authorize military force against Iraq in 2002.
Democrats
Retake Congress
(2006)
• With Bush’s poll numbers plummeting amid public dissatisfaction
with the war in Iraq and the federal response to Hurricane
Katrina, Democrats won more than two dozen seats to take
control of the House of Representatives in 2006.
• The victory elevated Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), an avowed
liberal, to House speaker, the highest office ever attained by a
woman. In the Senate, Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) became majority
leader as Democrats won a slim majority with 49 seats, plus two
independents who joined their caucus.
• The Democratic victories ended unified Republican control of the
White House and Congress and put the brakes on Bush’s agenda.
The Great Recession
and the Election of
Barack Obama (2008)
• Less than two months after the worst economic crisis since the
Great Depression in 1929, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) handily
defeated Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to become the first African
American president.
• Democrats also expanded their control of the House and
achieved a nearly filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
• In just two election cycles, the pendulum swung from total
Republican control of the government to unified Democratic
control of the White House and Congress. In 2009, after Sen.
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania switched parties and Al Franken
was declared the winner of the contested race in Minnesota,
Senate Democrats controlled the 60 seats needed to defeat a
GOP filibuster.
Tea Party Movement (2008-)
• As Democrats began pursuing an
aggressive liberal agenda that included
new laws to end pay discrimination for
women, increase regulation of Wall
Street and the repeal of the military’s
“Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy banning gay
people from serving openly, disaffected
conservatives began to organize and
turn out in large numbers at protests.
• Calling themselves the tea party, a
reference to Revolutionary war patriots
who dumped seized British tea into
Boston Harbor, these activists mobilized
against taxes, government regulation
and, in particular, a new bill being
pushed by the president that was
intended to provide health coverage for
millions of uninsured Americans.
GOP Resurgence
(2010)
• Riding a wave of conservative anger and dissatisfaction with
President Obama’s handling of the economy, Republicans won 63
new seats and again took control of the House in 2010, making
John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) their speaker.
• Many of these newcomers, having never held elected office
before and maintaining close ties to the tea party, came to
Washington with the intent of fighting Obama’s agenda, shrinking
the size of government and putting an end to politics as usual.
• But perhaps the most consequential Republican victory in 2010
took place at the state level, where the GOP won or expanded
their control of numerous legislatures. This allowed Republicans
to favorably redraw many congressional districts ahead of the
2012 elections.
“Obamacare”
(2010)
• The fight in Congress over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,
which came to be known as Obamacare, proved to be one of the most
bruising since the civil rights era.
• The August 2009 death of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), one of the bill’s
fiercest supporters, ended the Democrats’ brief filibuster-proof majority.
• Decried as unconstitutional socialized medicine by conservatives in
Congress and the tea partiers who flooded the town hall meetings held in
their districts, the bill passed Congress in June 2010 without a single
Republican vote after some controversial maneuvering by Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid (D). Obama signed the bill into law, but the fight
continued.
• After a number of court rulings for and against the law, the Supreme
Court settled the question of its constitutionality in National Federation of
Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012). The court upheld its most
controversial provision, the so-called individual mandate that requires
Americans to have health insurance or face a fine, but ruled that the law’s
expansion of Medicaid was optional for states.
Debt Limit - Sequestration
(2011-2012)
• With Democrats in control of the White House and the Senate, and Republicans
deeply opposed to the Democratic agenda controlling the House, the business of
passing laws slowed to a crawl in 2011 and set the stage for crisis.
• The first showdown was in April 2011, just months after the GOP took over.
Republicans threatened to force a government shutdown if Democrats didn’t
agree to budget cuts. Just minutes before the deadline, they did. But, later, new
Republicans felt misled: Many of the $38 billion in “cuts” were Washington
illusions, designed to change little in the real world.
• The second showdown came in summer 2011, when Republicans threatened not
to raise the national debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to spending cuts.,
bringing the world to the brink of another economic crisis. Boehner found his
caucus nearly impossible to control as he sought a deal with the White House.
• This time, the GOP and President Obama agreed: in exchange for raising the debt
ceiling, they set caps on annual spending and set in motion a bigger, broader
budget cut: sequestration. This was a massive cut — $85 billion in the first year —
spread across much of the federal government including defense and many
domestic programs. It was designed to be so bad that it wouldn’t come true: The
two parties would be scared into agreeing on a less-painful alternative before the
deadline on Dec. 31, 2012.
Fiscal Cliff
(2013)
• Following Obama’s reelection in 2012, a race that political
scientist Gary Jacobson described as “the most partisan,
nationalized . . . election in at least six decades,” the U.S.
government immediately found itself on the brink of
another self-imposed economic crisis.
• In addition to the sequestration deadline, tax cuts passed
during the Bush administration were set to expire at the end
of the year, threatening to raise taxes on Americans amid an
anemic recovery—the so-called “fiscal cliff.”
• An agreement was reached in the wee hours of New Year’s
Day 2013 to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for most
Americans, but the automatic spending cuts were left in
place.
Government
Shutdown
(2013)
• The battle between the White House and House Republicans reached its apex in
late September 2013 when GOP lawmakers refused to pass a temporary spending
bill to fund the government unless Democrats agreed to defund or postpone key
features of Obamacare.
• Once again, at the end of the fiscal year on October 1, 800,000 federal workers
were furloughed, “nonessential” parts of the federal government were shut
down, and “essential” government employees were required to work without pay.
• The nation once again was expected to reach its debt limit in mid-October.
