Campaigns
and Elections: Democracy in Action
I. Intro/Elections: the rules of the game (recounts in 2000, “chads,” punchcard ballots had
difficulties; half a million persons elected to state/local offices)
A.
Regularly scheduled elections—elections set in advance with fixed intervals
B.
Fixed, staggered, and sometimes limited terms
1. Electoral
system is based on fixed terms, meaning that the length of a term in office is
set,
not indefinite
a. The term of office for the U.S. House of Representatives
is two years
b. The term of office for the Senate is six years
c. The term of presidency is four years
2. Our electoral system has staggered terms for some offices, meaning
that not all offices are up
for election at the same time
a. All House members are up for election every two years
b. Only one-third of the senators are up for election at the
same time
3. Our electoral system has limits on the number of terms a person can
hold a particular office
a. The Twenty-second Amendment limits presidents to two
terms
b. Despite their popularity, proposals for term limits have
repeatedly lost when they have
come to a vote in Congress
c. If term limits are to be imposed on Congress, it will
have to be done either by an
amendment to the U.S. Constitution since the Supreme
Court has ruled term limits for
congressional offices (as set by the states)
unconstitutional
C. Winner-takes-all
1. The candidate with the most votes wins
2. Most American election districts are single-member districts, meaning
that in any district for
any given election, the voters choose one representative or
official
3. When a single-member district is combined with the winner-takes-all
rule, there is a powerful
push to sustain a two-party system
4. In contrast to the winner-takes-all rule, proportional representation
rewards minor parties and
permits them to participate in government
D. The electoral college
1. Each state has as many
electors as it has representatives and senators
2. Each state determines how its electors are selected
3. The Twelfth Amendment requires electors to vote separately for
president and vice-president
4. States generally have said candidates who win a plurality of the
popular vote in a state secure
all that state's electoral vote
5. It takes a majority of the electoral votes to win
a. If no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes
for president, the House chooses
among the top three candidates, with each state
delegation having one vote
b. If no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes
for vice-president, the Senate chooses
among the top two candidates, with each senator casting
one vote
6. The operation of the electoral college sharply influences
presidential politics (California
will have 55 electoral votes in 2004)
7. The electoral college system makes it possible for a person to
receive the most popular votes
and not get enough electoral votes (Gore got 500,000 more
popular votes in 2000, but lost
electoral college vote by 271 to 266)
II. Running for Congress
A. Similarities in House and Senate
elections
1. There is little competition in most congressional elections
2. The extent of presidential popularity
affects both House and Senate elections (coattail)
3.
Problem of “safe seats”
4. House seats lost relates to presidential popularity/economic conditions
5. GOP did well in 1994—picked up 53 seats; Democrats picked up 9 House
seats in 1996
6. Democrats positioned to take over Congress in 2002 midterm elections
B. The House of Representatives
1. Mounting a primary campaign
a. Building a personal organization
b. Hiring campaign managers, buying advertising, conducting
polls, paying for a variety of
activities
c. Gaining visibility through media
2. Campaigning for the general election
a. Incumbent
campaigns (over 95 percent of House incumbents have won since 1970);
In 2000, 98% of House incumbents were successful
b. Weak challenger campaigns (don’t have perks such as
franking privilege)
c. Strong challengers due to incumbent vulnerability and challenger
wealth
d. Open seat campaigns through death, retirement,
redistricting—promotes some turnover
C. The Senate
1. The six-year term and the national exposure make a Senate seat
competitive
2. The essential tactics of Senate races are much like those for the
House
3. Incumbency is an advantage for senators, although not as much as for
representatives
4. Competitive elections increase in number when Senate only controlled
by a few votes
III. Running for president
A. Stage 1: the nomination (candidate must begin
campaign well before primaries)
1. Presidential primaries (used by more than three-fourths of the
states)
a. A state presidential primary is the main method of
choosing delegates; the rest of the states
use caucuses or conventions; in 2000, 84% of
Democrats chosen by primaries, 89% of
Republican delegates.
b. Two main features of presidential primaries
1. A "beauty
contest," in which voters indicate which candidate for president running
in
the primary they prefer, but do not
actually elect delegates to the convention
2. Actual voting for
delegates pledged to a candidate
3. Different
combinations of these two features have produced the following systems
a. Proportional representation
b. Winner-takes-all
c. Delegate selection
d. Delegate selection and separate
presidential poll
4. Note
“Front-Loading”—California moved primary to March 2000
2. Caucuses and conventions
a. A caucus is a meeting of party members and supporters of
various candidates; it centers on
the party organization
b. The process starts at local meetings open to all party
members, who take positions on
candidates and issues and elect delegates to represent
their views at the next level; this
process repeats until
national nominating convention delegates are chosen
3. Strategies
a. Most candidates choose to run hard in Iowa and New
Hampshire (McCain 2000)
b. Candidates win or lose in this early phase by their
ability to adapt their own strengths to
changing circumstances
(Gore’s victories in Iowa, N. Hampshire knocked Bradley out of race)
c. The ability of candidates to manage the media's
expectations of their performance is
important
B. Stage 2: the convention
1. Choosing the candidate
a. National party conventions are the national meeting of the
delegates who assemble to pick
the party's presidential and vice-presidential candidates
b. In every election since the Republican convention of 1948
and the Democratic convention
of 1952, the nominee has been chosen on the first ballot
c. Conventions follow standard rules, routines, and rituals
d. Viewership has declined: conventions in 2000 lacked drama
2. The party platform
a. The platform indicates the general direction a party wants
to take
b. Most presidents make an effort to implement the platform
3. The vice-presidential nominee
a. The presidential nominee generally dictates the choice of
a running mate
b. The choice of a running mate is usually made before the
convention, and the
announcement is timed to enhance media coverage and
momentum going into the
convention
c. The presidential nominee traditionally chooses a running
mate who will "balance the ticket,"
but Bush and Cheney in 2000 ignored concept
4. The value of conventions
a. For the parties, they are a time of "coming
together" to endorse a party program and to
build unity and enthusiasm for the fall campaign
b. For future candidates, they are a chance to capture the
national spotlight and further their
political ambitions
c. For nominees, they are an opportunity to define themselves
in positive ways
5. Nomination by petition
a. Ross Perot's run for president; also John Anderson; Ralph
Nader in 2000
C. Stage 3: the general election
1. Factors affecting election outcomes
a. Whether the nation is prosperous
b. Party and candidate appeal
c. Voter turnout
2. The media and the image
a. Candidates define themselves positively and the opposition
negatively
3. Presidential debates (since 1988, sponsored by Commission on
Presidential Debates)
a. Televised presidential debates are a major feature of
presidential elections
b. Debates provide important opportunities for candidates to
distinguish themselves and for
the public to weigh their qualifications
c. 2000 debates did not cause major shift in voter choices.
d. Nader charged two main parties blocked his participation
IV. Money in American elections (“interested
money” wishes to influence election outcome/policy)
A. The problem (Teapot Dome,
Watergate as historical examples)
1. The source of campaign money (Charles Keating example)
2. The pattern of unequal distribution of money (challengers can’t raise
as much money)
3. Gore problems in 2000: McCain backed
campaign finance reform.
B. Efforts to reform
1. Strategies to prevent abuse in political contributions
a. Imposing limitations on giving, receiving, and spending
political money
b. Requiring public disclosure of the sources and uses of
political money
c. Giving governmental subsidies to presidential candidates,
campaigns, and parties, including
incentive arrangements
2. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA)
a. FECA limits amounts that candidates for federal office can
spend on media advertising,
requires the disclosure of the sources of campaign funds
as well as how they were spent,
and requires political action committees active in
federal campaigns to register with the
government and report all major contributions and
expenditures
b. FECA provides a tax checkoff that allows taxpayers to
direct $1 of general revenue to a
fund to subsidize presidential campaigns (number doing
this has declined)
3. Post-Watergate reforms
a. 1974 amendments to FECA established realistic limits on
contributions and spending,
tightened disclosure, and provided for public financing
of presidential campaigns; the
amount of public
subsidy rises with inflation
b. The law had to be amended after the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision, but the basic
outline
of the act remained unchanged
c. Bush declined federal matching funding primaries
4. The unsolved problem of soft money
a. No limits are set on the amount of soft money – funds
given to state and local parties by
political parties, individuals, or PACS for voter
registration drives and party mailings
b. Federal law does not require disclosure of its source or
use
c. Although soft money is supposed to benefit only state and
local parties, it influences
federal elections (soft money in presidential campaigns
has increased, 487 million in 1999-
2000)
d. In 2000, Democratic party soft money spending pulled even
with Republicans; Senate
Democrats raised 63
million in soft money in 1999-2000.