• Yet public opinion turned against the Republicans in congress, particularly the tea
party faction, and a compromise was quickly reached on October 17 just hours
before the federal government’s ability to borrow money was set to expire.
• Congress passed and President Obama signed into a law an agreement that funds
the federal government in place of an annual budget through Jan. 15, 2014 and
lifts the debt limit through Feb. 7, 2014.
House GOP
Obstructionism
Explained
• If you want to understand the congressional Republicans who have
forced confrontations with President Obama on the fiscal cliff, the
government shutdown and the debt ceiling — and whether those
lawmakers might feel encouraged to force more confrontations in the
future — you need to understand the economic struggles of the
Republicans’ home districts.
• People in those districts are poorer and more likely to be unemployed
than in the nation at large. They have focused their anger about their
economic circumstances on Obama, and they want someone, anyone, to
make him improve things for them.
• In the 45 districts represented by Members who have routinely opposed
Speaker John Boehner on things like the fiscal cliff deal, the farm bill and
aid for Hurricane Sandy victims, the median income in 2012 was 7%
lower than the national median, according to the Census Bureau. The
unemployment rate averaged 10%, which is almost 2% higher than the
national rate, and 2% higher than the overall rate in the states that
contain each district.
Is Dysfunctional Government Inevitable?
• American politics has been transformed over time through
reorganizing elections where the American people have
overwhelmingly rejected the politics of the past (an old political
regime) for the politics of the future (a new political regime).
• Political regimes rise and fall over decades. For example, the
liberal New Deal regime began with FDR’s election, reached its
apex with LBJ’s Great Society, and was undone during Jimmy
Carter’s term in office.
• America may be on the verge of another transformative
moment. The conservative New Right regime began with
Reagan’s election, reached its apex with the post 9-11 presidency
of George W. Bush, and will likely be undone during the next
GOP president’s administration.
• If this is what is happening, as some political scientists suggest,
what will characterize the next transformative political regime?
Recent polling may give us some clues.
• Despite the increasing trends of 2 Americas and polarization in congress
and the nation at large, there is still a sizable group of Americans in the
middle as demonstrated by the results from a 2013 poll conducted by the
lead pollsters for both the Obama and Romney 2012 presidential
campaigns.
• So who constitutes and what characterizes the American Political Center?
The Traditional Liberal-Conservative Split
• The Liberal Base:
– Bleeding Hearts: Mostly young, unmarried,
white, well-educated voters in the
Northeast and West who are extremely
supportive of the progressive agenda
– The Gospel Left: Mostly black party-line
progressives who live in Southern cities but
with God as their co-pilot fly rightward on
social issues.
• The Conservative Base:
– The Righteous Right: Middle-aged white
voters in the South who use faith as their
guide on gay marriage (bad), abortion (very
bad), and programs for the poor (ok).
– Talk Radio Heads: Alpha male conservatives
who want government to ban abortion and
support traditional marriage but otherwise
stay out of our private lives.
• Minivan Moderates: Mostly white suburbanite women clustered
in the Midwest and South with pro-choice/anti-gun tendencies
and a distrust of government.
• The MBA Middle: Mostly white, well-educated voters in upscale
sections of the South and West who blend a don’t-tread-on-me
streak with progressive social views.
• Pick-up Populists: Mostly white, low-income voters living in the
South and Midwest who worry the economy is unfair and
Washington is wasteful.
• WhateverMan: Very young and diverse voters in the Northeast
and West who seem to lean left but are so politically “meh” it’s
hard to tell.
Cynicism
Term Limits
Energy Independence
Less
Government
Regulation
Higher Taxes
for the Rich
Military
Isolationism
Diplomacy
Isolationism
Anti-Diversity
Pro
Gay Rights
No Religion
in Politics
Abortion
Rights
Gun Control
The New Middle Political Regime?
• Term limits for federal office-holders, either through constitutional
amendment or by overturning the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in U.S.
Term Limits v. Thornton (1995) which held that states may not term limit
their members of congress.
• Energy independence which means more nuclear and oil (as well as
green) production in the U.S.
• Less government regulation because government is wasteful, inefficient,
and can’t balance a budget.
• Higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans to fund programs for all.
• Strong but less interventionist, if not isolationist, military and foreign
policy.
• No more affirmative action, pro-voter ID laws, no path to citizenship for
illegal immigrants (yet).
• Pro gay rights including gay marriage.
• No religion in politics.
• Pro abortion rights but with restrictions.
• Pro gun control through government regulation.
• Pro legalization of marijuana.
Party Realignment and the Next
American Political Transformation
• The presidential candidate and party that adopts the preferences of the
American center will be able to transform the current political landscape.
• It will mean shedding most if not all of the extreme views and elements
of their party and recognizing and embracing a cynicism about old
politics that drives a new kind of political activism that includes the
preferences of the center.
• If American politics is cyclical, it will be a Democratic president who will
change the party to fit with the preferences of the American center (e.g
pro-term limits, less government regulation, end of affirmative action)
and build a solid governing coalition for decades to come.
• After a period of discord and infighting, the GOP will have to shed its
extreme elements (anti-tax, religious right, pro-life, homophobic, NRA,
anti-drug) in order to remain viable in the new political era.
• In turn, the politics of division and dysfunction that currently dominates
American politics will be swept away—but not before a transformative
upheaval of the American political order that we already see the
beginnings of.
Further Reading
• Skowronek, Stephen. The Politics Presidents
Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill
Clinton, rev. ed. Harvard University Press,
1997.
• Teles, Steven M. The Rise of the Conservative
Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the
Law. Princeton University Press, 2012.