5. Advocacy Advertising
a. Surge of this campaign activity in 1996 election;
unlimited due to issues, not candidates
b. In 2000, some issue ad campaigns have exceeded $1 million
(See Table 9-l)
c. One main problem with issue ads is accountability; groups
have reinforced cynicism and
voter alienation; some recent reforms before Congress
place limitations on issue ads
d. Proponents point to ad
campaigns aimed at legislation (tobacco tax, health plan)
6. Candidates' personal wealth
a. Campaign finance legislation cannot constitutionally
restrict rich candidates from giving
heavily to their own campaigns (Rockefellers, Kennedys,
Perot and Jon Curzine in 2000 who
spent 60 million)
7. Independent expenditures
a. Current finance laws do not constrain independent
expenditures by groups or individuals
who are separate from political candidates due to free
speech
b. Issue Ads have replaced independent expenditures
recently, since disclosure not necessary
C. Consequences of current campaign
financing
1. Rising costs of campaigns
a. Since the FECA became law in 1972, total expenditures by
candidates for the House have
more than doubled after controlling for inflation, and
they have risen even more in Senate
elections
2. Declining competition
a. The high cost of campaigns dampens competition by
discouraging individuals from running
for office (challengers in both parties are
underfunded)llll
3. Increasing dependence on PACs and wealthy donors
a. PACs do not want to offend politicians in power, and
politicians in power want to stay in
office
b. Politicians turn to individual donors who can contribute
$500 or $1,000 to their campaigns
c. Donors want access and politicians to respond to their
concerns and/or pass certain policies,
d. PAC defenders argue there is no proven link between
contributions and roll-call votes
V. Improving elections
A. Reforming presidential primaries
1. Arguments in favor of presidential primaries
a. Primaries are the most
participatory
b. Primaries are the most representative
2. Arguments opposed to presidential primaries (“the “selectorate”)
a. The quality of the participation is questionable
b. As a result of low levels of turnout in primaries,
candidates often take ideologically
extreme positions during the primaries
c. An electoral system does not allow for rank ordering that
may reflect voter preferences
d. The primaries are badly scheduled and the primary season
lasts too long (several states have
moved-up their primaries)
e. Candidates have only to win "the media game"
B. Reforming the nominating process
1. National presidential primary (advocates see
it as “simple, direct, and representative”)
a. Opponents argue that it would hurt chances of candidates
with weak finances
2. Regional primaries (coherence and less wear and tear vs.
money/media/polarization)
3. Cut down on the number of presidential primaries and make more use of
the caucus system
4. National preprimary caucus and convention plan (used by Colorado)
C. Reforming the electoral college
(see debate in text)
1. The most frequently proposed reform of the electoral college system
is direct popular election
of the president; runoff election needed
2. Criticisms of direct popular election
a. Undermines federalism
b. Encourages unrestrained majority rule and hence political
extremism
c. Hurts the smaller states
d. Makes presidential campaigns more remote from the voters
e. Increases the reliance of presidential campaigns on television
3.
Groups fear that direct plan will hurt their “swing vote power” (farmers,
African-Americans)
4.
National Bonus Plan idea—help popular voter winner take White House, but
complicated and
needs run-off election if no winner (Bonus of 102
electoral votes)
5. Maine,
Nebraska Quasi-proportional representation system
D. Reforming how we vote (2000 election controversy
over ballots recounts/need new voting
technology)
1. States
and local governments administer elections
2. Other
voting systems such as e-voting may provide for easier administration
a. Critics worry about the loss of
community
b. Opponents argue that it may encourage a
proliferation of voting.
E. Reforming Campaign Finance (see “A Closer look”)
1. Congress
slow to reform because members get elected with the current system.
2. Campaign
money defined as free speech-creates constitutional obstacles.